• Sections
Was 911 an Inside Job

# Was 911 an Inside Job

Created by inquiring minds on Jan 4, 2013

Click on an option to vote

YES

No

Don't know

Possibly

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5262 Jun 27, 2013
D dt (Z z(t) 0 &#956;(S)s&#729;(S)dS ) &#8722; g Z z(t) 0 &#956;(S)dS = &#8722; Fc(z, z&#729;)(1) 3 where t = time, z = vertical (Lagrangian) coordinate = distance of the current crushing front from the initial position of the tower top; the superior dots denote time derivatives; &#956;(S)= initial specific mass of tower (mass of a story divided by its height) at point of initial coordinate S; s&#729;(S)= velocity of material point with initial coordinate S. It will suffice to consider the velocity, as well as the momentum density, to be distributed throughout the compacted layer linearly. With these approximations, the crush-down differential equation of motion becomes: d dt ( m0[1 &#8722; (z)] dz
dt + &#956;cl 2 [2 &#8722; (z)] dz dt ) &#8722; m(z)g = &#8722;Fc(z, z&#729;)(crush-down)(2) while the crush-up differential equation of motion has the same form as Eq. 17 of Bazant and Verdure (2007): m(y)( d dt " [1 &#8722; (y)] dy dt #+ g )= Fc(y, y&#729;)(crush-up)(3) Here Eq.(2) represents a refinement of Eq. 12 of Bazant and Verdure (2007), while Eq.(3) is identical to their Eq. 17 because the compacted layer is stationary during crush-up. Furthermore, l = height of compacted layer B, &#956;c = specific mass of compacted layer B per unit height, which is considered to be constant and equal to the maximum possible density of compacted debris; m(z)= cumulative mass of the tower above level z of the crushing front (m(z)= m0 + &#956;cl); and Fc = resisting force = energy dissipation per unit height; Fc(z, z&#729;)= Fb + Fs + Fa + Fe, Fb = Wd/(1 &#8722; )h (4) where Wd(z)= total energy dissipation up to level z, which was assumed by Bazant and Verdure (2007) to consist only of energy Fb (per unit height) consumed by buckling of steel columns. In calculations, the large fluctuations of Fb as a function of z or y (evident in Figs. 3 and 4 of Ba&#711;zant and Verdure, 2007) are neglected, i.e., Fb is smoothly homogenized. As a refinement of previous analysis, we introduce here a generalization in which we add energy Fs (per unit height) consumed by continuated bifurcation of concrete floor slabs, energy Fa required to expel air from the tower, and energy Fe required to accelerate the mass of dust and larger fragments and studies, the compaction ratio will not be assumed as a constant but will be more accurately calculated as (z)=(1&#8722; out)&#9 56;(z)/&#956;c, and out = mass shedding fraction = fraction of mass that escapes outside tower perimeter before the end of crush-down (not afterwards). Note that Eq.(2) may be rewritten as Paints a Picture of [m0(1&#8722; )+&#956;c l(1&#8722;0.5 )]z¨&#87 22;mg = &#8722;Fm& #8722;Fc, Fm =[m0(1&#8722; )+&#956; cl(1&#8722;0.5 )]&#729 ; z&#729; = &# 956;¯z& #729;2 (5) where Fm = force required to accelerate to velocity z&#729; the stationary mass accreting at the crushing front, and ¯&#956; = d[m0(1 &#8722; )+ &# 956;cl(1 &#8722; 0.5 )]/dz. This force causes a greater difference from free fall than do forces Fb, Fs, Fa and Fe combined. Upon setting v = z&#729;, Eq.(2) or (5) was converted to a system of two nonlinear first-order differential equations for unknowns v(t) and z(t), which were then integrated numerically with high accuracy using the Runge-Kutta algorithm (note that, for the idealized special case of = Fc = out = 0 and constant &#956; = dm/dz, Eq.(2) reduces to the differential equation (zz&#729;)&#729; = gz, which was formulated and solved by finite differences by Kausel, 2001). As the initial conditions, it is considered that the crushing front initiates at the 96th story in the North Tower, and at the 81st story in the South Tower (NIST 2005).
.
Porkie Pig Pies Preference
Porkpie Preferably Presents Particularly Prolific Paid Professors to Pollinate Peer-reviewed Papers to Parrot his Position in which he Proposes will Purportedly Positively Prove his Propaganda
.

Here's laughing at you pig pie hat.

Judged:

3

2

2

Report Abuse Judge it!
Charlie Sheen
#5263 Jun 27, 2013
Is someone playing both sides of the fence here with a sock?
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe my mind is misunderstood , meaning , molecuraly miniscule morons might misconceive my motives !Maintaining my marijuana moon mission makes me much more mellow,mitigated,mild mannered,and must mention munchies!
Mental midgets make up masses, masters move massive mountains.You may wanna move minnie mouse!
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/smoking/TGK...
<quoted text>
Here's laughing at YOU pig. You little kanadian kook you
Porkpigpiehaqs Piehole
Periodic Penile Penetration Produces Persistent Progressive Perianal Pruritis Perhaps Particularly Perturbing Problematic Presentation Portending Poor Prognosis Preventing Proper Posture.
Please Procure Provisional Portable Protective Prosthetic Plug Plus Purchase Purified Peroxide Possibly Preventing Potential Pyrogenicly Putrid Protozoan Parasites Producing Purulent Purple Pustules Potentially Puckering PorkPigPiehaqs Piehole.
LMFAO LOL ROFLOL HAH HAH HAH HAH HA HAH ad nauseum ad infinitum
I'm rubber and you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#5264 Jun 27, 2013
No. 9/11 was not an inside jobity job job.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

#5265 Jun 27, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
D dt (Z z(t) 0 &#956;(S)s&#729;(S)dS ) &#8722; g Z z(t) 0 &#956;(S)dS = &#8722; Fc(z, z&#729;)(1) 3 where t = time, z = vertical (Lagrangian) coordinate = distance of the current crushing front from the initial position of the tower top; the superior dots denote time derivatives; &#956;(S)= initial specific mass of tower (mass of a story divided by its height) at point of initial coordinate S; s&#729;(S)= velocity of material point with initial coordinate S. It will suffice to consider the velocity, as well as the momentum density, to be distributed throughout the compacted layer linearly. With these approximations, the crush-down differential equation of motion becomes: d dt ( m0[1 &#8722; (z)] dz

.
Porkie Pig Pies Preference
Porkpie Preferably Presents Particularly Prolific Paid Professors to Pollinate Peer-reviewed Papers to Parrot his Position in which he Proposes will Purportedly Positively Prove his Propaganda
.
Here's laughing at you pig pie hat.
Uh huh.
So have you meds worn off or did you OD again?

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5266 Jun 27, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
Is someone playing both sides of the fence here with a sock?
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/smoking/TGK...
<quoted text>
Who cares about you bwunker socks. Why don't you try to out do this? As a mental midget from the Cornholed State of Nebraska, you can't come close.

Pork pig hat's claim to fame

"I'll debwate, and kick your dumb birfer ass, on any 911 related subject."

Debwunkers Diminutive Disclaimer

Debwunkers Debate Declaration Denied Dutifully Defending Disinformation, Deriding, Degrading, Deliberately Deceiving, Denouncing Damaging Data, Demanding Demonstration of Documented Data to Debwunk, Deny and Desperately Demand Debate Despite Decisive Defeat Deliberately Distracting Defensive Deterrent

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5267 Jun 27, 2013
And you bwunkers wonder why you are made fun of post after post?

LOSERS

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5268 Jun 27, 2013
All you cornholers can marry one another now. It's legal. LOL

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#5269 Jun 27, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
All you cornholers can marry one another now. It's legal. LOL
You first.

Judged:

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5270 Jun 27, 2013
LuLu Ford wrote:
No. 9/11 was not an inside jobity job job.
No, it sure wasn't.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5271 Jun 27, 2013
No You LuLu pig & sorry charlie said you're a cornholer.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5272 Jun 27, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
No You LuLu pig & sorry charlie said you're a cornholer.
keep stroking

Judged:

2

2

1

Report Abuse Judge it!
Charlie Sheen
#5273 Jun 27, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Debwunkers Diminutive Disclaimer
Debwunkers Debate Declaration Denied Dutifully Defending Disinformation, Deriding, Degrading, Deliberately Deceiving, Denouncing Damaging Data, Demanding Demonstration of Documented Data to Debwunk, Deny and Desperately Demand Debate Despite Decisive Defeat Deliberately Distracting Defensive Deterrent
This is strange.
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe my mind is misunderstood , meaning , molecuraly miniscule morons might misconceive my motives !Maintaining my marijuana moon mission makes me much more mellow,mitigated,mild mannered,and must mention munchies!
Mental midgets make up masses, masters move massive mountains.You may wanna move minnie mouse!
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/smoking/TGK...

Judged:

2

2

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

#5275 Jun 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>keep stroking
What's funny is he's not even good at mental masterbation yet it's all he does when he's not mindlessly spamming stupid.

Judged:

2

2

2

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5276 Jun 28, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
What's funny is he's not even good at mental masterbation yet it's all he does when he's not mindlessly spamming stupid.
Of course.

Judged:

2

2

2

Report Abuse Judge it!

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#5277 Jun 29, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
No You LuLu pig & sorry charlie said you're a cornholer.
Hey hun? Would you like me to do you with my big black strap-on?

Judged:

5

4

4

Report Abuse Judge it!
Julio

Tavira, Portugal

#5278 Jun 30, 2013
The New York and Washington attacks were self inflicted, obviously. Now, Americans are this deception to justify devastating criminal wars.

Judged:

8

8

8

Report Abuse Judge it!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5279 Jul 1, 2013
Julio wrote:
The New York and Washington attacks were self inflicted, obviously. Now, Americans are this deception to justify devastating criminal wars.
Right On Dewd ! Huh Eh !

Judged:

8

8

8

Report Abuse Judge it!
cornholed charlie
#5281 Jul 16, 2013
nothing to dismiss eh !

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5282 Aug 4, 2013
WTC 7 had not been hit by a plane, so it was apparently the first steel-framed high-rise building in the known universe to have collapsed because of fire alone.

New York Times writer James Glanz quoted a structural engineer as saying:[W]ithin the structural engineering community,[WTC 7] is considered to be much more important to understand [than the Twin Towers], because engineers had no answer to the question,why did 7 come down?[2]

From a purely scientific perspective, of course, there would have been an obvious answer.

Scientists, presupposing the regularity of nature, operate on the principle that like effects generally imply like causes.

Scientists are, therefore, loathe to posit unprecedented causes for common phenomena. By 9/11, the collapse of steel-framed high-rises had become a rather common phenomenon, which most Americans had seen on television.

And in every one of these cases, the building had been brought down by explosives in the process known as controlled demolition.

From a scientific perspective, therefore, the obvious assumption would have been that WTC 7 came down because explosives had been used to remove its steel supports.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-mysterious-c...

Huh Eh !

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#5283 Aug 5, 2013
"Any detonation of explosives within WTC 7 would have been detected by multiple seismographs monitoring ground vibration in the general area. No such telltale spike or vibratory anomaly was recorded by any monitoring instrument."  Brent Blanchard of Protec Field Monitoring Systems

YOU ARE A CLUELESS MORON ZOREASS !!!
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
WTC 7 had not been hit by a plane, so it was apparently the first steel-framed high-rise building in the known universe to have collapsed because of fire alone.
New York Times writer James Glanz quoted a structural engineer as saying:[W]ithin the structural engineering community,[WTC 7] is considered to be much more important to understand [than the Twin Towers], because engineers had no answer to the question,why did 7 come down?[2]
From a purely scientific perspective, of course, there would have been an obvious answer.
Scientists, presupposing the regularity of nature, operate on the principle that like effects generally imply like causes.
Scientists are, therefore, loathe to posit unprecedented causes for common phenomena. By 9/11, the collapse of steel-framed high-rises had become a rather common phenomenon, which most Americans had seen on television.
And in every one of these cases, the building had been brought down by explosives in the process known as controlled demolition.
From a scientific perspective, therefore, the obvious assumption would have been that WTC 7 came down because explosives had been used to remove its steel supports.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-mysterious-c...
Huh Eh !

#### Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.