Velocity Reviews > Looks like the "conspiracy theories" really were true after all...

# Looks like the "conspiracy theories" really were true after all...

schoenfeld.one@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

R. Mark Clayton
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
> crashing down on the day of 9/11.

At least one other building fell when hit by debris from one of the towers -
IIRC the Vista Hotel, which sat between the two towers, but several other
buildings were badly damaged and at least one was demolished shortly
afterwards as it was dangerous.

>
> The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
>
>
> There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.
>
> Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?

Probably, but being hit by thousands of tons of steel and masonary already
plunging downwards at high velocity can make it come down faster than free
fall speed.

>
> If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
> demolitions industry!
>
> How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?
>
> If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
> from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

6 seconds is free fall from 180m, so how tall was WTC7?

>
> This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
> so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
> DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

Er wrong again, the two towers pretty much collapsed like a deck of cards,
with only the top section tipping over.

But anyway, what are you actually trying to prove?

Dan
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>

plonk.

dan

Christopher Benson-Manica
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
In comp.lang.c R. Mark Clayton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> some response to spam

Any chance you could take this charming discussion somewhere other
than comp.lang.c? I assure you that no one here is interested.

(F'ups set.)

--
C. Benson Manica | I appreciate all corrections, polite or otherwise.
cbmanica(at)gmail.com |
----------------------| I do not currently read any posts posted through
sdf.lonestar.org | Google groups, due to rampant unchecked spam.

Essex Laptops - Andy Usher
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
> crashing down on the day of 9/11.

Most people in the UK that I know of could not care less about your
obsession with the WTC, The only thing to have come out of all this is
people not being able to move as freely as they should be

Just A User
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
> crashing down on the day of 9/11.
>
> The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
>
>
> There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.
>
> Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?
>
> If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
> demolitions industry!
>
> How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?
>
> If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
> from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.
>
> This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
> so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
> DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!
>
> PROPOSITION 1:
> It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
> ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,
>
> Collapse start time: 17 seconds
> Collapse end time: 23 seconds
> Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds
>
> PROPOSITION 2:
> A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
> seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
> kinematical considerations alone:
>
> Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
> total time^2
>
> or
>
> s = ut + 1/2at^2
> where
> s = 174 m (height of building)
> u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
> a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
> a constant)
>
> Thus,
> 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2
>
> Solving for t
> t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.
> = 5.9590
> ~ 6 seconds
>

And the explosives were put in the building by Elvis and the mystery
shooter on the grassy knoll. And they were of explosives were supplied
by the aliens that are still alive that crashed in Roswell in 1947.

Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
Christopher Benson-Manica <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> In comp.lang.c R. Mark Clayton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> some response to spam

>
> Any chance you could take this charming discussion somewhere other
> than comp.lang.c? I assure you that no one here is interested.
>
> (F'ups set.)

Well done. You just woke the thread up for those of us with properly
configured spam filters and thread scoring who hadn't seen it. Well done
indeed.

prettybaby@softhome.net
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
On Oct 22, 5:51 am, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
> crashing down on the day of 9/11.
>
> The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here
>
>
> There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.
>
> Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall speed?
>
> If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
> demolitions industry!
>
> How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?
>
> If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
> from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.
>
> This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
> so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
> DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!
>
> PROPOSITION 1:
> It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
> ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,
>
> Collapse start time: 17 seconds
> Collapse end time: 23 seconds
> Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds
>
> PROPOSITION 2:
> A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
> seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
> kinematical considerations alone:
>
> Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
> total time^2
>
> or
>
> s = ut + 1/2at^2
> where
> s = 174 m (height of building)
> u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
> a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
> a constant)
>
> Thus,
> 174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2
>
> Solving for t
> t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.
> = 5.9590
> ~ 6 seconds

whatever you are trying to say, it is still a sign of the end of this
age.

prettybaby
http://spiritofart123.blogspot.com

Niel J Humphreys
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
"Essex Laptops - Andy Usher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>> Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
>> crashing down on the day of 9/11.

>
> Most people in the UK that I know of could not care less about your
> obsession with the WTC, The only thing to have come out of all this is
> people not being able to move as freely as they should be

You're joking. Everytime I get held up in a bloody queue at the airport it
makes me hate those ****ing Muslim extremists even more.
--

Niel H

Essex Laptops - Andy Usher
Guest
Posts: n/a

 10-22-2007
"Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Christopher Benson-Manica <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> In comp.lang.c R. Mark Clayton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> some response to spam

>>
>> Any chance you could take this charming discussion somewhere other
>> than comp.lang.c? I assure you that no one here is interested.
>>
>> (F'ups set.)

>
> Well done. You just woke the thread up for those of us with properly
> configured spam filters and thread scoring who hadn't seen it. Well done
> indeed.

tiy didnt have to open or reply to it, no one cares about the post and no