See other 9/11 Articles
Title: 9/11 Truth: Steven Jones on WTC 7 and Controlled Demolition
Source:
9/11 Truth conference
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pJQ2yZfTY0
Published: Feb 20, 2007
Author: Steven Jones
Post Date: 2007-02-20 00:41:08 by robin
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 19952
Comments: 230
From Halifaxion Steven Jones speaks at the Chicago 9/11 Steven Jones speaks at the Chicago 9/11 Truth conference (June 2006) about World Trade Center Building 7 and the case for controlled demolition of all three towers. This is just ten minutes from a longer lecture that you can find in its entirety on Google Video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2436472348579687382
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-180) not displayed.
.
.
.
#181. To: RickyJ (#178)
Could explain why they have been printing so much money since 9/11. They go into detail in the International Forecaster (Robert Chapman) on how M3 is no longer being reported and how much money the printing presses have been churning out.
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, Bush is President
As I noted to tom007, I meant exactly what I wrote: 417 meters * 2 = 1/2 9.8 t^^2 ... t = 13.05 seconds because I was dealing with the case of a tower TWICE as tall as the WTC towers. And you'll note that the answer demonstrates that RickyJ (who once labeled anyone who can't see that the WTC tower collapses are demolitions a moron) was wrong when he claimed it would take 16.31 seconds.
No, Diana, real scientists and engineers know how to use the equations to get the answer right. And they don't think bombs brought down the WTC and damaged the Pentagon.
Ahhh ... another who, like RickyJ, must think that 99.99999 percent of the structural engineers, demolition experts and macro-world physicists in the world are morons. ROTFLOL!
Refer to post #175
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, Bush is President
Common sense doesn't require a degree, BAC. Deal with it! (Asshole.)
you didn't get my point obviously from the post above. When you wrote 9.8 pertaining to gravity you didn't write m/s (meters per second) like tom007 did. One must always include units. Otherwise it's considered sloppy.
I think Diana has an extremely good point in 187. She knows a real scientist from a fake scientist. I happen to remember that she married a scientist. You BAC are NOT a scientist. you failed to put down the meters per second designation and without that designation it is meaningless and you are very sloppy. This just about dis-proves everything you've said on these subjects once & 4all.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
HE VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT WTC7 IS A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!!!!! WHY DO YOU IGNORE THAT!!! He based his opinion on the videos alone. If he had all the evidence, of the explosions heard by the firefighters, the seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell, for example, he would have a different explanation. If just one of the buildings was a demolition, then it proves the government was involved. It takes weeks in advance to wire a building. Can you deny that!?!?
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush No, Diana. Sloppy is claiming to have an engineering degree and then claiming it would take an object, freefalling from the twice the height of the WTC, 16.31 seconds to reach the ground. Sloppy is claiming an expertise in steel and then claiming steel structural members are stronger in compression than tension.
I haven't claimed to be a scientist, Red. Well I suggest she ask her husband who got the right answer in that calculation. RickyJ or I? You don't know anything about me, Summa Cum Laude. But I know you believe in a lot of demonstrable nonsense. For whatever reason. Especially when I eat at Carl's Jr. ROTFLOL!
And he very clearly doesn't believe that WTC1 or WTC2 are controlled demolitions. Why do you ignore that? You mean loud noised interpreted as explosions. There were NO seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell (other than those associated with the aircraft impacts). Don't you believe Lerner-Lam? Not according to Mr Jowenko. You did watch the video, didn't you? ROTFLOL!
He based his opinion on the videos alone. If he had all the evidence, of the explosions heard by the firefighters, the seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell, for example, he would have a different explanation. If just one of the buildings was a demolition, then it proves the government was involved. It takes weeks in advance to wire a building. Can you deny that!?!? Let's try this again. Mr Jowenko only watched the videos. How many times must this be repeated to you? You can never accuse anyone of being overly selective with your posts again, you do it yourself. There were NO seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell (other than those associated with the aircraft impacts). That is incorrect. You lose, try again. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shake.html The Palisades seismic record shows that — as the collapses began — a huge seismic "spike" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the ground. The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the earth. These unexplained "spikes" in the seismic data lend credence to the theory that massive explosions at the base of the towers caused the collapses. Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush Like the last times, robin? ROTFLOL! Now there's a great source. ROTFLOL! Who do think recorded that seismic data, robin? Lerner-Lam and his staff. And they state categorically that the seismic record does NOT show signs of a demolition. Let me repeat what he said again: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context." In fact, the raw seismic data is available to any seismologist around the world. And guess what? There isn't ONE who has come forward to say there is something in that record that doesn't jibe with NIST's explanation of the collapses. This is simply FALSE, robin. The seismic traces when looked at with a broader time scale rather than that compressed one you posted clearly show a gradually increasing amplitude, with the peak oscillations near the middle of the waveform, not at the beginning as your source wants folks to believe. ImplosionWorld, experts on demolition, is on the record http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf) stating that "In all cases where seismographs detected the collapses, waveform readings indicate a single, gradually ascending and descending level of ground vibrations during the event. At no point during 9/11 were sudden or independent vibration "spikes" documented by any seismograph, and we are unaware of any entity possessing such data. This evidence makes a compelling argument against explosive demolition. The laws of physics dictate that any detonation powerful enough to defeat steel columns would have transferred excess energy through those same columns into the ground, and would certainly have been detected by at least one of the monitors that were sensitive enough to record the structural collapses. However, a detailed analysis of all available data reveals no presense of any unusual or abnormal vibration events." You simply don't know what you are talking about, robin, You are so eager to make the government bad guys, you will believe anything posted by conspiracists. It is sad.
http://www.rense.com/general60/seis.htm SEISMIC 'SPIKES' Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded strange seismic activity on Sept. 11 that has still not been explained. While the aircraft crashes caused minimal earth shaking, significant earthquakes with unusual spikes occurred at the beginning of each collapse. The Palisades seismic data recorded a 2.1 magnitude earthquake during the 10-second collapse of the South Tower at 9:59:04 and a 2.3 quake during the 8-second collapse of the North Tower at 10:28:31. However, the Palisades seismic record shows that-as the collapses began-a huge seismic "spike" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the ground. The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the Earth. These unexplained "spikes" in the seismic data lend credence to the theory that massive explosions at the base of the towers caused the collapses. A "sharp spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of University of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph. The two unexplained spikes are more than 20 times the amplitude of the other seismic waves associated with the collapses and occurred in the East-West seismic recording as the buildings began to fall. Experts cannot explain why the seismic waves peaked before the towers actually hit the ground. You still lose, try again
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush Citing a AFP article written by Christopher Bollyn is not very convincing, robin. Bollyn is one of those who has done just what Lerner-Lam complained about. Or worse. I happen to think he's an outright liar who made up quotes from people since quotes in his articles could not be corroborated even by going to the individuals quoted (such as Lerner-Lam). Where do you think Lerner-Lam and his colleagues work, robin? ROTFLOL! This is what I mean about Bollyn LYING, robin. There are no unusual spikes at the beginning of each collapse. Neither Lerner-Lam or any seismologist around the world has said there were. And I quoted ImplosionWorld (experts in demolotion) stating categorically this is not true. If you look at the waveforms with broader timescales you will see this. Or are you too lazy to go look? This is absolutely untrue, robin. You will not find truth by mindlessly regurgitating other's lies.
A simple stopwatch says that all three buildings were brought down by controlled demolition - you can't get around that, BAC! You can manipulate and micro-manage information all you want; the harsh reality doesn't change.
417 meters * 2 = 1/2 9.8 t^^2 ... t = 13.05 seconds because I was dealing with the case of a tower TWICE as tall as the WTC towers. I was confused because I didn't read the whole thread, so couldn't figure out where the 417*2 came from.
No problem, I understand. But Diana doesn't.
Bollyn is quoting seismologists. You lose, try again.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush that is a statement by Skydrifter. and it is 110% true. and it disproves everything you've said on the subject. thanks BAC for trying - but you've come up short.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
I am sloppy at Carls JR. too. what a coincidence. ROTFLOL!
Galatians 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Yay, someone else gets it right. It was not a "controlled" demolition at all. It was definitey a demolition however. The perps just didn't care where the debris landed.
BAC was so sloppy, or rather ignorant, he actually questioned why it was necessary to even have a calculation that proves the towers came down as the governemnt says. NIST made up fake computer models until they got the result they were looking for, but NIST didn't use that because they knew it was BS so they just said it was obvious from the video. LOL! On top of that I see now BAC got the same equation wrong twice. Apparently he doesn't learn from past mistakes, or have a clue what it is that he is talking about in the first place. He has no credibility around here, I doubt he had much at LP either.
God is always good! Whatever... if that makes you feel better to think that then go ahead. It's just a simple calculation that anyone who took physics 101 can do. I guess you didn't like me pointing that out about the units, but it's good to remember, and it's a bad habit not to include them.
Yes, using the correct units when doing an equation is important. Otherwise you could end up with bad data. :) NASA engineers figured this out the hard way when they didn't convert inches to meters and wasted a multi-million dollar probe to Mars.
God is always good! No, robin, Bollyn was either taking things said by seismologists completely out of context or outright making up quotes and attributing them to them. He CLAIMED to cite what Lerner-Lam said but I showed you what Lerner-Lam actually said (with quotation marks). You can go directly to the reports put out by Lerner-Lam and his staff. They say NOTHING about spikes or seeing anything remotely related to bombs in the towers explosions in the seismic traces. They say and the seismic records clearly show that Bollyn's claim that the peak amplitudes are at the beginning of the collapse is FALSE. FALSE. The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. Riviera, Bollyn and YOU used only one graph which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span, too long to see any real detail in the pulses. The truth is that Bollyn LIED, robin. And you appear to be gullible enough to believe those lies or because they conform to what you WANT to believe. Either is sad. The South Tower collapse: The North Tower collapse: As to Thorne statement, I suggest you contact him to see if he thinks there is any indication of bombs in the seismic data traces: thorne@es.ucsc.edu Bet you he doesn't.
Says the guy who told everyone that a tower twice as high as the WTC towers would take 16.31 seconds to collapse at freefall speed in a vacuum. ROTFLOL! Says the guy who claims all the structural engineers, demolition experts and macro-world physicists in the world are morons because they don't see that the WTC towers were obvious demolitions. ROTFLOL! Then you should be able to just ignore me, Ricky ... as I go around demolishing every thread you folks try to start about bombs in the WTC towers and no Flight 77 at the Pentagon. ROTFLOL!
For some reason, RickyJ couldn't. And imagine ... I did it even without specifying the units. Say, what did your husband have to say, Diana? ROTFLOL!
RickyJ - "It would take approx. 16.31 seconds for a building as twice as tall as the WTC to freefall with no resistance to its fall." ROTFLOL!
BAC, you have a programmer for each thought you have. You're no one's math genius. Common sense goes to the hard-core fact that the three buildings came down at free-fall rates (non-vacuum), not at anything which approached a "collapse." All your spamming can't change that. I don't know why so many go troll-feeding with you, in the first place. {You disappeared - was that your Sabbath? 7th Day Adventist - right?}
ROTFLOL! That's a low blow BAC, he's been gone a few years now. It was a horrible thing what happened, affected a lot of people and i don't like it being brought up on this board.
That's fine, but still it's frowned upon not to use units, I didn't make those rules, but people who deal with that sort of thing on a regular basis know that.
My father was a scientist too and scribbled equations in the evenings, sort of as a hobby. He always used units and stressed the importance of doing so. It would be too easy to mess up if a person, even a brilliant genius such as BeAChooser (!) neglected to include them, but I know you know that.
I guess you missed this link I posted to you on the other thread. more links on the seismic spikes. http://www.studyof911.com/articles/mirrored/craigfurlong/ http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shake.html Those are spikes that precede the fall of each tower.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush I'm sorry to hear that Diana. I didn't know. It's just that Red Jones said he remembered you married a scientist and I responded, with a ping to you, that "she should ask her husband who got the right answer in that calculation, RickyJ or I". You should have corrected me then. In anycase, I'm sorry for your loss. I'm sure you miss him.
So robin ... can you tell everyone the qualifications of Craig T. Furlong or Gordon Ross, authors of your linked article? Can you tell us anything about Craig Furlong, other than his name? Here, let me help you. "Craig T Furlong" has indicated in various places on the web that he's from Huntington, California. He's listed on the Scholars for 9/11 *Truth* website as "Quantitative Methods, Business Administration." But not much else is provided anywhere in anything he posts. Well, what do you know ... there is a Craig T. Furlong in Huntington Beach, CA. Here. According to this, Craig is a Chief Financial Officer of a non-profit charitable company that provides Medical, Counseling and Support Services. That fits the st911 description. That would sure qualify him to write an authoritative article on seismic data and its interpretation. ROTFLOL! Now if I'm wrong about thinking Craig is this individual, by all means set me straight. Tell us, robin ... who is Craig T Furlong? One more thing ... on various 9/11 forums, Craig makes some rather interesting assertions ... such as "anyone who sees a video of WTC7 KNOWS it was a controlled demolition." Now there's someone who didn't make up his mind until viewing all the data. Guess he's also a demolition expert. ROTFLOL! And what about Gordon Ross? Isn't he the guy who also claims any initial collapse would have been arrested by the intact lower section of the buildings? Ah yes, that is the guy. The guy who holds degrees in both Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering and graduated from Liverpool John Moores University in 1984. The guy who is smarter than all the structural and demolition engineers in the world. Who is smarter than all the computer codes that have shown the collapse would have continued to the ground once it started. And who now is also smarter than all the seismologists in the world too. Let's look at his analysis of the collapse I mentioned above. The following is from a discussion about it that I found on the web here: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/06/17/18281125.php . "His analysis assumes that the columns in the floors being impacted will reconnect with something in the falling debris that will maximally resist the descent of all of the debris above. He states "Upon impact with the lower section the falling mass would deliver a force which would grow from zero, up to the failure load of the impacted storey columns, over a finite period of time and distance." That premise leads to this statement "The analysis shows that despite the assumptions made in favour of collapse continuation, vertical movement of the falling section would be arrested prior to completion of the 3% shortening phase of the impacted columns, and within 0.02 seconds after impact. A collapse driven only by gravity would not continue to progress beyond that point." But Ross assumes a perfect descent of the collapsing structure and perfect contact between the columns of the falling floors with the undamaged columns in the floors below. THIS IS AN ABSURD PREMISE." Anyone know what Mr Ross has actually worked on during his engineering life? We wouldn't want him to be another, Professor Jones, who gets called a physicist but actually has only worked on sub-atomic particle physics for the last 30 years. Now since Mr Ross posts over at Liberty Forum, maybe he could be convinced to join us here to tell us a little more about his qualifications. You game to contact him, robin? Maybe you can get him to confirm Craig T. Furlong's qualifications while you are at it.
That is the seismic record from Palisades NY. They show 2 seismic spikes before the towers hit the ground. Similar to the seismic spike when a gas station exploded a few years before. That's the seismologists' interpretation. That many patriots have posted this information on various websites does not change the facts. You of course, have tried to. That's because you are not interested in facts. You are interested only in distortion and lies.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush You're feeding the troll - granted, he makes it tempting.
I know, I'm done now.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush
Comments (221 - 230) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestYes, I do believe our government which prints money at a furious pace now that M3 money supply is no longer being reported can afford to pay whatever it takes to help keep the lid on the truth of 9/11 from reaching the general population.
#182. To: Diana, tom007, RickyJ, ALL (#161)
tom007 - Wouldn't that be, if H= 417m,
tom007 - t= (417m*2/9.8m/s^2)1/2, T=9.22?
At least you included your units, he didn't.
He should know better if he is so smart.
#183. To: Diana, ALL (#162)
Real scientists and engineers always include units in their equations.
#184. To: intotheabyss, RickyJ, SKYDRIFTER, ALL (#168)
SKYDRIFTER - Thus, only controlled demolition of the core 47 steel columns in each of the towers could have provided the documented free-fall rate.
It really is that obvious to any non-shill with an IQ above that of a moron.
#185. To: BeAChooser (#184)
#186. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#184)
Ahhh ... another who, like RickyJ, must think that 99.99999 percent of the structural engineers, demolition experts and macro-world physicists in the world are morons. ROTFLOL!
#187. To: BeAChooser (#183)
No, Diana, real scientists and engineers know how to use the equations to get the answer right.
#188. To: BeAChooser, Diana (#184)
#189. To: BeAChooser (#179)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#190. To: Diana, RickyJ, innieway, ALL (#187)
Otherwise it's considered sloppy.
#191. To: Red Jones, Diana, RickyJ, ALL (#188)
She knows a real scientist from a fake scientist.
I happen to remember that she married a scientist.
You BAC are NOT a scientist.
you are very sloppy.
#192. To: robin, ALL (#189)
HE VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT WTC7 IS A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!!!!!
WHY DO YOU IGNORE THAT!!!
If he had all the evidence, of the explosions heard by the firefighters,
the seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell
If just one of the buildings was a demolition, then it proves the government was involved. It takes weeks in advance to wire a building.
#193. To: BeAChooser (#192)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#194. To: robin, ALL (#193)
"There were NO seismic spikes before WTC1 and WTC2 fell (other than those associated with the aircraft impacts)."
That is incorrect. You lose, try again.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shake.html
The Palisades seismic record shows
The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses,
#195. To: BeAChooser (#194)
(Edited)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#196. To: robin, ALL (#195)
http://www.rense.com/general60/seis.htm
Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades,
While the aircraft crashes caused minimal earth shaking, significant earthquakes with unusual spikes occurred at the beginning of each collapse.
The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses
#197. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#196)
#198. To: BeAChooser (#182)
As I noted to tom007, I meant exactly what I wrote:
#199. To: tom007, Diana, ALL (#198)
I was confused because I didn't read the whole thread, so couldn't figure out where the 417*2 came from.
#200. To: BeAChooser (#196)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#201. To: BeAChooser (#194)
A simple stopwatch says that all three buildings were brought down by controlled demolition - you can't get around that, BAC!
#202. To: BeAChooser (#191)
Especially when I eat at Carl's Jr
#203. To: RickyJ (#153)
Not a normal controlled demolition at all.
I don't want to be a martyr, I want to win! - Me
#204. To: Diana, BeAChooser, All (#187)
(Edited)
When you wrote 9.8 pertaining to gravity you didn't write m/s (meters per second) like tom007 did. One must always include units. Otherwise it's considered sloppy.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#205. To: BeAChooser, tom007, RickyJ (#199)
No problem, I understand. But Diana doesn't.
#206. To: Diana (#205)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#207. To: robin, ALL (#200)
Bollyn is quoting seismologists.
#208. To: RickyJ, ALL (#204)
BAC was so sloppy,
or rather ignorant,
He has no credibility around here,
#209. To: Diana, RickyJ, ALL (#205)
It's just a simple calculation that anyone who took physics 101 can do.
#210. To: RickyJ, Diana, ALL (#206)
RickyJ to Diana - Yes, using the correct units when doing an equation is important. Otherwise you could end up with bad data. :)
#211. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#209)
#212. To: BeAChooser (#209)
Say, what did your husband have to say, Diana?
#213. To: BeAChooser, Ricky J (#209)
And imagine ... I did it even without specifying the units.
#214. To: RickyJ, BeAChooser (#206)
NASA engineers figured this out the hard way when they didn't convert inches to meters and wasted a multi-million dollar probe to Mars.
#215. To: BeAChooser (#207)
"Shortly before the first tower came down, I remember feeling the ground shaking. I heard a terrible noise, and then debris just started flying everywhere. ... By the time the debris settled from the first collapse, we started to walk back east, toward West Street, and a few minutes later ... we basically had the same thing: The ground shook again, and we heard another terrible noise and the next thing we knew the second tower was coming down." [EMS Lieutenant Bradley Mann]
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#216. To: Diana, Red Jones, RickyJ, ALL (#212)
Say, what did your husband have to say, Diana?
ROTFLOL!
That's a low blow BAC, he's been gone a few years now.
#217. To: robin, ALL (#215)
I guess you missed this link I posted to you on the other thread.
more links on the seismic spikes.
http://www.studyof911.com/articles/mirrored/craigfurlong/
#218. To: BeAChooser (#217)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
#219. To: robin (#218)
#220. To: SKYDRIFTER (#219)
(About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
.
.
.