Looks like the "conspiracy theories" really were true after all...

Discussion in 'C++' started by schoenfeld.one@gmail.com, Oct 20, 2007.

  1. Guest

    Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
    crashing down on the day of 9/11.

    The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

    There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

    Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?

    If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
    demolitions industry!

    How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

    If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
    from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

    This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

    PROPOSITION 1:
    It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
    ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    Collapse start time: 17 seconds
    Collapse end time: 23 seconds
    Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

    PROPOSITION 2:
    A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
    seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
    kinematical considerations alone:

    Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
    total time^2

    or

    s = ut + 1/2at^2
    where
    s = 174 m (height of building)
    u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
    a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
    a constant)

    Thus,
    174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

    Solving for t
    t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
    = 5.9590
    ~ 6 seconds
     
    , Oct 20, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Oct 19, 8:02 pm, wrote:
    > Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
    > crashing down on the day of 9/11.
    >
    > The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
    >
    > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    >
    > There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.
    >
    > Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?
    >
    > If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
    > demolitions industry!
    >
    > How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?
    >
    > If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
    > from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.
    >
    > This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    > so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    > DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!
    >
    > PROPOSITION 1:
    > It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
    > ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,
    >
    > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    > Collapse start time: 17 seconds
    > Collapse end time: 23 seconds
    > Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds
    >
    > PROPOSITION 2:
    > A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
    > seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
    > kinematical considerations alone:
    >
    > Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
    > total time^2
    >
    > or
    >
    > s = ut + 1/2at^2
    > where
    > s = 174 m (height of building)
    > u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
    > a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
    > a constant)
    >
    > Thus,
    > 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2
    >
    > Solving for t
    > t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
    > = 5.9590
    > ~ 6 seconds



    Die.
     
    O'Neil's Faggy Prostate - I 0wn j0000000, Oct 20, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. lws8 Guest

    take your meds dildo
    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
    > crashing down on the day of 9/11.
    >
    > The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
    >
    > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    >
    > There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.
    >
    > Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?
    >
    > If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
    > demolitions industry!
    >
    > How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?
    >
    > If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
    > from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.
    >
    > This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    > so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    > DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!
    >
    > PROPOSITION 1:
    > It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
    > ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,
    >
    > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    > Collapse start time: 17 seconds
    > Collapse end time: 23 seconds
    > Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds
    >
    > PROPOSITION 2:
    > A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
    > seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
    > kinematical considerations alone:
    >
    > Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
    > total time^2
    >
    > or
    >
    > s = ut + 1/2at^2
    > where
    > s = 174 m (height of building)
    > u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
    > a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
    > a constant)
    >
    > Thus,
    > 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2
    >
    > Solving for t
    > t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
    > = 5.9590
    > ~ 6 seconds
    >
     
    lws8, Oct 20, 2007
    #3
  4. Bo Persson Guest

    wrote:
    :: Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which
    :: came crashing down on the day of 9/11.
    ::
    :: The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
    ::
    :: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329
    ::
    :: Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?

    No, but standing next to two collapsing towers JUST might. :)


    Sigh!


    Bo Persson
     
    Bo Persson, Oct 20, 2007
    #4
  5. wrote:
    > This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    > so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    > DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!


    Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy
    theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that.
     
    Juha Nieminen, Oct 20, 2007
    #5
  6. Markus Pitha Guest

    Hello,

    Juha Nieminen wrote:
    > wrote:
    >> This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    >> so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    >> DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

    >
    > Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy
    > theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that.


    Surely, but I saw at a tv show that the steel of the destroyed building
    was twisted in a way only a controlled detonation could accomplish that.
    There are still too many inconsistencies and what did Bush dealed out
    with the Bin Ladens as they were in the USA at this time? Or fact is
    that the WTC wasn't very profitable. It caused a lot of costs. Days
    before the attack, people reported that on some floors they suddendly
    worked with heavy machines on the outer walls and access was forbitten
    to these floors....
    However, one can think what they want, but my thought is that we only
    know the tip of the iceberg.
    It was always the plan to monitor the citizens and now they have an
    alibi to to do it. A good coincidence, isn't it?. Whereby I'm already
    sick of this stupid terrorism lies in our media all around the world.
    Every politician in the modern industry nations uses this terrorism lie
    to monitor us more and more and the people and believe all this crap.
    I didn't investigate but I guess that nowadays are not more terrorism
    attacks in the whole world as before 2001. All this terrorism crap is
    built up by our media.
    Even here in Austria where I live, politicians here use these terrorism
    climate to try to make laws to be allowed to spy out home computers
    although we never had any terrorism problems in our small country.
    Moreover I wonder how stupid a terrorist must be to doesn't find a way
    to avoid those computer monitoring crap.
     
    Markus Pitha, Oct 22, 2007
    #6
  7. Markus Pitha wrote:
    >> Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy
    >> theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that.

    >
    > Surely, but I saw at a tv show that the steel of the destroyed building
    > was twisted in a way only a controlled detonation could accomplish that.


    Yes, because a random "tv show" is more reliable than the word of
    countless professionals in the field of demolition. Everything they say
    on TV must be true.

    > It was always the plan to monitor the citizens and now they have an
    > alibi to to do it. A good coincidence, isn't it?.


    Ah yes, the good old "they got a good excuse to reduce privacy, so
    the whole thing must have been staged".

    Whether or not such an event is used for political purposes is in no
    way proof about it being staged.
     
    Juha Nieminen, Oct 24, 2007
    #7
  8. In article <471a0f1d$0$5059$>, Juha Nieminen
    <> wrote:

    > wrote:
    > > This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
    > > so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
    > > DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

    >
    > Curiously no demolition professional agrees with that. Only conspiracy
    > theorists, who have no professional experience in demolition, claim that.


    He will be reported to the Ministry of Conspiracies as soon as I learn
    their address.
    "Wink, wink, nudge, nudge."

    --
    Is it the real turtle soup or merely the mock? COLE PORTER
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Radically systematic, radical metaphysics: "Existence 2"
    http://home.att.net/~sdgross
     
    Stephen Grossman, Dec 13, 2007
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Joe
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    493
  2. Thomas Moore
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    299
  3. Replies:
    14
    Views:
    541
    val189
    Oct 24, 2007
  4. AAaron123
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,138
    AAaron123
    Nov 27, 2008
  5. bdb112
    Replies:
    45
    Views:
    1,351
    jazbees
    Apr 29, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page