EITHER YOU ARE DEEPLY CONFUSED OR YOU ARE TRYING DESINFORM THE PUBLIC .
YOU DONT EXPLAIN ANY OF YOUR DEFENSE OF THE ALLEGED PANCAQUE EFFECT. IF YOU HAVE APROPER ARGUMENT AND EVIDENCE, THAN EXPOSE IT. OTHERWISE PLEASE REMOVE THE VIDEO.
@Reasonable99pct no it was thermite the steel did not melt the aluminum from the planes weakened tower 1 and 2s steel supports and core by 50% the aluminum was like napalm thats why you see that molten metal flying out 2 minutes before collapse tower 2 collapsed first cause it had more weight floors if youd like to say aboe it nd it couldnt take it any longer the rubble at ground zero was from the 85 floor and up any floors below was demolished into that thin dust that was all oer manhatten
1. Are you trying to prove the "pancake" theory is right or wrong?
2. Although the graphic is impressive it is lacking explanation.
3. The collapse of the lower floors could be faster than the higher ones. But the overall speed of the collapse of the building should be quite longer than a free fall object.
4. The building has a steel core which doesn't offer a free fall model as reinforced concrete one, it bends, it twists and ultimately it holds.
there was no resistance or conservation of momentum involved b/c there was no impact with the floors, it just looks like you are tring to prove the pancake theory correct... also, how can you claim there is no resistance but then you say conservation of momentum is applied causes decelleration??? are you just saying there is no resistance inbetween floors?
Conservation of momentum is applied in this scenarion, but that's all. There's no structural resistance, no mass loss, no energy conversions (crush), just COM.
I'm happy to go into detail, but first suggest visiting the following:
the911forum. freeforums. org /wtccs-spreadsheet-crush-down-model-t159. html
Sure. Visiting my site may clarify more than I can do in 500ch tho.
It is a simulation of the mass of the top 28 floors of WTC2 free-falling onto the other 82 magically suspended floors of correct mass which pose no resistance to impact, and which coalesce with the falling impacting mass upon contact. Conservation of momentum is applied, resulting in decelleration of the resulting mass. The resultant timing of the successive impacts is calculated as the time taken to impact ground level.
@femr2
Sorry, it is not me here desinforming the public.
On the other hand I am just bringing facts.
Reasonable99pct 9 months ago
EITHER YOU ARE DEEPLY CONFUSED OR YOU ARE TRYING DESINFORM THE PUBLIC .
YOU DONT EXPLAIN ANY OF YOUR DEFENSE OF THE ALLEGED PANCAQUE EFFECT. IF YOU HAVE APROPER ARGUMENT AND EVIDENCE, THAN EXPOSE IT. OTHERWISE PLEASE REMOVE THE VIDEO.
Reasonable99pct 11 months ago
@Reasonable99pct "EITHER YOU ARE DEEPLY CONFUSED OR YOU ARE TRYING DESINFORM THE PUBLIC ."
Neither. Search for ROOSD.
femr2 11 months ago
So you can add this explanation here, as many people will not go necessarly to another site.
Leaving as it is brings confusion, clutter the discussion and may drive to adverse concluions.
Reasonable99pct 2 years ago
More
5. Thermite "explosives" residues are found in all the three buildings on the day and in the following week.
6. Molten metal is found for weeks.
7. WTC7, a steel structure, had no plane crashed on it and the damage was minimum.
Reasonable99pct 2 years ago
@Reasonable99pct no it was thermite the steel did not melt the aluminum from the planes weakened tower 1 and 2s steel supports and core by 50% the aluminum was like napalm thats why you see that molten metal flying out 2 minutes before collapse tower 2 collapsed first cause it had more weight floors if youd like to say aboe it nd it couldnt take it any longer the rubble at ground zero was from the 85 floor and up any floors below was demolished into that thin dust that was all oer manhatten
lightningstrike555 11 months ago
@Reasonable99pct
exactly!!!
yeah and just the collapse of WTC 7 with few small fire (no fuel not hits etc) is advise that something going wrong there
/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI
watch?v=yEj-kXPfb_g&feature=related
FreeYourMind911 9 months ago
1. Are you trying to prove the "pancake" theory is right or wrong?
2. Although the graphic is impressive it is lacking explanation.
3. The collapse of the lower floors could be faster than the higher ones. But the overall speed of the collapse of the building should be quite longer than a free fall object.
4. The building has a steel core which doesn't offer a free fall model as reinforced concrete one, it bends, it twists and ultimately it holds.
Reasonable99pct 2 years ago
there was no resistance or conservation of momentum involved b/c there was no impact with the floors, it just looks like you are tring to prove the pancake theory correct... also, how can you claim there is no resistance but then you say conservation of momentum is applied causes decelleration??? are you just saying there is no resistance inbetween floors?
xdyingfetusx69 2 years ago
Conservation of momentum is applied in this scenarion, but that's all. There's no structural resistance, no mass loss, no energy conversions (crush), just COM.
I'm happy to go into detail, but first suggest visiting the following:
the911forum. freeforums. org /wtccs-spreadsheet-crush-down-model-t159. html
femr2. ucoz. com
femr2 2 years ago
This isnt an accurate representation .... you either dont know what you are doing or trying to disinform people.....
xdyingfetusx69 2 years ago
thanks! very interesting indeed
smitty121981 2 years ago
Interesting video, can you tell me more about it? I am a little confused as to what you are simulating here.
smitty121981 2 years ago
Sure. Visiting my site may clarify more than I can do in 500ch tho.
It is a simulation of the mass of the top 28 floors of WTC2 free-falling onto the other 82 magically suspended floors of correct mass which pose no resistance to impact, and which coalesce with the falling impacting mass upon contact. Conservation of momentum is applied, resulting in decelleration of the resulting mass. The resultant timing of the successive impacts is calculated as the time taken to impact ground level.
femr2 2 years ago
Spot on!
Total collapse my a..!
clauzii 2 years ago