Reply #50

In the discussion thread: Cutter Charges in the North Tower... [View all]

Sun Mar 11, 2012, 04:11 AM

50. LOL!

I like it. Squibs 30 stories below the falling debris is also from floors landing on floors and causing it to push out a few of the windows. I am so happy I discovered this group. And if you ever watch a video of the first plane hit, watch how quick smoke comes billowing out the roof top. It takes like a minute 30 for smoke to rise 30 or 40 stories with not much other smoke coming out of the building anywhere else before the roof, it like jumps. Amazing isn't it. And yet with all this the deniers don't even believe the janitor who said he felt an explosion under his feet while in the lobby that happened in the basement a few seconds before the first plane even hit. Even the commission took his testimony out. I guess true eye witnesses aren't any good.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

73 replies	Author	Time	Post
Cutter Charges in the North Tower... [View all]	wildbilln864	Dec 2011	OP
and a kick! nt	wildbilln864	Dec 2011	#1
FDNY firefighters...	wildbilln864	Jan 2012	#2
NIST explains them as pressurized puffs of air	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#3
so you can tell from that picture that the puff is "exiting out of a single window"?	zappaman	Jan 2012	#4
Since they are actually explosives	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#5
how and when exactly	sabbat hunter	Mar 2012	#60
"they would be blowing out of ALL the windows of the floor" - No.	Bolo Boffin	Jan 2012	#6
So this 'jetting material' just happens to resemble	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#7
As I explained, they do NOT resemble precisely timed explosions	Bolo Boffin	Jan 2012	#8
Do you require glasses?	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#11
Please stop the sarcasm.	Bolo Boffin	Jan 2012	#12
Why would they need to cut the outer walls?	hack89	Jan 2012	#17
there were in fact a lot of renovations going on in the towers	NoMoreWarNow	Apr 2012	#68
Feel free to back this up with some evidence. nt	hack89	Apr 2012	#69
are you saying there weren't a lot of renovations going on?	NoMoreWarNow	Apr 2012	#70
But you haven't found it yet: keep looking. That link proves NOTHING. n/t.	apocalypsehow	Jun 2012	#71
LOL!	Politicalboi	Mar 2012	#65
"But of course I'm the nut."	zappaman	Mar 2012	#66
This post was hidden by jury decision.	The Great Haku	Jun 2012	#72
thanks for posting this! nt	wildbilln864	Jul 2012	#73
.	jesters	Jan 2012	#9
There are reports of the air blowing down much further than that during the collapse.	Bolo Boffin	Jan 2012	#10
Something else they can't to explain	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#14
See my post #15 nt	hack89	Jan 2012	#16
When the volume of a single floor went from 400K cubic feet to zero in fractions of seconds	hack89	Jan 2012	#15
So these 'puffs of air' as you call them	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#18
Do you understand compression?	hack89	Jan 2012	#19
Compression requires an airtight seal.	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#20
No, it doesn't.	AZCat	Jan 2012	#21
"the installation of the charges took place at night and/or on the weekends when people weren't work	zappaman	Jan 2012	#22
There was video	Politicalboi	Mar 2012	#51
"There was video"	zappaman	Mar 2012	#53
The WTC was a sealed building - all the windows were closed	hack89	Jan 2012	#23
No.	jesters	Jan 2012	#24
Because of where the elevator and HVAC shafts terminated?	hack89	Jan 2012	#28
maybe you and gyroscope can settle this and then get back to the rest of us	OnTheOtherHand	Jan 2012	#29
the 'puffs' come out of the windows in regular demolitions - see	Rosa Luxemburg	Mar 2012	#56
But the venting in the WTC buildings don't "puff," they jet	Bolo Boffin	Mar 2012	#62
Why weren't the plotters smart enough to put the cutter chargers	hack89	Jan 2012	#13
There would have been some destructive devices along the core. Obviously.	jesters	Jan 2012	#25
more importantly	zappaman	Jan 2012	#26
Why would they need them on the exterior walls?	hack89	Jan 2012	#27
Simple.	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#30
So a table can stand with only two legs on one side?	hack89	Jan 2012	#31
Don't you forget what you said	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#32
So if you "need all four 'legs' to hold the table up"	hack89	Jan 2012	#33
But it wont come straight down	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#34
If the core of the tower collapses straight down while the perimeter remains stationary	hack89	Jan 2012	#35
So you agree that the core sank first.	jesters	Jan 2012	#36
Too many damaged columns further weakened by fire	hack89	Jan 2012	#37
Lol.	jesters	Jan 2012	#38
The professional building community has been discussing these issues for some time.	AZCat	Jan 2012	#39
You do understand why highrises have fireproofing and sprinkler systems?	hack89	Jan 2012	#40
Lol.	jesters	Jan 2012	#41
Only one needed to sag.	hack89	Jan 2012	#42
Hack says that "Buildings are not designed with vertical static loads in mind."	jesters	Jan 2012	#43
Levitation?	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#46
Sorry - meant vertical dynamic loads. Now answer my question. nt	hack89	Jan 2012	#49
The fires weren't massive	Politicalboi	Mar 2012	#52
He was right at the edge of fire and below the impact floor	hack89	Mar 2012	#57
The inner core isn't going to give very easily if at all	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#44
"it doesn't work without removing the resistance. "	jesters	Jan 2012	#45
Maybe I'll start my own CD company	gyroscope	Jan 2012	#47
You cut out a big chunk of the core	hack89	Jan 2012	#48
I seem to recall...	ryan_cats	Mar 2012	#58
LOL!	Politicalboi	Mar 2012	#50
It's a trip back in the time machine	LARED	Mar 2012	#54
Amazing, right?	zappaman	Mar 2012	#55
Do we now have a magic smoke theory?	ryan_cats	Mar 2012	#63
Good one, Bill	jberryhill	Mar 2012	#59
I'm glad you're proud!	wildbilln864	Mar 2012	#61
Riddle me this, billman...	cherokeeprogressive	Mar 2012	#64
kick! nt	wildbilln864	Apr 2012	#67

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.