Re: University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11
Quote from: spendy
Assuming 12 feet per floor, 12*80 = 960 feet until the section above the crash zone hit the debris pile. And how long is your prized "free fall speed" for 960 feet?
Looks about 7.3 seconds. Looks like your theory is disproved, because initial presumptions were incorrect.
Looks about 7.3 seconds. Looks like your theory is disproved, because initial presumptions were incorrect.
no spendy, we just watch how long it takes the rooftop @ 1,362 feet to meet the ground, and determine instantly that some 200+ vertical steel columns provided ZERO resistance to the fall
--it's like saying the trunk of a tree has little or no influence over the loft of it's branches ...
Quote from: franky1
... badecker is still trying to roll with a conspiracy thats over 18 years old.
thank you for stating an ongoing conspiracy exists, perhaps we can move on
Answer: You can't.
Closest you can get is to look at the acoustics tracks
I was going to do a big laugh. But then I realized that you aren't even funny anymore. There's videos of the fall, well, maybe not all over the place. But in lots of places. What? Are you trying to measure, the fall in nano-seconds or something?
...
Since this case isn't being re-opened, and since the inside-job perpetrators aren't being found out and prosecuted and executed, the whole government is guilty. ...
Since this case isn't being re-opened, and since the inside-job perpetrators aren't being found out and prosecuted and executed, the whole government is guilty. ...
Iranian propaganda is your thing, apparently.
Your thing is to cover up an inside job.
Inviting guys like you to prove up your assertions with simple math is the exact opposite of covering anything up. You believe in the Iranian propaganda and promote it.
But you have not proved it. Quite the opposite. You are the guy that thought this link was authoritative.
Oh, that's right. The did it already. One little place is right here - https://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html.
You were wrong. Whoever wrote that page did not even have an understanding of 8th grade physics.
You mean those guys that got it wrong by 8th grade physics? Yea, you do. Like right here in this section?
The roofline of WTC1 (The North Tower) begins dropping with sudden onset and accelerates uniformly downward at about 64% of the acceleration of gravity (g) until it disappears into the dust. This means it is meeting resistance equal to about 36% of its weight. The implication of this, however, is that the force it is exerting on the lower section of the building is also only 36% of the weight of the falling section. This is much less than the force it would exert if it were at rest. The acceleration data thus prove that the falling top section of the building cannot be responsible for the destruction of the lower section of the building.
Deal with it.