• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread henryco's new paper

henryco said:
Of course people and concrete near the explosions were pulverized just in the same way. The Huge explosions were witnessed by many many people which had to be far away enough or protected by the screening effect of several upper floors as certainly was the survivors of stairwell B who reported noise (which does not mean absence of explosion) and wind.

Again and looking at the photo posted by Sam.I.Am the question is : where are the 90 floors that should have pancaked and accumulated over and around these core columns near stairwell B ? This is just crazy!
Click to expand...

Let me add that thermobarics for instance have a much lower pressure peak than conventionnal high energy explosives and yet are more destructive, because longer, especially in confined areas.
 
henryco said:
How do you know wish video has the correct sound ? :
Click to expand...

The opne that does not contain the vboice of Michael Hezarkhani saying "Oh! My God!" or the several screaming women who appear to be standing in one place around a stationary microphone. The one that does show an all-male grouip of people hauling ass and one voice saying one word _ "RUN." That is the real one. And you will notice in that that there are no sounds of demolition charges. The voice of Michael Hezarkhani was added later, along with the fake demolition charges. His voice was taken from the video he shot from Battery Park, about a mile away, as the second plane hit. How many times must I repeat this? Your example has both screaming women and Michael Hezarkhani recorded on the sound track. Yours is BOGUS, FALSE INFORMATION, HOG WASH, BS. Do you get where I am going now? Hezarkhani was not within line of sight when the towers fell.
 
henryco said:
Let me add that thermobarics for instance have a much lower pressure peak than conventionnal high energy explosives and yet are more destructive, because longer, especially in confined areas.
Click to expand...
:jaw-dropp

And I thought you could not make a more absurd post than you had already!

There is no possibility that a thermobaric charge was used to drop the towers, and I would have reason to doubt your qualifications as an engineer of ANY kind if you continue to insist that it is possible.

It would have, indeed, taken out all the glass in lower Manhattan ABOVE the level to which the dust cloud rose after the collapse. We do not see this. All the facing windows that broke were less than ten floors up in most buildings. You are riding the Fail Boat to hell.

A thermobaric explosion or two DID occur in at least the south tower, one in the freight elevator in the basement (the first explosion Willie R experienced) and in the express elevator from the lobby to the observation deck. Based upon oral histories, this would be the second explosion that Willie experienced, and the one that John Schroeder experienced as he entered the lobby with the first crew in (from right across the street.) It was from JET FUEL.
 
leftysergeant said:
:jaw-dropp

And I thought you could not make a more absurd post than you had already!

There is no possibility that a thermobaric charge was used to drop the towers, and I would have reason to doubt your qualifications as an engineer of ANY kind if you continue to insist that it is possible.
Click to expand...

Thermobarics rank alongside pyroclastic flows as a classic "I don't know a thing about it but I've read Jim Hoffman's website" indicator. Steven Jones came up with thermite in the unsuccessful attempt to find something that could cut steel columns without making an enormous bang, then proceeded to nanothermite in the ultimate fail attempt of coming up with something that couldn't cut the columns but would still go bang. Hoffman's thermobaric idea beat him to the fail by a considerable margin, though; even less ability to cut steel, even more of a bang.

Dave
 
The core and the exterior did not collapse first, the floor system did. At the very least 3 stories ahead of the collapse front. They had to. Otherwise the walls would have been pulled inwards. That didn't happen.
 
3bodyproblem said:
The core and the exterior did not collapse first, the floor system did. At the very least 3 stories ahead of the collapse front. They had to. Otherwise the walls would have been pulled inwards. That didn't happen.
Click to expand...

I think you meant the walls wouldn't have been pulled inwards. Cuz they most certainly were pulled in.
 
Newtons Bit said:
I think you meant the walls wouldn't have been pulled inwards. Cuz they most certainly were pulled in.
Click to expand...

Prior to collapse, yes, but I think 3bodyproblem meant during the collapse. If the core had been melted first the way bill smith fantasises, then the perimeter columns might well have collapsed inwards; it's a bit tricky to say for certain, given that his/her/its scenario is so unrealistic as to be utterly absurd.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Prior to collapse, yes, but I think 3bodyproblem meant during the collapse. If the core had been melted first the way bill smith fantasises, then the perimeter columns might well have collapsed inwards; it's a bit tricky to say for certain, given that his/her/its scenario is so unrealistic as to be utterly absurd.

Dave
Click to expand...

Yah this ^. I was humoring this idea that the core collapsed first during the collapse. It's hard to say what would have happened but I imagine the exterior would have been pulled in. The sill plates probably wouldn't have been sheared off either.

The idea is truly absurd. All the evidence indicates otherwise.
 
henryco said:
How do you know wish video has the correct sound ? :
the one wish agrees hundreds of testimonies of huge explosions or the other one ?
;)
Click to expand...

Aaaah, I was waiting for such a goofy reply like this since a long time.

Where do we know?
First, your sample of your video has a stereo sound. In 2001, reporters' cameras were filming in mono. But let's assume they recorded in stereo mode.

Let's record the audio of your video :
VIDEO1.png


Now let's have a look at the extract in the red rectangle:
VIDEO2.png


Then, let's copy the audio of the white rectangle, and let's put it under another explosion, same extract:
VIDEO3.png


Now, let's play the extract in the blue rectangle: http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/fakebooms.mp3

You didn't notice anything? That's right, it's the same exact sample of an explosive noise, and explosions can't have the exact same noise. That's why your video has no value.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Thermobarics rank alongside pyroclastic flows as a classic "I don't know a thing about it but I've read Jim Hoffman's website" indicator. Steven Jones came up with thermite in the unsuccessful attempt to find something that could cut steel columns without making an enormous bang, then proceeded to nanothermite in the ultimate fail attempt of coming up with something that couldn't cut the columns but would still go bang. Hoffman's thermobaric idea beat him to the fail by a considerable margin, though; even less ability to cut steel, even more of a bang.

Dave
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the signs of use of a thermobaric weapon on some victims be obvious?

I could have sworn I read an account of when the Russians used them in Chechnya. A young woman said she was hiding in her basement and when she came out after the attack her neighbors were all lying about dead or dying with their lungs inside out.

That might have been some woo but I read a lot of places that collapsed lungs, embolisms, etc would be the "telltale" signs. Any reports from the ME or hospitals of these sorts of injuries, Tom, or are you just making this stuff up as you go along?
 
240-185 said:
Aaaah, I was waiting for such a goofy reply like this since a long time.

Where do we know?
First, your sample of your video has a stereo sound. In 2001, reporters' cameras were filming in mono. But let's assume they recorded in stereo mode.

Let's record the audio of your video :
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO1.png[/qimg]

Now let's have a look at the extract in the red rectangle:
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO2.png[/qimg]

Then, let's copy the audio of the white rectangle, and let's put it under another explosion, same extract:
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO3.png[/qimg]

Now, let's play the extract in the blue rectangle: http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/fakebooms.mp3

You didn't notice anything? That's right, it's the same exact sample of an explosive noise, and explosions can't have the exact same noise. That's why your video has no value.
Click to expand...

That was very well done, thanks. Why do these truthers always drag out this video? It's been debunked to death and it certainly doesn't help their "cause".
 
henryco said:
no way how the core (BTW the most resistant part) could collapse in advance without blowing all the windows and even if it could the air could escape above: the conditions for hermiticity are obviously not satisfied. Again look at the north tower collapse at t=7s: this does not even look like a squib, entire exterior floors are blown out!



It has to be 160km/h much lower the level of the collapse front.


Massive collective hallucinations on 9/11 :
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html
Over insane witnesses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2A8VMg_B64
Click to expand...

Just in case you didn't see this one Henri

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study
 
Audible Click said:
That was very well done, thanks. Why do these truthers always drag out this video? It's been debunked to death and it certainly doesn't help their "cause".
Click to expand...

Having 500 debunkers say ''No, it's not true' is not the same s actually debunking anything Click.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Prior to collapse, yes, but I think 3bodyproblem meant during the collapse. If the core had been melted first the way bill smith fantasises, then the perimeter columns might well have collapsed inwards; it's a bit tricky to say for certain, given that his/her/its scenario is so unrealistic as to be utterly absurd.

Dave
Click to expand...

Uh-uh Dave. I say only 50% or so of the core columns were entirely melted in a fast sequence from bottom to top with the molten steel dropping down into the basemants. FOS of three or greater for the core columns- remember? That would amount to 12-15,000 tons of molten steel bubbling in the basements where it would take more than three months to cool.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Having 500 debunkers say ''No, it's not true' is not the same s actually debunking anything Click.
Click to expand...

Well, Smith, did you take a look at post 130? If you did then please enlighten us as to why you think this is not evidence of the altered video.
 
henryco said:
For an unknown reason, i was not informed that my post was published on Jref until yesterday monday 18th. I did not received the messages sent to me before. I will start by answering as soon as possible Dr Greening explanations on the 911 forum.

I will never publish in a peer-reviewer journal, not because i'm too innovative for them but because its a feodal system completely under control of various lobbies and i dont want to waste my time.

Frederic Henry-Couannier
Click to expand...

I became very suspicious of Steven Jones after he gave the lecture in Boston in December 2007 about the nanothermite chips. I couldn't understand why he was taking so long to send the samples out to be checked independently somewhere really credible like Princeton.

I thought that would be our final undeniable proof.

But when I really thought about it I realised what would have actually happened.

Somebody in the Whitehouse would have lifted a phone and placed a call to Princeton. 'Hello George, what can I do for you today' There is no way in hell that StevenJones could have risked that. Princeton would have found no chips come what may and that would have been that. The same goes for all other establishment bodies. So Steve did brillintly to do it as he did.

Heiwa has had remarkable problems getting published in the JEM despite having had his discussion document accepted for publication almost a year ago- just as you would have in any of the mainstream journals or peer review boards.
 
Last edited:
240-185 said:
Aaaah, I was waiting for such a goofy reply like this since a long time.

Where do we know?
First, your sample of your video has a stereo sound. In 2001, reporters' cameras were filming in mono. But let's assume they recorded in stereo mode.

Let's record the audio of your video :
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO1.png[/qimg]

Now let's have a look at the extract in the red rectangle:
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO2.png[/qimg]

Then, let's copy the audio of the white rectangle, and let's put it under another explosion, same extract:
[qimg]http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/VIDEO3.png[/qimg]

Now, let's play the extract in the blue rectangle: http://gilou82.free.fr/debunk/fakebooms.mp3

You didn't notice anything? That's right, it's the same exact sample of an explosive noise, and explosions can't have the exact same noise. That's why your video has no value.
Click to expand...

I read post 30 not 130 Click lol. Anyway maybe 240-185 wants to do the same analysis with these two clips. A comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsoWbX6hCYk&NR=1 Authentic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1LdQ6DGhpo Fake
 
bill smith said:
I read post 30 not 130 Click lol. Anyway maybe 240-185 wants to do the same analysis with these two clips. A comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsoWbX6hCYk&NR=1 Authentic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1LdQ6DGhpo Fake
Click to expand...

That's bass ackwards. The first clip that you call authentic includes Michael Hezarkhani and the screaming women. The second is actually the opriginal, with only the voice of a real male fire fighter who is obviously running and telling everyone else to run.

DERRRRRR.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom