ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 9/11

Reply
Old 19th September 2017, 09:39 AM   #161
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by traxy View Post
I was unaware that there was such a thing as "insignificant warping" of a burning 47 story building.

Your statement begs the question, at what point does that warping become "significant"?
There is such a thing as "insignificant warping" of parts of a 47 story building. The steel perimeter and the cladding tiles could have been the only thing causing the movement noted on the transit. This fact was made into a rumor that the entire building was leaning. A firefighter named "Miller" actually thought he could see the building leaning with the naked eye. But nobody has ever provided any photographic evidence for that.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 09:43 AM   #162
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,382
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is such a thing as "insignificant warping" of parts of a 47 story building. The steel perimeter and the cladding tiles could have been the only thing causing the movement noted on the transit. This fact was made into a rumor that the entire building was leaning. A firefighter named "Miller" actually thought he could see the building leaning with the naked eye. But nobody has ever provided any photographic evidence for that.
Well we know that there was a visible bulge which is why they put a transit on it.

Soo... that kind of destroys the redditor's speculation.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 09:44 AM   #163
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Geez, what material other than high explosives and nano-banano-fofano therm*t was known to be at the scene?

If someone wants to play the exord in the building card in the 9/11 attacks, somebody with burns with blast injuries is weak stuff. Burn injuries from explosive detonation only come in at 4th place (out of 4) on the trauma medicine blast injury treatment checklist, and yes, that's in descending order..

I know Hollywood loves their fireballs and movie goers love 'em too, but that isn't what happens when explosives detonate - there is a very high temperature expansion of high velocity gas at the moment of detonation, but for the most part any fire at a detonation point comes from materials ignited by that expanding gas - watch this video -M18A1 Claymore AP mine:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


1lb. C4 plastic explosive. Watch as many times as you like, small bright flash, no fireball.

Lets go bigger:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


500 lb. Mk82 aerial bomb - iirc just under 200 lbs. TNT mix with filler.

More flash, still no Hollywood fireball. You can use the counter on the video to gwet a rough idea of how long the flash lasts at the moment of detonation.

Lets get bigger:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


1000 lb. Mk 83 aerial bomb w/ JDAM package, 440 M/L Lbs of TNT mix as the MK 82. Watch that detonation and time that flash.

So in light of reality, what is the most reasonable explanation for a fireball reported by witnesses and what materials were proven to be at the scene of the 9/11?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1HJoG-1Pg

At the 0:18 mark, you can see a fireball coming out of the base of the J.L. Hudson Department Store.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 09:46 AM   #164
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Well we know that there was a visible bulge which is why they put a transit on it.

Soo... that kind of destroys the redditor's speculation.
There was a bulge, but the same reasoning could be applied there. And nobody ever said how big the bulge actually was. Looking upwards on the surface of a building, any small irregularity can be noticed. That's why the reports of the top of the North Tower leaning were probably just due to the perimeter wall units that were bowing inwards.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 09:49 AM   #165
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,382
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There was a bulge, but the same reasoning could be applied there. And nobody ever said how big the bulge actually was. Looking upwards on the surface of a building, any small irregularity can be noticed. That's why the reports of the top of the North Tower leaning were probably just due to the perimeter wall units that were bowing inwards.
"Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse."

seems pretty clear to me how big it was
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 09:53 AM   #166
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It should be obvious to anyone of more than meagre intelligence that burns alone are evidence only of heat, and that anyone close enough to an explosion to suffer burns would also suffer blast injuries.
Is anybody here suggesting that Ron was hit by a large piece of rubble? Otherwise, let's review his injuries:

Unconsciousness for 2-6 days

"Big gash in my head", fractured skull

"Broken bone in my back"

Burns on 60%-80% of body

Contacts glued to eyes

"my ears were turned inside out"
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 10:07 AM   #167
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 12,159
Just to point out something...

You do realize, I hope, that fireballs are usually not a feature of most explosions? The "movie" style of explosion is usually not; it's a deflagration using gasoline because it's more visually appealing. Not an explosion.

Also, burns are almost always secondary injuries in explosions; the damage an explosion causes is blast or shock. If you're close enough for the actual explosion to burn you, you're generally close enough that the blast kills you, and the burns are the least of your worries. Burns in survivors are usually caused by secondary effects (materials ignited by the explosion or by the damage the explosion caused).

Expected injuries from explosions would be concussion and blast effects, and shrapnel injuries...not burns. Not fireballs. And we don't see patterns of injuries consistent with that.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 10:09 AM   #168
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,889
deleted post - never mind

Last edited by carlitos; 19th September 2017 at 10:10 AM. Reason: the truth is dead. long live the truth.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 10:25 AM   #169
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 26,396
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Is anybody here suggesting that Ron was hit by a large piece of rubble?
Given that there were a lot of large pieces of rubble available to be hit by, it's hardly an outlandish suggestion. It's even possible he was hit by a small piece of rubble, or several small pieces.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Otherwise, let's review his injuries:

Unconsciousness for 2-6 days

"Big gash in my head", fractured skull

"Broken bone in my back"
We'd expect an outrush of air and debris as the building collapsed, which could easily cause all these injuries.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Burns on 60%-80% of body

Contacts glued to eyes
Heat, then. Nobody's disputing that.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
"my ears were turned inside out"
Gosh, do you think a collapsing skyscraper might have made a loud noise?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 10:30 AM   #170
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 26,396
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There was a bulge, but the same reasoning could be applied there. And nobody ever said how big the bulge actually was. Looking upwards on the surface of a building, any small irregularity can be noticed. That's why the reports of the top of the North Tower leaning were probably just due to the perimeter wall units that were bowing inwards.

It's impressive, you'll all note, how MicahJava always understands what was going on better than the people who were actually there, despite the fact that their testimony is all he has to go on. It's a gift he uses a lot in formulating his clearly superior and not in the least contradictory interpretations.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 10:48 AM   #171
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It's impressive, you'll all note, how MicahJava always understands what was going on better than the people who were actually there, despite the fact that their testimony is all he has to go on. It's a gift he uses a lot in formulating his clearly superior and not in the least contradictory interpretations.

Dave
The bulge was apparently noticed a while after the engineer made his prediction, so they already had the idea planted in their minds.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 11:00 AM   #172
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,496
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The bulge was apparently noticed a while after the engineer made his prediction, so they already had the idea planted in their minds.

The facts about the dynamics of the plane collisions, building fires and collapses on 9/11 were apparently presented to you a while after the conspiracy theory CD claims were promulgated, so you already had the latter idea planted in your mind.
__________________
A zřmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 11:10 AM   #173
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,382
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The bulge was apparently noticed a while after the engineer made his prediction, so they already had the idea planted in their minds.
Really? Ok, they knew to look for a bulge, and then they saw a bulge and then they used a device to measure the bulge.

Wait, are you trying to explain why they believed the WTC7 was going to come down because you are doing an outstanding job of it!
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 11:50 AM   #174
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,989
Originally Posted by ralfyman View Post
As I explained earlier, what's illogical about this investigation is that most of the physical evidence was sold off as scrap without careful examination, and the FEMA report reveals this.
The fact is that probably only about 3% of the steel needed to be looked at carefully. Any steel columns that were not physically deformed could be sold off as scrap. This essentially means that only those steel columns around the floors of impact and fire needed careful examination.

Quote:
BTW, I'm not a truther. My argument is actually based on being a skeptic.
The mark of woo.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 12:12 PM   #175
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,302
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Is anybody here suggesting that Ron was hit by a large piece of rubble? Otherwise, let's review his injuries:

Unconsciousness for 2-6 days

"Big gash in my head", fractured skull

"Broken bone in my back"

Burns on 60%-80% of body

Contacts glued to eyes

"my ears were turned inside out"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_injury

"The ears are most often affected by the overpressure, followed by the lungs and the hollow organs of the gastrointestinal tract."

No damage to ears or lungs or gastrointestinal tract on the list.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 12:54 PM   #176
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 12,159
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_injury

"The ears are most often affected by the overpressure, followed by the lungs and the hollow organs of the gastrointestinal tract."

No damage to ears or lungs or gastrointestinal tract on the list.
Yep, precisely my point (but better made, thanks pgimeno).

Injuries are consistent with blunt force trauma and fire, rather than anything expected from an explosion.

But too many people only know explosions from Hollywood. Generally, that's a good thing (in a perfect world, no one would have experience with explosions). In this case, not so much.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:03 PM   #177
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,587
The two main reasons why I do not believe the CTs are

1 - if an experiment is repeated and it gives the same result, it is verified. Fly one jumbo jet plane into a TTT and it collapses, then repeat and the second tower collapses. That is verification flying a jumbo jet plane into a TTT will cause it to collapse. If there had been a third tower, fly a similar plane into it and it would collapse.

2 - the 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists almost always also believe in other CTs where governments are hoodwinking the public to benefit a few very wealthy/Illuminate/Jewish people. They like to think they are being clever and daring by doubting the government. They are biased and have an agenda.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:03 PM   #178
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1HJoG-1Pg

At the 0:18 mark, you can see a fireball coming out of the base of the J.L. Hudson Department Store.
Was that before or after the building stared to descend?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:05 PM   #179
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,912
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1HJoG-1Pg

At the 0:18 mark, you can see a fireball coming out of the base of the J.L. Hudson Department Store.
That is not a fire ball, it is a blast from explosives.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:06 PM   #180
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The bulge was apparently noticed a while after the engineer made his prediction, so they already had the idea planted in their minds.

16 years and counting and still no CD evidence to present shows that the false story was fabricated, or perhaps I should say, planted.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 19th September 2017 at 01:07 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:06 PM   #181
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,382
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Was that before or after the building stared to descend?
It wasn't a fireball at all, it was demolition charges
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:07 PM   #182
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Just to point out something...

You do realize, I hope, that fireballs are usually not a feature of most explosions? The "movie" style of explosion is usually not; it's a deflagration using gasoline because it's more visually appealing. Not an explosion. ...
Slight correction:

Explosions are any rapid expansions of gas that go "boom".

The supersonic ones (those that are actually capable of cutting steel) are called "detonations"
The sub-sonic ones (gasoline fire balls, but also black powder) are "deflagrations"
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:09 PM   #183
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...
"my ears were turned inside out"
Were the ears actually turned inside out?
If not, please interprete this expression for us!

(Hint: We have no way of telling what specific injury is referenced here, only that it affected the ears. )
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:12 PM   #184
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The two main reasons why I do not believe the CTs are
...
I have one more reason, and it tops my list:

1. There exists not CT for 9/11
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:13 PM   #185
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There was a bulge, but the same reasoning could be applied there. And nobody ever said how big the bulge actually was. Looking upwards on the surface of a building, any small irregularity can be noticed. That's why the reports of the top of the North Tower leaning were probably just due to the perimeter wall units that were bowing inwards.

Just to let you know that the signs of bowing and bulges were clues that fire was weakening the steel structures of WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 to the point of failure which eventually resulted in their collapse.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:13 PM   #186
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
It wasn't a fireball at all, it was demolition charges
Shht! Spoil-sport!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:14 PM   #187
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 12,159
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Slight correction:

Explosions are any rapid expansions of gas that go "boom".

The supersonic ones (those that are actually capable of cutting steel) are called "detonations"
The sub-sonic ones (gasoline fire balls, but also black powder) are "deflagrations"
Eh, I'll take it. We always used explosion to refer specifically to detonation, but that could well be a local usage

ETA: Although typically, deflagrations go "woosh" more than "boom" (them there are technical terms, mind you)
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:21 PM   #188
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1HJoG-1Pg

At the 0:18 mark, you can see a fireball coming out of the base of the J.L. Hudson Department Store.

Now, let's take a look at the Verinage demolition process which does not use explosives and tell us why dust plumes and debris are ejected from the buildings as they collapse.


Verinage Demolition Without Explosives

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:25 PM   #189
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,382
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
Now, let's take a look at the Verinage demolition process which does not use explosives and tell us why dust plumes and debris are ejected from the buildings as they collapse.


Verinage Demolition Without Explosives

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o
If you jump on Twitter now you can see several building collapsing in Mexico City today from the earthquake that results in smoke, dust and debris.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:27 PM   #190
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Eh, I'll take it. We always used explosion to refer specifically to detonation, but that could well be a local usage

ETA: Although typically, deflagrations go "woosh" more than "boom" (them there are technical terms, mind you)
I guess that these terms do not have one single definition that is consistently used across all fields of human activity where they play some role.

The distinction I defined I think is relevant to all those who want to employ explosions to destroy stuff.
Deflagrations have different destructive mechanisms than detonations, and being sub- or supersonic is an important delineation: Supersonic blasts shatter material - you can't shoot a bullet with supersonic explosives, for example.
A sub-sonic bomb can be very effictive in making an enclosed buiding burst, when exploded in the middle of it - they just create a sphere of overpressure that does the work well.
Supersonic devices work best when in direct contact with the material you want to break.

Thermobaric bombs are an example of subsonic low explosives; their advantage is high energy density and a relatively long duration of the blast. Pretty nasty against living things.
And the fuel that exploded down the WTC shafts acted a lot like thermovaric bombs!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:31 PM   #191
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is such a thing as "insignificant warping" of parts of a 47 story building. The steel perimeter and the cladding tiles could have been the only thing causing the movement noted on the transit. This fact was made into a rumor that the entire building was leaning. A firefighter named "Miller" actually thought he could see the building leaning with the naked eye. But nobody has ever provided any photographic evidence for that.

Explain why WTC 7 is seen leaning toward the south during its collapse as seen at timeline 0:13 - 0:15.


WTC 7 Tilts South During Collapse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mamvq7LWqRU
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:46 PM   #192
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 12,159
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I guess that these terms do not have one single definition that is consistently used across all fields of human activity where they play some role.

The distinction I defined I think is relevant to all those who want to employ explosions to destroy stuff.
Deflagrations have different destructive mechanisms than detonations, and being sub- or supersonic is an important delineation: Supersonic blasts shatter material - you can't shoot a bullet with supersonic explosives, for example.
A sub-sonic bomb can be very effictive in making an enclosed buiding burst, when exploded in the middle of it - they just create a sphere of overpressure that does the work well.
Supersonic devices work best when in direct contact with the material you want to break.

Thermobaric bombs are an example of subsonic low explosives; their advantage is high energy density and a relatively long duration of the blast. Pretty nasty against living things.
And the fuel that exploded down the WTC shafts acted a lot like thermovaric bombs!
Yep. And actually, for knocking down a structure, deflagrations tend to be more effective. The pressure wave from them is much smaller (lower force), but applied over a long period of time, and has been shown to be more effective in knocking down walls and similar. In layman's terms, they "push", while actual detonations tend to cut or shatter as you said. Even among high explosives, cratering charges (designed to move dirt, such as ANFO) tend to be much lower-velocity than cutting charges (designed to cut through materials, such as C-4) for precisely that reason.

I do, however, disagree with your statement about bullets; you can use high explosives to fire a bullet (technically, that's what a fragmentation grenade is), if you have a weapon system designed for such. That being said, it's typically undesirable: the slower-burning propellants work better (and are safer to use) in that application.

I spent quite a bit of time in the military as a medic assigned to Combat Engineering units (CE's make things into many smaller, high-velocity things), including several deployments to Iraq, and a lot of experience in seeing explosions of various types and treating injuries from the same. I also cross-trained as a Combat Engineer myself.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:49 PM   #193
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1HJoG-1Pg

At the 0:18 mark, you can see a fireball coming out of the base of the J.L. Hudson Department Store.
Thanks, but I already have hands on experience with explosive materials and devices.

You say "fireball" because you have a popular fiction pov.

The vid you linked shows a flash consistent with a high explosive detonation, and in fact is not much different from the first vid I linked in my post that shows an M18 AP mine being detonated. This makes sense because in a CD typical charges are in the 1 - 2 lb. range.

The "fireballs" you have cited from other ill-informed sources are not consistent with HE detonation, and one of your cited witnesses clearly stated they thought the fire was due to jet fuel in the building.

Posting a video of a CD does not answer my question. The observable evidence is that HE does not produce "fireballs" at detonation. What material was indisputably present at the scene that does create fireballs of the type you (in actuality the sources you choose to believe) describe?
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 01:59 PM   #194
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,302
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Were the ears actually turned inside out?
If not, please interprete this expression for us!

(Hint: We have no way of telling what specific injury is referenced here, only that it affected the ears. )
The description suggests it affected the outer ear. Blast injury typically affects the tympanic membrane and other parts of the middle ear. Hence, not blast injury. At least not from high explosives. I wanted to clarify it, since it mentions the ears were somehow affected but I didn't take that as meaning the kind of ear injury caused by an explosion.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 02:02 PM   #195
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is such a thing as "insignificant warping" of parts of a 47 story building. The steel perimeter and the cladding tiles could have been the only thing causing the movement noted on the transit. This fact was made into a rumor that the entire building was leaning. A firefighter named "Miller" actually thought he could see the building leaning with the naked eye. But nobody has ever provided any photographic evidence for that.
Nobody has provided evidence?

If you'd bother to read through the multitude of 911 threads here you'd find those pictures showing both towers and 7 leaning as the fires did their job.

Right off the bat you base your claim on a lie that is easily debunked, and has been debunked multiple times on this board.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 02:05 PM   #196
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The bulge was apparently noticed a while after the engineer made his prediction, so they already had the idea planted in their minds.
I can guarantee that the majority of the thousands of FDNY and first responders near WTC7 never heard what the engineer said.

We're still waiting for you to tell us how many high rise fires your engine company has fought.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 02:15 PM   #197
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Is anybody here suggesting that Ron was hit by a large piece of rubble? Otherwise, let's review his injuries:

Unconsciousness for 2-6 days

"Big gash in my head", fractured skull

"Broken bone in my back"

Burns on 60%-80% of body

Contacts glued to eyes

"my ears were turned inside out"
How's that work? does he (or you) not know how long he was out or was he in and out for 2 to 6 days?

That counts out HE.

If a victim of an HE detonation is close enough to receive that level of burn injury, the burns would be nothing more than an injury noted when the body parts of the corpse were recovered.

Levels of burn injury in individuals surviving an explosive detonation are under 30%. - Individuals suffering burns from HE above that 30% would typically also suffer various traumatic amputations and internal injuries that would make survival highly unlikely outside of immediate trauma care.

The injuries you cite are very consistent with being inside a structure that failed.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 02:37 PM   #198
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,479
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is such a thing as "insignificant warping" of parts of a 47 story building. The steel perimeter and the cladding tiles could have been the only thing causing the movement noted on the transit. This fact was made into a rumor that the entire building was leaning. A firefighter named "Miller" actually thought he could see the building leaning with the naked eye. But nobody has ever provided any photographic evidence for that.
So the guy who didn't realize that Carol Marin and Carol MarTin are two different people thinks he knows better than people who were present at the time?
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 03:13 PM   #199
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,856
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Yep. ...

I do, however, disagree with your statement about bullets; you can use high explosives to fire a bullet (technically, that's what a fragmentation grenade is), if you have a weapon system designed for such. ...
Huh? In my conception, a bullet (aimed, stable trajectory) is pretty much the opposite of a fragmentation grenade

Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
I spent quite a bit of time in the military as a medic assigned to Combat Engineering units (CE's make things into many smaller, high-velocity things), including several deployments to Iraq, and a lot of experience in seeing explosions of various types and treating injuries from the same. I also cross-trained as a Combat Engineer myself.
Hehe that means I can be a bit proud I didn't make a complete fool of myself?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2017, 03:17 PM   #200
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Yep. And actually, for knocking down a structure, deflagrations tend to be more effective. The pressure wave from them is much smaller (lower force), but applied over a long period of time, and has been shown to be more effective in knocking down walls and similar. In layman's terms, they "push", while actual detonations tend to cut or shatter as you said. Even among high explosives, cratering charges (designed to move dirt, such as ANFO) tend to be much lower-velocity than cutting charges (designed to cut through materials, such as C-4) for precisely that reason.

I do, however, disagree with your statement about bullets; you can use high explosives to fire a bullet (technically, that's what a fragmentation grenade is), if you have a weapon system designed for such. That being said, it's typically undesirable: the slower-burning propellants work better (and are safer to use) in that application.

I spent quite a bit of time in the military as a medic assigned to Combat Engineering units (CE's make things into many smaller, high-velocity things), including several deployments to Iraq, and a lot of experience in seeing explosions of various types and treating injuries from the same. I also cross-trained as a Combat Engineer myself.
There was a code-word classified program during Vietnam that involved salting VC weapons caches with ammunition that would explode when used. The idea was that if Nguyen Van Nguyen got the word that his AK or SKS might explode if fired, he might call it a day.

Optimistic, yes. Successful, no.

The big brains decided that they would produce copies of typical combloc 7.62 x 39mm rounds with C4 as the propellant charge. The premise was that the rounds would explode and ruin someone's day.

Rounds in typical combloc packaging were issued to LRRP and various other sneaky-pete types with orders to insert the doctored rounds into discovered weapons caches.

It sounds like a good idea, except evidently nobody tested the theory.

Eventually there was a live-fire test conducted by the Foreign Science and Technology Center where the doctored ammo was fired through various combloc weapons, using a fixture for mounting the weapon.

None of the weapons detonated in the tests, although there were functioning issues due to total case head separations in some examples.

After these tests disproved the earlier assumptions of explosive detonation, one of the testers, Charlie Leatherwood, fired an AK from the standing position in full auto, firing the 30 rounds in one burst. Other than the split steel cases, no damage was noted to the shooter or the weapon.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.