Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av
onopono
"Byggnader", ja. Skyskrapor i stål? Nej, aldrig tidigare. "Rasat", ja. Totalkollapsar symmetriskt i fritt fall med obrutna fasader? Nej, aldrig tidigare.
Hur menar du att man skulle ha sprängt något som du även påstår har "obrutna fasader"? Var det en "specialbomb" stark nog att ta ner bärande element men svag nog att inte ens spränga fönster?
Citat:
Det misstänkta är att någon har meddelat nyhetskanalarna att byggnaden har kollapsat INNAN den har gjort det. Vem gjorde det och hur kunde denne veta att så skulle ske? Självklart så är nyhetskanalerna med reportrar helt oskyldiga.
Dett har givetvis, som det mesta, både diskuterats och förklarats tidigare i tråden men här kommer det igen...
BBC har själva svarat att det var ett missförstånd och att det bland annat hade reagerat på denna information från CNN:
CNN's chronology of events published at the time confirms they reported the building on fire and a clip from a CNN bulletin, widely available on the web, hears from a reporter at about 4.15pm EDT, 9.15pm in the UK, who says: "We're getting information that one of the other buildings... Building 7... is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing... now we're told there is a fire there and that the building may collapse as well."
...
One senior fire officer was quoted in a subsequent interview as saying there was a "bulge" in the building and he was "pretty sure it was going to collapse". During this time, our staff were talking directly to the emergency services and monitoring local and national media… and there was a fairly consistent picture being painted of Building 7 in danger of collapse.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/03/part_of_the_conspiracy_2.html
Här är även en rapport skriven av Brent Blanchard, Senior Editor på Implosionworld.com och Director of Field Operations på Protec* Vibration Consultants - specialister på markvibrationer och demoleringar..
Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event. We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported hearing or seeing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse. As one eyewitness told us, “We were all standing around helpless we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn’t know if another plane was coming but I never heard explosions like demo charges. We knew with the damage to that building and how hot the fire was, that building was gonna go, so we just waited, and a little later it went.”
http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf
Citat:
Jag frågar igen. Känner du till några vittnesmål från personer som befann sig i närheten som UTTRYCKLIGEN säger att de inte hörde ljud från explosioner från WTC 7?
Se citatet ovanför.
Och ja, jag vet att du inte kommer svara på mitt inlägg - det är uppenbart att du "ignorerar" mig sedan jag återigen bevisade att du är en lögnare i tråden om din Messias (jfk), det är lite sorgligt att se din oförmåga att erkänna när du farit med osanning - det blir bara än tydligare att du inte tar diskussionerna på allvar.
Om någon annan är intresserad av eventuella svar så går det bra att citera ur detta, och förstås även mina tidigare obesvarade inlägg, och ställa frågorna igen till onopono.
EDIT: * Angående Protec här ovan så är exempelvis även detta stycke om vibrationer intressant :
Protec was operating portable field seismographs at construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn on 9/11, and these seismographs were recording ground vibration throughout the timeframe of events at Ground Zero. These measurements, when combined with more specific and detailed seismic data recorded by Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, help to provide an unfiltered, purely scientific view of each event.
The only scientifically legitimate way to ascertain if explosives were used is to cross- reference the fundamental characteristics of an explosive detonation with independent ground vibration data recorded near Ground Zero on 9/11. Fortunately, several seismographs were recording ground vibration that morning, and perhaps more fortunately, all available data is consistent and appears to paint a clear picture.
Seismographs at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, recorded the collapses of WTC 1, 2 and 7. This data was later released to the public and currently appears on their website. Additionally, on 9/11 Protec field technicians were utilizing portable field seismographs to continuously record ground vibrations on several construction sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn for liability purposes.
In all cases where seismographs detected the collapses, waveform readings indicate a single, gradually ascending and descending level of ground vibration 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 presence of any unusual or abnormal vibration events.
)
