The Sam.I.Am Challenge

[Sam.I.Am]

Show me any example of a controlled demolition using any chemical reaction (explosives and Therm*te are chemical reactions but any other will do) that pulls or pushes inward any major element of a structure that:

1: Isn't audibly detectable from less than 1,000 yards by anyone who doesn't require a hearing aid.

B: Leaves no seismic trace.

III: Has no exterior visual "Cutting" or containment devices to speak of at the precise initial collapse point.

You must also show how your chemical reaction cannot initiate after being exposed to the shock from an airliner hitting it at 400+ MPH and can withstand the heat of a minimum of degrees at 300c until 45 minutes or more has elapsed.

You can use any combination of devices but none of them can be visible to either the average office worker, the regular maintainence staff or the regular inspectors of things like the elevators.

I offer $1M (not bucks) to anyone who can do this to my satisfaction...

(I reserve the right to change this as I see fit...)

[kylebisme]

The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html) effectively meets your conditions. I'm not rightly in a position to prove the specific materials he suggests do exist, but I'm not rightly in a position to rule any of them out either.

[Quad4_72]

The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html) effectively meets your conditions. I'm not rightly in a position to prove the specific materials he suggests do exist, but I'm not rightly in a position to rule any of them out either.

That is completely retarded Kyle and does not meet Sams requirement. Hoffman talks about lining 900,000 tiles with explosives! Do you have any idea how distinctively audible that would be for miles around?

[TruthersLie]

MOTHRA did it.

I have just as much proof of that as the nearly 1 million nanothermite ceiling tiles...

Of course it begs the question.
1. who made them?
2. where were they made?
3. how were they made?
4. how were they installed w/out no one noticing
5. how were they wired to detonate.

I mean if you are making up a hypothesis that requires mass producing a substance where there are serious issues getting the raw materials (ANITAC). YOu would need a factor, workers etc... yet not one has ever come forward.

MOTHRA is the real culprit.

I'll take my $1M in pennies.

[sphenisc]

...

1: Isn't audibly detectable from less than 1,000 yards by anyone who doesn't require a hearing aid.

B: Leaves no seismic trace.

III: Has no exterior visual "Cutting" or containment devices to speak of at the precise initial collapse point.

...
(I reserve the right to change this as I see fit...)


Could you change it to have a consistent numbering system?

Thanks

[Sam.I.Am]

MOTHRA did it.

MOTHRA has an audible signal, there was no signal. Mothra didn't do it. Gargantua is a possibility however... time will tell.

[Sam.I.Am]

Could you change it to have a consistent numbering system?

Thanks

If you need a constant anything then you missed the point of my post and why I posted it... But I'll give you this smile anyway. :)

[kylebisme]

Hoffman talks about lining 900,000 tiles with explosives! Do you have any idea how distinctively audible that would be for miles around?
I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

[PixyMisa]

Let me get this straight: You detonate the explosives after the building has already started to collapse? What exactly is this supposed to achieve?

[JimBenArm]

Sam, you know it was submarines that did it. Do you think they actually decommisioned the old boomers? Huh? No, they used them in a steath raid to surface into the WTCs, and this lead to the collapse. That's why no explosives were heard. Why do you think they called us the Silent Service?

[TruthersLie]

MOTHRA did it.

MOTHRA has an audible signal, there was no signal. Mothra didn't do it. Gargantua is a possibility however... time will tell.

There are reports of people being blown over by a large wind (I won't datamine the survivors that is just crude and in poor taste). Mothra has large wings which push lots of wind.

Everyone knows bugs like to go to high places. The towers collapsed from the top.

Mothra is heavy. Heavy things cause things to tilt.

They used super duper Mothra hush a wings.

Just as much proof it was mothra... and NIST didn't test for Mothra Poo. Inside jobby job.

[TruthersLie]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

GREAT.

Again and again I will ask you for proof.

So detonating tiles would be silent? Provide a citation showing that nanothermite tiles are capable of cutting through steel beams quietly. It should be easy to find.

I love how the sound of explosives cannot be heard during the collapse...
again and again appeal to MAGIC fallacy. (next you will say that you are not all knowing so you can't.)

ETA: again and again.
Here is a very indepth analysis of what CD charges sound like.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926#12m50s**

notice how loud just 60lbs of HE is.

Also notice how much work is involved in prepping the steel columns for demolitions. In 1993, the van bomb in the wtc garage had over 1000 lbs of explosives but didn't cut a single column... also note that EVERYONE in the wtc complex heard it detonate.

hush a boom... I love it. PROVE IT.

[kookbreaker]

Mothra huggers!

[TruthersLie]

Let me get this straight: You detonate the explosives after the building has already started to collapse? What exactly is this supposed to achieve?

It is supposed to make sure the towers collapse but have them LOOK LIKE a top down collapse.

There are some instances where they have done top down CDs but they are a pain in the rear, very difficult to make sure happen, and take MORE coordination.

I'm still waiting for anyone to show images of or video of the tell tale debris caused by CD of any sort.

I am reminded of someone elses question.

wouldn't it just be easier to fly a jet into the building? A much smaller conspiracy, fewer chances of discovery, etc...

[TruthersLie]

Mothra huggers!

You are just jealous

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by kylebisme
I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

140db is louder than the sound of the collapse. Nobody saw or heard these explosives explode. There are no recovered bodies that died by proximity to explosions.

Hoffman doesn't know how the WTC towers were built, at least as far as the ceiling/floor structure goes. The tiles are hung from the truss and therefor a couple feet from the floor above. Modest amounts of explosives don't act at a distance.

As someone with a passing exposure to architecture, I would expect you to appreciate modern office building construction. Drop ceilings are kind of universal, at least in NYC.

The proposed logistics of installing his tiles is silly to someone (me) who has been involved with a couple from-bare-steel renovations of floors in big, secure, Manhattan buildings.

Hoffman obviously never worked all hours in a big office building and dealt with getting stuff up freight and construction elevators.

[Dave Rogers]

The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html) effectively meets your conditions. I'm not rightly in a position to prove the specific materials he suggests do exist, but I'm not rightly in a position to rule any of them out either.

Please explain how explosive ceiling tiles cause perimeter structural members to deform inwards, which is the fundamental requirement of the challenge.

Dave

[roger]

Deleted. I can't joke about this crap.

[dafydd]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

Do you ever actually think as you type?

[Quad4_72]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

No, the sound would not blend in. Ever been to a CD before? The sound is extremely distinct. And the amount of explosives being suggested by Hoffman would have been picked up by every single audio device recording on that day for miles around. The DB level of the explosives is well above that of the collapse. What you linked to is utter trash.

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by kylebisme
The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis effectively meets your conditions. I'm not rightly in a position to prove the specific materials he suggests do exist, but I'm not rightly in a position to rule any of them out either.


Hoffman's hypothesis that radio control was used is stupid. The US Army Demolition manual (FM-5-250, Explosives & Demolition) shows that electric fuses are not to be used near radio transmitters. Safe distance from a 50KW transmitter is 3,000 meters.

Guess what? The WTC1 antenna radiated several signals of that strength or greater. The whole WTC facility was way above the safe signal level.

For many reasons, the Hoffman hypothesis shows ignorance about how explosives work and how the WTC towers were constructed. He avoids describing how the material was placed and when. The logistics of such placement are cartoon-book fantasy material.

[Dave Rogers]

Why is anyone even bothering to argue about the noise levels or the feasibility of radio control? Hoffman's scenario doesn't begin to satisfy the first condition of the challenge; it couldn't have pulled in on the perimeter columns. The fact that it couldn't possibly have happened is secondary to the topic of this thread.

Dave

[TruthersLie]

Hoffman's hypothesis that radio control was used is stupid. The US Army Demolition manual (FM-5-250, Explosives & Demolition) shows that electric fuses are not to be used near radio transmitters. Safe distance from a 50KW transmitter is 3,000 meters.

Guess what? The WTC1 antenna radiated several signals of that strength or greater. The whole WTC facility was way above the safe signal level.

For many reasons, the Hoffman hypothesis shows ignorance about how explosives work and how the WTC towers were constructed. He avoids describing how the material was placed and when. The logistics of such placement are cartoon-book fantasy material.

This is the same reason when you are driving by road construction which is blasting they have those HUGE signs which say
TURN OFF YOUR CELLPHONES.

[CHF]

I love the new truther collapse theory! :D

"Well ummm...the WTC was taken down with a mixture of thermite and conventional explosives...hundreds of tons of conventional explosives."

Do these morons not remember that the whole reason for their idiotic thermite theories in the first place was to explain away the fact that we didn't hear any CD charges on 9/11?

So after trying, and failing, to make a convincing CD theory out of thermite they've now decided to combine thermite with explosives.

This leaves them with the same friggin' problems they had to begin with only now they've also got to explain the point of using thermite on top of that.

Morons!

[Jonnyclueless]

Would magic satisfy the requirements?

[sts60]

Hoffman's hypothesis that radio control was used is stupid. The US Army Demolition manual (FM-5-250, Explosives & Demolition) shows that electric fuses are not to be used near radio transmitters. Safe distance from a 50KW transmitter is 3,000 meters.

Guess what? The WTC1 antenna radiated several signals of that strength or greater. The whole WTC facility was way above the safe signal level.
And let's not forget the cell phones of alarmed occupants inside and onlookers outside, the wireless routers, the radios of the first responders (on foot inside the building, and in cars, fire/EMS units, and helicopters), and the transmitters of the radio and television vans drawn to the scene by the impacts...

[dafydd]

You have to give these truthers credit for imagination .

[Lupie]

I know what would work. All you need is some Molecular Acid. Want proof? Go rent Alien, and pay attention to the part where they try to cut the alien face-hugger off John Hurt's character. When they try to cut off a finger, the stuff that squirts out (molecular acid) almost melts a hole all the way through the ship. They even said that the Alien was worth millions to the bioweapons division of "The Company". See a pattern forming here people?

Mothra? HA! What a joke. You Mothra huggers are all disinfo nwo shills. It was an Alien with acid for blood, not some silly Mothra thing. I have da proof! You'll see! And just remember-

In Cyberspace, No One Can Hear You Scream

L.

[Sam.I.Am]

I know what would work. All you need is some Molecular Acid. Want proof? Go rent Alien, and pay attention to the part where they try to cut the alien face-hugger off John Hurt's character. When they try to cut off a finger, the stuff that squirts out (molecular acid) almost melts a hole all the way through the ship. They even said that the Alien was worth millions to the bioweapons division of "The Company". See a pattern forming here people?

Nuking it from orbit, just to be sure, does not meet the requirements of the challenge...

[kylebisme]

Let me get this straight: You detonate the explosives after the building has already started to collapse? What exactly is this supposed to achieve?
You start the collapse; detonating the first floor initiates the collapse, and then every other floor from there is detonated one after the other all the way to the bottom, with the overwhelming sound of the destruction continuing though that entire time and those detonations only being some faction of that overall sound.

140db is louder than the sound of the collapse...
I'll take your word on that, but I do contest your unjustified assumption of relevance.

There are no recovered bodies that died by proximity to explosions.

The explosive force of would simply crush people, and many recovered bodies were crushed.


Hoffman doesn't know how the WTC towers were built, at least as far as the ceiling/floor structure goes. The tiles are hung from the truss and therefor a couple feet from the floor above.
It seems the problem here is you not wanting to know what Hoffman does, actually quotes NIST stating the details of drop ceilings on the page I linked, and such suspension is crucial to hypothesis presented there.


Modest amounts of explosives don't act at a distance.
Hoffman did not suggest modest amounts of explosives in the relevant sense of how much force they unleash, only modest in their relative mass.


Hoffman obviously never worked all hours in a big office building and dealt with getting stuff up freight and construction elevators.
Elevators work just as well for ceiling tiles as anything else one might bring up them, it is silly to argue otherwise.

Please explain how explosive ceiling tiles cause perimeter structural members to deform inwards, which is the fundamental requirement of the challenge.
The fires did that, before the explosives went off.
[/QUOTE]
Ever been to a CD before? The sound is extremely distinct.
Hoffman didn't suggest anything which would sound like a traditional CD, so your argument isn't relevant here.

The US Army Demolition manual (FM-5-250, Explosives & Demolition) shows that electric fuses are not to be used near radio transmitters. Safe distance from a 50KW transmitter is 3,000 meters.

That's because those detonators don't require encrypted instructions to activate them like the ones Hoffman proposes do.

[WildCat]

Let me get this straight: You detonate the explosives after the building has already started to collapse? What exactly is this supposed to achieve?
The NWO just does it because they can. That's the way they roll, they're so evil!

[Mr.D]

I know what would work. All you need is some Molecular Acid.

Durnit. Beat me to it.

[WildCat]

You start the collapse; detonating the first floor initiates the collapse, and then every other floor from there is detonated one after the other all the way to the bottom, with the overwhelming sound of the destruction continuing though that entire time and those detonations only being some faction of that overall sound.
And explosive-laden ceiling tiles somehow cut core columns?

:dl:

[Mr.D]

and then every other floor from there is detonated one after the other all the way to the bottom


Why?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The explosive force of would simply crush people, and many recovered bodies were crushed.

Stundied.

[Scott Sommers]

So we're back to super duper nanothermite. I've always suppored this one. No one has ever seen a super duper nanothermite demolition, especially the ceiling tile variation, so who are you to say it doesn't look EXACTLY like the WTC collapse. But it;s more to have been a space-based energy beam with no planes.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.

The exact same way the sound of a Twisted Sister concert blends into the sound of someone farting three rows away from you.

[Lupie]

Nuking it from orbit, just to be sure, does not meet the requirements of the challenge...

Yeah, well, I would expect a dodge like that from a Mothra Loyalist! :D

[Quad4_72]

Hoffman didn't suggest anything which would sound like a traditional CD, so your argument isn't relevant here.



Its not about it being a traditional CD or not. It's about THE SOUND OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES GOING OFF. The explosives he suggested would have made extremely loud sounds but yet not a single sound of an explosive being detonated was heard on 9/11. Why is that?

[kylebisme]

Why?
Because otherwise the building wouldn't have collapsed with anywhere near the completeness which they did.
The exact same way the sound of a Twisted Sister concert blends into the sound of someone farting three rows away from you.
Not the best or analogy, and certianly not the most plesent, but you've got the basic point there anyway.
And explosive-laden ceiling tiles somehow cut core columns?
What evidence do you have of cut core columns?
Why?
Because otherwise the building wouldn't have collapsed with anywhere near the completeness which it did.
The exact same way the sound of a Twisted Sister concert blends into the sound of someone farting three rows away from you.
Not the best or analogy, and certainly not the most pleasant, but you've got the basic point there anyway. A better one would be a some audio track into the performance as the band was playing, if one had no clue what the music was supposed to sound like could easily mistake it for part of the show.

[tsig]

Sam, you know it was submarines that did it. Do you think they actually decommisioned the old boomers? Huh? No, they used them in a steath raid to surface into the WTCs, and this lead to the collapse. That's why no explosives were heard. Why do you think they called us the Silent Service?

And you would do well to live up to your motto.:D

[Lupie]

The explosive force of would simply crush people, and many recovered bodies were crushed.




Kyle, you really need to give it up. The grocery clerk who pointed me towards the sparklers, and rang up the sale this last 4th of July has more experience with explosives and incendiaries than you do. Unless, your true intent is to entertain and provide generous amounts of stundie worthy material. If that's the case, then proceed good sir, as you are doing a fine job in that capacity.

L.

[Justin39640]

I know what would work. All you need is some Molecular Acid. Want proof? Go rent Alien, and pay attention to the part where they try to cut the alien face-hugger off John Hurt's character. When they try to cut off a finger, the stuff that squirts out (molecular acid) almost melts a hole all the way through the ship. They even said that the Alien was worth millions to the bioweapons division of "The Company". See a pattern forming here people?

Mothra? HA! What a joke. You Mothra huggers are all disinfo nwo shills. It was an Alien with acid for blood, not some silly Mothra thing. I have da proof! You'll see! And just remember-

In Cyberspace, No One Can Hear You Scream

L.
"looks like someone bagged one of Ripley's bad guys"

Hudson: Is this gonna be a standup fight, sir, or another bughunt?
Gorman: All we know is that there's still no contact with the colony, and that a xenomorph may be involved.
Frost: Excuse me sir, a-a what?
Gorman: A xenomorph.
Hicks: It's a bughunt.


:D

[ElMondoHummus]

What evidence do you have of cut core columns?


You're sort of misssing the point. If you propose demolitions, then the natural consequence of that would be explosively severed - i.e. "cut" - load bearing elements. In the Twin Towers, those are mainly the core columns (I'll leave it to engineers here to discuss the relationship between the core and perimeter columns in keeping the towers standing). Ergo, there would be evidence of severed core columns if the explosives proposal were in fact true.

But there is not. All recovered steel elements show mechanical strain and severing, not separation due to explosives. This is evident in the NIST report (I don't recall which subreport off the top of my head; someone else can provide that). The very lack of "cut" - i.e. explosively severed - core columns undermines any argument that explosives were used.

There are other arguments refuting the idea, but WildCat's whole point is that this piece of evidence is in fact missing. And that by itself refutes the explosives proposal.

[kylebisme]

It's about THE SOUND OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES GOING OFF. The explosives he suggested would have made extremely loud sounds but yet not a single sound of an explosive being detonated was heard on 9/11.
Hoffman did not suggest thousands of pounds of explosives. Besides, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce. For instance, you can take acetylene and oxygen and fill a trash bag with an even mix to create a very loud boom with very little mass, just be sure to stand back well back before setting igniting it. I had a lot of fun with that nearly every Forth of July back in my younger days.

[ElMondoHummus]

Why do you think they called us the Silent Service?

I can't imagine who'd ever bestow that name, since bubbleheads never shut u..... OW! Who hit me??

;):D:p

[tsig]

You're sort of misssing the point. If you propose demolitions, then the natural consequence of that would be explosively severed - i.e. "cut" - load bearing elements. In the Twin Towers, those are mainly the core columns (I'll leave it to engineers here to discuss the relationship between the core and perimeter columns in keeping the towers standing). Ergo, there would be evidence of severed core columns if the explosives proposal were in fact true.

But there is not. All recovered steel elements show mechanical strain and severing, not separation due to explosives. This is evident in the NIST report (I don't recall which subreport off the top of my head; someone else can provide that). The very lack of "cut" - i.e. explosively severed - core columns undermines any argument that explosives were used.

There are other arguments refuting the idea, but WildCat's whole point is that this piece of evidence is in fact missing. And that by itself refutes the explosives proposal.

Explosives are magic, just set them off wherever and the building comes down.

[kylebisme]

You're sort of misssing the point.
Rather, you are completely missing the point here, as you are talking about cutting columns while the hypothesis I'm defending suggests nothing of the sort.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Hoffman did not suggest thousands of pounds of explosives.


Yes, he did. Here is what he said in his hysterical drug trip he calls a "plausible theory": (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html)

Equipment Procurement
The following table lists the materials required for both Towers.

part quantity
20"x20"x3/4" ceiling tile with embedded thin-film explosive and 2-channel wireless micro-detonator 1,000,000
12"x12"x3/4" ceiling tile with embedded thin-film explosive and 2-channel wireless micro-detonator 800,000


1/10th of a pound of explosives per booby-trapped ceiling tile would be One Hundred Eighty Thousand pounds of explosives.

Next time you should try reading what you post before you post it.

[ElMondoHummus]

Rather, you are completely missing the point here, as you are talking about cutting columns while the hypothesis I'm defending suggests nothing of the sort.

Ok. In your hypothesis, what are the demolitions severing then? I suppose you can argue that they could be used on the floor trusses, collapsing those and leaving the columns to fall from their own weight and subsequent lack of lateral support. Is this what you're proposing?

[Quad4_72]

Hoffman did not suggest thousands of pounds of explosives. Besides, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce. For instance, you can take acetylene and oxygen and fill a trash bag with an even mix to create a very loud boom with very little mass, just be sure to stand back well back before setting igniting it. I had a lot of fun with that nearly every Forth of July back in my younger days.

I direct you to Sword of Truth's post for my response. He pretty much took the words right out of my mouth.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=5106019#post5106019

[Justin39640]

Not the best or analogy, and certainly not the most pleasant, but you've got the basic point there anyway. A better one would be a some audio track into the performance as the band was playing, if one had no clue what the music was supposed to sound like could easily mistake it for part of the show.

i got one for you

a long time ago i was at a "hardcore" show (sunday hardcore matinee) at a small concert hall
these shows were very loud and violent

while a band was playing
somebody took a baseball bat to a metal railing and it made a loud sharp bang (this was due to tensions prior to the show between bands and groups of fans) many people mistook that as a gunshot and the place cleared out

later the cops figured out it was the bat based on people who were standing right there and saw/heard it

(i wasnt in the club at the moment, i was "being green" in the back lot lol)

ETA: point being youll hear a report in a loud environment

[kylebisme]

1/10th of a pound of explosives per booby-trapped ceiling tile...

Where are you getting this figure from? And to clarify, the number of ceiling tiles he lists is for both towers, spread across every other floor, and set off rapid succession. That is less than 1/20th of the total in each separate blast, though so quickly one after the other and so mixed in with the sound of the crushing building as to be indistinguishable from it.

But again, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce anyway, you are only misleading yourself by insisting otherwise.

[Toke]

Ceiling tiles does not touch anything, how are they supposed to damage a load carrying column?

[Sam.I.Am]

How did these ceiling tiles survive the observed fires and then cause the exterior columns to bow inwards?

[kylebisme]

somebody took a baseball bat to a metal railing and it made a loud sharp bang (this was due to tensions prior to the show between bands and groups of fans) many people mistook that as a gunshot and the place cleared out

If the band were playing something that sounded like a building coming down while people were quickly smacking bats into rails, it would have been impossible to distinguish the sound of a gun had someone fired one.

[kylebisme]

Ceiling tiles does not touch anything, how are they supposed to damage a load carrying column?
Air pressure.
How did these ceiling tiles survive the observed fires and then cause the exterior columns to bow inwards?
No one suggested they did either.

[Quad4_72]

Where are you getting this figure from? And to clarify, the number of ceiling tiles he lists is for both towers, spread across every other floor, and set off rapid succession. That is less than 1/20th of the total in each separate blast, though so quickly one after the other and so mixed in with the sound of the crushing building as to be indistinguishable from it.

But again, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce anyway, you are only misleading yourself by insisting otherwise.

None of what you are saying adds up or makes a single bit of sense. The work by Hoffman that you linked us to is filled with gratuitous amounts of fail and stupidity. You are way out of your league trying to come in here peddling that train wreck of a paper and thinking it will get you anywhere. It is factually incorrect and does not in any way provide a reasonable hypothesis for a CD of the Twin Towers. Please stop trying to defend it, I am actually embarrassed for you just reading your posts.

[Quad4_72]

If the band were playing something that sounded like a building coming down while people were quickly smacking bats into rails, it would have been impossible to distinguish the sound of a gun had someone fired one.

We are talking about explosives here. I am telling you from experience with CDs that yes, you would undeniably be able to hear the explosives being detonated as the building came down. I have heard them first hand in a demolition so please stop telling lies.

[Quad4_72]

Air pressure.



Did you really just suggest that air pressure from the explosives caused the collapse of the towers?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Where are you getting this figure from?

The same place Hoffman got his entire article from.

Admittedly, the 1/10th of a pound is a guesstimate. Even if we agreed that the amount of explosive in each of Hoffmans hallucinatory tiles was 1/100th of a pound, the amount planted in the WTC would still be 18,000 pounds.

Your claim that Hoffman never said anything about thousands of pounds of explosives is false and you should acknowledge at least that much.

But as Toke pointed out above, the charges in Hoffmans asinine rant aren't in direct contact with any structural members. Blast waves drop dramatically as they travel away from the point of detonation. In order for explosive charges not in direct contact with an object to carry enough destructive force, they have to be made much larger. So in order to have a reasonable chance of crushing the trusses closest to them, Hoffmans tiles would likely have had to have several pounds of explosives each.

[Toke]

Air pressure.


I know little of explosives, but I can tell the difference in principle between driving and high explosive.
High explosive have to touch to give proper effect.

Driving is more like the black power used to make giant craters under trenches and castle walls.

[Mr.D]

Besides, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce.

Stundied for missing the point at least twice in one sentence.

[stateofgrace]

Hoffman did not suggest thousands of pounds of explosives. Besides, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce. For instance, you can take acetylene and oxygen and fill a trash bag with an even mix to create a very loud boom with very little mass, just be sure to stand back well back before setting igniting it. I had a lot of fun with that nearly every Forth of July back in my younger days.

Really Paul ?

I always thought lots of explosives made lots of noise and small amounts of explosives made small noises.

Is it different on Planet Crazy?

[CHF]

Explosives planted in ceiling tiles????

This is what it's come to?

[tsig]

Explosives planted in ceiling tiles????

This is what it's come to?

Manufactured in a special facility. Each with it's own receiver to initiate the explosion. Replaced at the rate of two a minute.

[triforcharity]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.


Fail.

Kyle, we have gone over this before.

Building collapse: 120-160 db

Explosive with enough velocity to degrade a steel support anything:200 db minimum.

160 db will NOT EVER, in this known UNIVERSE cover something 200 db. Not gonna happen. We have gone over this before kyle. Why do you have a hard time remembering things?? Do you have alzheimers??

[akama1]

Did you really just suggest that air pressure from the explosives caused the collapse of the towers?

Yes, Yes he did.

And kylebisme, thank you. I now feel Permanently Stupider from reading your comments. it is staggering reading the list of ignorant points you have raised.

Example of issues with floating ceilings.
1) Get a penny banger, light it and have it rest on you hand (This is your floating Ceiling.) With it sitting on you hand, it will go of with a bang, and you may feel a little sting. that is all
2) grab the same Penny Banger, light it and then grip it with your hand. same level of bang. but you will never be able to play guitar again. (hence, don't actually try it unless you like the nicknames "stumpy" or "stupido")

To do the same amount of damage as a floating explosion, you need a massive increase in the amount of explosive material. Floating Explosive tiles would look cool in a movie, but there ability to damage anything less than themselves is pointless.

< Edit to add > Sword_Of_Truth covered it a lot better < end edit >

[Lupie]

But again, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce anyway, you are only misleading yourself by insisting otherwise.

So, are we to assume that on top of being an explosives expert, you are also an expert in the field of acoustics? I've tossed many a fragmentation grenade. They have a sharp, authoritative "bang", if you will. I have detonated several Claymore antipersonnel mines, they contain a larger charge of explosives, and the report is quite loud when compared to that of a frag grenade.

I have been 200 meters away from a 120mm HEAT round fired from an M1-A1 as it detonated against the hull of another tank. It is a ground shaking, deafening sound that goes right through your body. The shaped charge is much larger and the explosive compound far more energetic than the charges in a frag and in a Claymore. Are you seeing a pattern here? Bigger bomb, more boom?

I have actually done all of these things, witnessed them and participated in them firsthand. You, have not. Therefore I call total BS on your above statement, and you have no recourse because, well, you have no experience with explosives, and I do.

L.

P.S.A.-You know, only in the twisted world of the Troofers, would you actually have to explain why a bigger bomb, makes a bigger boom.

[BigAl]

Manufactured in a special facility. Each with it's own receiver to initiate the explosion. Replaced at the rate of two a minute.

In an RF field that no living explosives expert would get near.

[BigAl]

If the band were playing something that sounded like a building coming down while people were quickly smacking bats into rails, it would have been impossible to distinguish the sound of a gun had someone fired one.

For a gun that fires a round that goes supersonic, wrong, wrong, wrong.

[BigAl]

So we're back to super duper nanothermite. I've always suppored this one. No one has ever seen a super duper nanothermite demolition, especially the ceiling tile variation, so who are you to say it doesn't look EXACTLY like the WTC collapse. But it;s more to have been a space-based energy beam with no planes.

I've decided that super duper nanothermite is more correctly called Black Hole thermite. The event horizon contains the smoke and flash and slag that is the unmissable feature of other thermites. How BHT actually melts anything is the topic of active research in the more esoteric realms of advanced grant writing.

[Lupie]

For a gun that fired a round that went supersonic, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Funny that you mention that. Besides my rather fun career involving explosives, my other pursuit has been the design and manufacture of sound suppressors. You can design the largest volume "can" you want, stack it with all manner of baffles to cool and slow the escape of the expanding gasses, but you cannot eliminate the noise generated if the bullet exceeds the speed of sound. Even a supressed .22lr is loud if it breaks the sound barrier. You should hear what a .50bmg sounds like. Even with the majority of the blast from the hot gasses exiting the muzzle cooled and quieted, the 750 grain bullet makes a sonic "crack" that is still extremely loud.

I guess we can add the speed of sound to the list of scientific facts whose application the troofers find "optional".

L.

[BigAl]

Elevators work just as well for ceiling tiles as anything else one might bring up them, it is silly to argue otherwise.


You've apparently never worked on a construction project in a tall secure building and dealt with scheduling time on the loading docks and freight elevators for materiel and getting security passes for the crew. I have.

You and Hoffman don't have a clue what you are proposing.

[Justin39640]

I've decided that super duper nanothermite is more correctly called Black Hole thermite. The event horizon contains the smoke and flash and slag that is the unmissable feature of other thermites. How BHT actually melts anything is the topic of active research in the more esoteric realms of advanced grant writing.

they end up at the LHC along with all of the worlds missing socks?

[tsig]

You've apparently never worked on a construction project in a tall secure building and dealt with scheduling time on the loading docks and freight elevators for materiel and getting security passes for the crew. I have.

You and Hoffman don't have a clue what you are proposing.

All that would be easy compared to getting by the janitors. They protect their turf ferociously. Plus the unions would be wanting to know the status of the workers. The real world is so much messier than masterminds give it credit for.

[Crazytimes]

Kyle, what do you do for a living ? If your profession is being wrong keep up the good work. Stay crazy and let us know when you have some sort of evidence.

[ElMondoHummus]

Look, I may be deviating from the OP a bit in detail here, but in spirit Hoffman's hypothetical still doesn't meet the criteria. It can't. If I may interpret things here, the overall spirit of Sam.I.Am's post was about proposing demolitions that wouldn't leave very obvious effects. Yes, Sam.I.Am specified three, but beyond that, the point is for a proposal that properly accounts for the observed events. Yet even when limited to just the three that were listed, Hoffman's "aluminothermics" (sic) proposal do not pass. For example, there were never any reports of "exterior containment devices" on any structural elements, and because the collapse initiated in the fire zones, you can definitively rule out many, many incendiaries and explosives on the mere fact that they would not have survived the fires. You have to propose something that would withstand the fires that were burning in the impact and collapse initiation zones, and thermite would've been set off by the heat from those very quickly, regardless of how visible or invisible the implementation of that would've been. The point is that we would not have seen such a delay in collapse if that was used. It's ruled out simply because it would not have survived the fires.

But speaking beyond Sam's three and moving towards the spirit of the OP, thermite or explosives proposals fail for a very simple reason, and that's the fact that there are zero signs of any characteristic effects left on the recovered steel. Even if you eliminate the seismic effects, and even if you find a way to eliminate the noise, the steel members themselves should show signs of such explosives or incendiary effects if such were used. And none of the recovered load bearing steel elements do. None of them showed any sign of having undergone anything other than mechanical force - they showed no signs of having been affected by explosives, and most definitely showed no signs of having been attacked by an incendiary (yes, I know about the Astaneh-Asl "evaporated" steel; search this forum for the term "eutectic" to find out why it doesn't count here). And it's the steel elements that matter; the core and perimeter columns were steel, and IIRC, so were the floor trusses (someone correct me on that if I'm wrong, but the point is that it's still some sort of iron, and not something like concrete). Without signs of anything other than mechanical force having compromised the key structural elements, how can any incendiary or explosives proposal be seriously entertained?

The simple answer is that they can't. Hoffman's hypothetical fails the test of reality for the simple reason that there were zero signs of "aluminothermic" melting on the recovered steel. End of story. The only hypotheses that can even conceivably succeed are ones which account for all of the physical evidence, and that includes the physically severed ends of all the recovered steel. Physically severed by mechanical force, not explosives or melting from incendiaries. Without accounting for that, any proposal fails.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Yes, he did. Here is what he said in his hysterical drug trip he calls a "plausible theory": (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html)



1/10th of a pound of explosives per booby-trapped ceiling tile would be One Hundred Eighty Thousand pounds of explosives.

Next time you should try reading what you post before you post it.

In addition to what I wrote above, this is a video depicting the dropping of 60,000 pounds of bombs (1/3rd of the amount extrapolated from Hoffmans illucid episode) from a B-52.

sks6D2l8erA&NR=1

You still think no one is going to hear any of this or see the giant fireballs erupting out of the WTC, Kyle?

[TruthersLie]

You start the collapse; detonating the first floor initiates the collapse, and then every other floor from there is detonated one after the other all the way to the bottom, with the overwhelming sound of the destruction continuing though that entire time and those detonations only being some faction of that overall sound.


Please provide proof of ANY type of CD charges which are only a "fraction of the overall sound."

Here is a top down CD

5CsSXPCGjww
Wow.. did you see and hear that? Or was it a "fraction of the overall sound?"

now notice
h0S-vlpU1BE

Now why are all CD of buildings sooooo freaking loud? Is it because it is sexy? Is it because they are compensating for small genitalia? Is it because they just love the "BOOM?" NO.

Do 5 minutes of real reseach and find out why CD charges are soooo loud.


The explosive force of would simply crush people, and many recovered bodies were crushed.


The explosive force would literally rip bodies apart. Anyone near it would be ripped apart. AND you leave out the other down side of explosives. Shrapnel. In real CD, you wrap your columns several times so that it holds in any shrapnel. If HE were used to detonate the columns w/out being wrapped there would have been literally MILLIONS of pieces of concrete shrapnel shot all over the place. Where is ANY OF IT?

It seems the problem here is you not wanting to know what Hoffman does, actually quotes NIST stating the details of drop ceilings on the page I linked, and such suspension is crucial to hypothesis presented there.

It seems that unlike real engineers you want to believe it soooo bad that you cannot even imagine the problems.

wouldn't it have been easier just to fly jets into the buildings?


Hoffman didn't suggest anything which would sound like a traditional CD, so your argument isn't relevant here.


Great then find us ANY EXAMPLE of a non traditional CD which looks like 9/11. I have seen the verinage techniques... which is non traditinal CD.

Please provide a citation to find ANY other NON traditional CD. Maybe one that uses thermite. You know for the first time in history to use it for CD.

[TruthersLie]

:D

Yes a bug hunt.

MOTHRA did it.

[TruthersLie]

Hoffman did not suggest thousands of pounds of explosives. Besides, the mass of explosive materials doesn't not necessarily have any relationship on the level of sound they produce. For instance, you can take acetylene and oxygen and fill a trash bag with an even mix to create a very loud boom with very little mass, just be sure to stand back well back before setting igniting it. I had a lot of fun with that nearly every Forth of July back in my younger days.

Did you watch this?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926#12m50s**

particulary the part with how loud just 60 lbs of HE is. Pay attention.

now we have twoof saying that the thermite was coupled with up to 100 tons of HE. (as per Niels Harrit, and even S JOnes.)

pay attention please
ynZxVErTovg
This is 1000 lbs of TNT. one half of a ton. And it can be heard CLEARLY over a mile away. It is so loud they jump and you can hear the shrapnel travelling.

NHuOb3_WbfI
This is 100 tons of TNT. Pay attention.

kJyoh4p_vt4
100 tons at over several miles away.
what do you hear?

[TruthersLie]

Air pressure.

No one suggested they did either.

Airpressure. Of course.

It is rather amazing that 1000 lbs of explosives parked in a van next to a support column in 1993 was unable to cut that column. but it destroyed a HUGE section of concrete...

and the air pressure of it was HEARD by EVERYONE in the complex when it happened.

Yet you have magic hush-a-boom ceiling tiles which can cut columns by airpressure (you obviously have NO IDEA what CD really is or how it works)

[TruthersLie]

Air pressure.



So airpressure from small ceiling tiles were able to cut columns which allowed the building to collapse?

http://www.nycop.com/Stories/Dec_00/World_Trade_Center_Bombing/Trade_Center_Explosion.jpg

1200 lb bomb. Lots of air pressure. didn't cut a single column.

http://media.artdiamondblog.com/images2/PathTo911WTCBombDamage.jpg

I love ignorant twoofs.

[Matthew Cline]

Please explain how explosive ceiling tiles cause perimeter structural members to deform inwards, which is the fundamental requirement of the challenge.

Explosives from the Bizarro dimension?

So after trying, and failing, to make a convincing CD theory out of thermite they've now decided to combine thermite with explosives.

This leaves them with the same friggin' problems they had to begin with only now they've also got to explain the point of using thermite on top of that.

I think that the reasoning is that if thermite and explosives are used together that the explosions can be made small enough that no one will :)notice.

Nuking it from orbit, just to be sure, does not meet the requirements of the challenge...

Shill!

Because otherwise the building wouldn't have collapsed with anywhere near the completeness which they did.

So then a verinage style demolition wouldn't have destroyed all of the floors, leaving the towers partially standing? Or it would have destroyed all of the floors, but the remaining chunks would have been too big? In either case, why would those doing the demolition require "complete" collapse?

[Dave Rogers]

Please explain how explosive ceiling tiles cause perimeter structural members to deform inwards, which is the fundamental requirement of the challenge.
The fires did that, before the explosives went off.


I'd like to present this as a perfect self-debunk. So you're admitting that the fires were capable of weakening the floor trusses and causing them to sag, exerting enough inward force on the perimeter columns to deform them inwards by up to three feet, and that explosives and thermite didn't do this? Why, then, did you submit explosives and thermite as a means by which this could be done, when you're now claiming that they didn't do it?

Put more simply, did you read the challenge in the OP? Or did you just reply with a standard truther fantasy as a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of the Twin Towers?

Dave

[TruthersLie]

Show me any example of a controlled demolition using any chemical reaction (explosives and Therm*te are chemical reactions but any other will do) that pulls or pushes inward any major element of a structure that:

1: Isn't audibly detectable from less than 1,000 yards by anyone who doesn't require a hearing aid.

B: Leaves no seismic trace.

III: Has no exterior visual "Cutting" or containment devices to speak of at the precise initial collapse point.

You must also show how your chemical reaction cannot initiate after being exposed to the shock from an airliner hitting it at 400+ MPH and can withstand the heat of a minimum of degrees at 300c until 45 minutes or more has elapsed.

You can use any combination of devices but none of them can be visible to either the average office worker, the regular maintainence staff or the regular inspectors of things like the elevators.

I offer $1M (not bucks) to anyone who can do this to my satisfaction...

(I reserve the right to change this as I see fit...)

Sam.

I propose that the verinage technique shown in the videos from france meet ALMOST all of your challenge.. except for the fact that they are NOT chemical reactions.

BUt other than that small problem (heck twoofs get scale wrong all the time, give me this), they fit it exactly.

A series of hydraulic presses on the roof supports on one floor. If there was just one floor closed off on 9/11 per building, they could do it.
Now that does bring up a very straightforward question... what do the hydraulic presses that are used for verinage look like after the collapses. Because if they are destroyed in the collapse, it is possible that they would be overlooked. DAMN THE FRENCH. OUTSIDE JOBBY JOB. IT was the French, not Al Q. Do they hate us so much because we eat our hamburgers with ketchup?

Oh no... I just jobby jobbed it...
Forgive me my NWO masters...

[MRC_Hans]

I said effectively meets Sam's conditions, as the explosives Hoffman suggests would detonate a floor at a time as they brought the building down, blending into the the overwhelming sound of that.No. To cut steel supporting structures with explosives not placed directly in contact with the steel, you will need enormous explosive power. Such explosions would not only be extremely obvious, they would also cause collateral damage that would make GZ look like a mild hail-storm.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Air pressure.



Air pressure makes noise. The gas/oxygen bag you played with makes so much noise because the expanding volume of gas is high. Yet they can't cut a steel beam. They cant even cut a broom-stick.

To cut a steel beam, you need to have the explosion build enough pressure to actually cut through the steel. The temperature rise will help a lot, but you need to have a HE charge in direct contact with the steel. Then, the pressure can build up sufficiently because the shock-wave in the surrounding air will be supersonic.

If you don't have a supersonic shock-wave, you can only rupture a steel beam if the pressure over the total wavefront hitting the beam is high enough to overload it.

In both cases, supersonic shock-wave and large pressure-front, the sound will be very impressive. The explosions required to weaken buildings like the Twin Towers would not just be loud; they would pretty much blast all windows in central Manhattan, and people near the buildings would be temporarily deaf, many would probably suffer permanent ear damage. They would be audible all over NY.

Why do you think some truthers are so keen on therm*te? It is because it is the ONLY known device which can perceivably produce a weakening effect without being particularly noisy. ... That it would produce a conspicuous amount of light and smoke and take minutes to to cut through a steel beaam (and thus be impossible to time properly) is another matter. :p

Hans

[Sam.I.Am]

Did I mention that I will be the sole judge of who has satisfactorily met the conditions of the challenge? You only need to meet 1, B and III along with avoiding my disqualifiers.

You must also deliver to me 10 deep fried mozzarella sticks or 11 deep fried mushrooms and they must be fresh.

Yes, I do sound fat...

[Dave Rogers]

Show me any example of a controlled demolition using any chemical reaction (explosives and Therm*te are chemical reactions but any other will do) that pulls or pushes inward any major element of a structure

The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html) effectively meets your conditions.

How did these ceiling tiles survive the observed fires and then cause the exterior columns to bow inwards?

No one suggested they did either.

It's completely clear from this exchange that kylebisme can't even enunciate a self-consistent line of argument.

Dave

[Sam.I.Am]

It's completely clear from this exchange that kylebisme can't even enunciate a self-consistent line of argument.

Dave

I thought that was self evident and a keystone of the "Truth" movement in general...

[ElMondoHummus]

You must also deliver to me 10 deep fried mozzarella sticks or 11 deep fried mushrooms and they must be fresh.

Yes, I do sound fat...


You invoke the power of God or at least a hungry autocrat and all you demand are deep fried snack foods?

Shameful... just, shameful... doesn't even ask for a big, thick burger, let alone perfectly done fries, a cold beer... dipping sauces... (*shakes head*).

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I have found a video which shows what it would look like if the Empire State Building were loded with a million explosive cieling tiles and then detonated floor by floor from top to bottom.

SK75ZqUtDns

So why didn't we see similar effects on 9/11 if Hoffmans hypotheses is accurate, Kyle?

[triforcharity]

That looks EXACTLY like the WTC's!! EXACTLY!!!11!!1!

!

[kylebisme]

Did you really just suggest that air pressure from the explosives caused the collapse of the towers?
This seems to be a common argument here; either it was gravity or explosives, and since it wasn't explosives it had to be gravity. Such a belief is quite simply a false dichotomy. Explosives don't stop gravity from affecting mass. Rather, when explosives are used to bring a building down, they work together with gravity to do so.

[beachnut]

The materials Jim Hoffman proposes in this hypothesis (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html) effectively meets your conditions. I'm not rightly in a position to prove the specific materials he suggests do exist, but I'm not rightly in a position to rule any of them out either.
How much meth did Hoffman consume in coming up with that theory? That is the dumbest theory for anyone to fall for. I understand you have no knowledge of skills to figure out Hoffman made up a lie about 911.

[LashL]

<snipped blather>


Do you have a coherent theory to offer or not?

[TriskettheKid]

Do you have a coherent theory to offer or not?

Coherence?

Come now, LashL....one must not get bugged down in such trivialities.

[kylebisme]

Do you have a coherent theory to offer or not?
Did you read the one I posted? I've seen a few people here making arguments against it which demonstrates that they simply didn't. Then of course there are the false dichotomy arguments of "either gravity or explosives" I mentioned above. If you have read the hypothesis I posted and feel there is a legitimate argument against it other than a belief that gravity was the sole force in the destruction, please present directly and I will be happy to address it.

[Dave Rogers]

I have found a video which shows what it would look like if the Empire State Building were loded with a million explosive cieling tiles and then detonated floor by floor from top to bottom.

I think you can even see Judy Wood in the crowd. Maybe that's where she got the idea.

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

Did you read the one I posted? I've seen a few people here making arguments against it which demonstrates that they simply didn't.

Since your theory proves that you simply didn't read the OP, should you really be the one throwing stones here?

Dave

[MRC_Hans]

This seems to be a common argument here; either it was gravity or explosives, and since it wasn't explosives it had to be gravity. Such a belief is quite simply a false dichotomy. Explosives don't stop gravity from affecting mass. Rather, when explosives are used to bring a building down, they work together with gravity to do so.EHr, OK. Let's make things clearer, then: It was either explosives+gravity, or gravity alone (of course preceeded by the structure being compromised by impact and fire damage).

So, since no evidence of explosives is found (and no viable explanation exists on how explosives might have been planted), we must assume gravity alone.

Good enough for you?

Hans

[Dave Rogers]

So, since no evidence of explosives is found (and no viable explanation exists on how explosives might have been planted), we must assume gravity alone.

To amplify that slightly: there is positive evidence that no explosives were involved in the collapse, from the well-documented absence of any sufficiently intense sounds of explosions immediately preceding the collapse. This can be confirmed from the soundtracks of the known videos of the collapses. Examination of the testimonies describing explosions or sounds similar to explosions have been examined, and the sounds described were neither immediately preceding the collapse, nor of sufficient intensity. Therefore, in the absence of any positive evidence that explosives were present in the towers, we can conclude that explosives did not initiate the collapse.

Dave

[TruthersLie]

Did you read the one I posted? I've seen a few people here making arguments against it which demonstrates that they simply didn't. Then of course there are the false dichotomy arguments of "either gravity or explosives" I mentioned above. If you have read the hypothesis I posted and feel there is a legitimate argument against it other than a belief that gravity was the sole force in the destruction, please present directly and I will be happy to address it.

Ummm
no you didn't come up with a coherent idea.

You postulated HOffmans 900,000 nanothermite ceiling tiles.

Now follow the simple statements.
1. how do explosives that are NOT in contact with structural supports cut steel?

You were provided photographic evidence of a 1200 lbs BOMB that went off RIGHT NEXT to a structural support w/out cutting it from the 1993 bombing.

how do ceiling tiles NOT IN contact with any structural members cut them? Please explain.
Or do you mean to tell me that ceiling tiles not in connection with steel members are STRONGER than a 1200 lb bomb RIGHT next to it? Airpressure? really? your ignorance is showing.

2. How do ceiling tiles which are EXPLOSIVES go off w/out being hear on any mic? expecially if they are strong enough to cut structural supports which a 1200 LBS bomb couldnt.

3. a 1200 Lbs bomb was heard by EVERYONE in the WTC complex when it detonated in 1993. Where is the evidence? (don't datamine twoof... it is below you)

try again.. this time provide some proof or evidence, or even some forethought.

[kylebisme]

So, since no evidence of explosives is found (and no viable explanation exists on how explosives might have been planted)...
What evidence of the materials proposed in Hoffman's hypothesis would you expect should have been found if they were used, and what issue take with his proposal of how they would have been planted?
To amplify that slightly: there is positive evidence that no explosives were involved in the collapse, from the well-documented absence of any sufficiently intense sounds of explosions immediately preceding the collapse.
Hoffman's hypothesis doesn't suggest anything which would produce intense sounds preceding the collapse, only throughout it, which was a period full of intense sound.

Am I to take it neither of you read it (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/blasting_scenario.html)?

[kylebisme]

how do explosives that are NOT in contact with structural supports cut steel?
What evidence have you seen of cut steel? Or is this just another "either gravity or explosives" false dichotomy argument?

[TruthersLie]

What evidence have you seen of cut steel? Or is this just another "either gravity or explosives" false dichotomy argument?

ah...
so then you are of the 900,000 ceiling tiles (which were not in contact with any structural support) could have weakened the steel?

you were the one who stated that they could have cut the steel with "air pressure." Your assertion, not mine.

are you now shift shift shifting away from that?

ETA. He is the one calling for using aluminothrermitc ceiling tiles for CD. For blasting.

I do believe that you haven't read it. 1,000,000 ceiling tiles coated with explosives. and "kicker" charges
have you watched any of the videos I have posted for you? You know the vidoes which explain how CD charges work? the one with just 60lbs of explosvies?

try again

again, wouldn't it have been easier and cheaper for the government just to fly a plane into the building? I do love the rube goldberg (da jooooooz did it) conspiracy theory machine... it is inconcievable....

and no... I don't do the false dichotomies.
we have
500mph jet impacts, unfought fires burning on multiple floors causing the steel to lose its strength, and once started gravity took over. You know like Leslie Robertson has said repeatedly

or were there no planes twoof?

[kylebisme]

so then you are of the 900,000 ceiling tiles (which were not in contact with any structural support) could have weakened the steel?
No one suggested they did. Weakling the steel is covered elsewhere in the hypothesis, which would be best to read before attempting to argue against.

you were the one who stated that they could have cut the steel with "air pressure." Your assertion, not mine.

Rather, you are quoting me out of context and imagining assertaions on me.

[TruthersLie]

No one suggested they did. Weakling the steel is covered elsewhere in the hypothesis, which would be best to read before attempting to argue against.

Rather, you are quoting me out of context and imagining assertaions on me.

quoting you out of context?

you were asked how the steel was cut
your two word reply
air pressure

how is that out of context?

I love ignorant twoofs who "just ask questions."

Have you watched ANY of the videos I have posted for you? (of course not) Do try.

[Toke]

Nanotermite as an explosive creating air pressure sounds inefficient.
Regular explosives turn from solids into hot expanding gas, termite turn into hot liquid.

[kylebisme]

quoting you out of context?

you were asked how the steel was cut
your two word reply
air pressure

how is that out of context?

It's out of context because you are misrepresenting the question I was asked (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5106095&postcount=57)
Nanotermite as an explosive creating air pressure sounds inefficient.
Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

[Dave Rogers]

Hoffman's hypothesis doesn't suggest anything which would produce intense sounds preceding the collapse, only throughout it, which was a period full of intense sound.

In which case it suffers from two fatal flaws, one within the context of this thread and the other outside it. Within the context of this thread, it does not cause inward bowing of the perimeter columns, which is what the whole thread is about. More globally, it doesn't include a credible means of collapse initiation, only of collapse progression.

It also doesn't explain the lack of enormous, unmistakable blasts showering huge quantities of small debris over a distance of kilometers, clearly visible not to be taking place on collapse videos (which show a total of six events far too small to be the result of large explosions).

It constantly amazes me how truthers can look at a video in which an explosion is very obviously not taking place, then try to construct arguments as to why they think there are subtle but almost imperceptible signs of one. The explosion of tons of TNT is like an elephant in your refrigerator; if you're not sure whether you can see one, you can be sure there isn't one.

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

By the way:

Hoffman's hypothesis doesn't suggest anything which would produce intense sounds preceding the collapse, only throughout it, which was a period full of intense sound.


Stage 2A: Kicker Charges Initiate Motion of Top


At the onset of Stage 2, kicker charges mounted just above the core steelwork attacked in Stage 1 are ignited by the wireless control system, fully detaching the core's upper block from its base and from the hat truss, and causing it to fall several feet. Half a second later, ignition of thin-film charges around the crash zones start. The jolt provided by the short fall of the core's upper block, combined with the blast wave of the synchronized detonation of the high-explosive tiles adjacent to the perimeter walls, buckles and breaks the perimeter columns and initiates the descent of the entire upper block of the Tower.


If you can read that and pretend that it doesn't imply intense sounds preceding the collapse, you haven't understood it. Hoffman is postulating an explosion powerful enough to sever 30,000 tons from its supports. That sort of charge, based on NIST's WTC7 estimate, would have to produce at least 130-140dB within about half a mile - enough to cause temporary hearing loss. It's a matter of record that that didn't happen.

Dave

[TruthersLie]

It's out of context because you are misrepresenting the question I was asked (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5106095&postcount=57)

Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

In the terms of the towers, and wtc7? impacts, unfought fires, and gravity.

In general CD terms? you use High explosive which has a copper lining. when the explosives go off, it turns the copper into a superheated "slag" that travels at over 5x the speed of sound cutting through preweakened steel.

There is NO airpressure that is used in CD to cut the steel.

again and again twoofie. did you even bother to watch the videos which I have linked for you repeatedly? (no, you didn't. please do so)

Still waiting for your semantic handwaving on how a building crumbles down to its footprint is different than falls into own footprint (LIE)

and now we have you dodging the "airpressure could cut the steel"

[TruthersLie]

It's out of context because you are misrepresenting the question I was asked (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5106095&postcount=57)

Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

Here is the question you were asked

Ceiling tiles does not touch anything, how are they supposed to damage a load carrying column?

Here is your answer

air pressure.

That is not out of context nor is it distorting your answer.

How does 1,000,000 ceiling tiles which are NOT attached to any load carrying columns damage the columns? YOur answer is air pressure.

For air pressure to be what would damage the columns we would be talking about hyperberic (sp) weapons... of course it would have blown out all the windows from all the buildings for MILES to be capable of cutting/damaging the steel supports. Everyone in a half mile radius would have had ruptured ear drums, and the shrapnel would have killed anyone within 1,000 feet.

It would help if you didn't try to handwave away BS comments you have made.

[ElMondoHummus]

Waitaminute... the defense of Hoffman's proposal is that it would've produced sufficient air pressure to compromise the steel structural supports? Without causing an audible shockwave? And all this without the "aluminothermics" being in contact with the supports? Seriously?

[MRC_Hans]

What evidence have you seen of cut steel? Or is this just another "either gravity or explosives" false dichotomy argument?Ehr, if said explosives did not cut supports, how did they contribute to the collapse of the building?

What evidence of the materials proposed in Hoffman's hypothesis would you expect should have been found if they were used, and what issue take with his proposal of how they would have been planted?

Of 900,000 explosive tiles? I would expect to find vast amounts of chemical products from the explosives. You don't imagine that after detonating, an explosive just vanishes, do you?

I would also expect to find scrapnel imbedded in parts from the buildings and in adjacent buildings.

I would expect to find remains of detonators, wiring, and even unexploded tiles.

There is no way 900,000 explosive tiles could have been manufactured, transported, installed, and wired, without a LOT of people noticing something.

Hoffman's hypothesis doesn't suggest anything which would produce intense sounds preceding the collapse, only throughout it, which was a period full of intense sound.

The intense sound we are talking about is sound that would be deafening all over Manhattan, probably audible for hundreds of miles.

Have you ever worked with explosives? Do you realize how far away a normal artillery piece can be heard?

These are not sounds you could have masked with anything.

Hans

[Newtons Bit]

No. To cut steel supporting structures with explosives not placed directly in contact with the steel, you will need enormous explosive power. Such explosions would not only be extremely obvious, they would also cause collateral damage that would make GZ look like a mild hail-storm.

Hans

I don't even think that it's possible with columns as large as those in the WTC. The columns are incredibly more stiff than the the floor slabs and exterior shell. The later two items will deform and be destroyed, increasing the volume of space for the gas to expand to long before the column itself deformed.

Of course, if you knock out enough floors the column will become unbraced and buckle, but that should be pretty darn obvious.

[Toke]

Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?
Airplanes.

[funk de fino]

It's out of context because you are misrepresenting the question I was asked (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5106095&postcount=57)

Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

Hoffman is a lying sack of dirt. He is dumber than dumb. You defend his pathetic paper.

Ho ho ho

Please show us the windows being blown out by the explosives.

[HeyLeroy]

they end up at the LHC along with all of the worlds missing socks?

That's just silly.

Everyone knows that missing socks end up here.

http://cdn.vidilife.com/image/2006/10/10/946639/1749293L.jpg

[Quad4_72]

Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

Airplanes started the fires and caused structural damage, fires then weakened the steel, the top portions collapsed onto the bottom portions and progressive collapse was initiated. After collapse initiation, the buildings were doomed. That IS what happened, and there is nothing left to debate on the matter.

[dafydd]

Airplanes started the fires and caused structural damage, fires then weakened the steel, the top portions collapsed onto the bottom portions and progressive collapse was initiated. After collapse initiation, the buildings were doomed. That IS what happened, and there is nothing left to debate on the matter.

Anyone with half a brain knows this is what happened.

[Quad4_72]

Anyone with half a brain knows this is what happened.

*redneck mechanic voice*
Well that's ur problem right therrrrr!"

[triforcharity]

It's out of context because you are misrepresenting the question I was asked (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5106095&postcount=57)
The question asked was how were the comumns damaged.

You said "Air Pressure"

How did the "Air Pressure" hurt them WITHOUT being heard?

When air pressure moves fast enough to damage something, it is heard.


Well that isn't the whole of the hypothesis anyway. Regardless, what do you suggest was used?

A ******* plane. On national TV. How could you have missed this??

[kylebisme]

Please show us the windows being blown out by the explosives.
See here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o).

The question asked was how were the comumns damaged.

You said "Air Pressure"

Rather, the question was how do ceiling tiles damage load carrying columns, of course that is after the corrosive attack weakening many in the 10minutes prior.

And this argument suggests "either gravity or explosives but not both", which is a false dichotomy. So the question can easily be turned around; how did load bearing columns get damaged without explosives and perhaps corrosives of some sort?

[Sam.I.Am]

See here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o).


Rather, the question was how do ceiling tiles damage load carrying columns, of course that is after the corrosive attack weakening many in the 10minutes prior.

And this argument suggests "either gravity or explosives but not both", which is a false dichotomy. So the question can easily be turned around; how did load bearing columns get damaged without explosives and perhaps corrosives of some sort?

Getting hit by a big airplane traveling at 400+ mph might have had something to do with it...

[ElMondoHummus]

See here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o).


No. First of all, that video isn't even close enough to show windows being blown out. Second, you cannot use explosives to explain what simple pneumatic pressure from the upper segments falling better explains.
http://www.911myths.com/html/high_velocity_effects.html
http://debunking911.com/overp.htm


Rather, the question was how do ceiling tiles damage load carrying columns, of course that is after the corrosive attack weakening many in the 10minutes prior.


None of the main tower columns showed any signs of having underwent corrosive attack. Only one from tower 7 showed any sort of chemical erosion, and that was shown to be a eutectic attack from the sulfur and heat in the fires. The proposal that there was some sort of "corrosive attack" fails for that reason.

[BigAl]

See here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o).


Rather, the question was how do ceiling tiles damage load carrying columns, of course that is after the corrosive attack weakening many in the 10minutes prior.


Thermite. Demo explosives, now a "corrosion attack", whatever that is????

Wouldn't flying planes into the buildings be easier?

[triforcharity]

See here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o).[QUOTE]

I couldn't barely make out the names of the firefighters on the back/bottom of their coats. How did you possibly see many many many windows being broken out?? I didn't see any.


[QUOTE=kylebisme;5113453]Rather, the question was how do ceiling tiles damage load carrying columns, of course that is after the corrosive attack weakening many in the 10minutes prior.

Wait, what corrosive?? I saw lots of heat, but I did not however see huge vats of some unknown corrosive.
I did however see a plane crash into it, and set the freaking thing on fire.

And this argument suggests "either gravity or explosives but not both", which is a false dichotomy. So the question can easily be turned around; how did load bearing columns get damaged without explosives and perhaps corrosives of some sort?

Gravity, and forces that were exerted on them beyond their limits.

Damn, how hard is that to understand?
You're splitting hairs. You know EXACTLY what was meant by that statement.

[Lupie]

Wow,

This truther has managed to steer this discussion so far into the realm of fantasy, that I have to wonder, what the hell is the point of even responding to this crap?

L.

[kylebisme]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.

[TruthersLie]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.

You claim that explosives could be used.

GREAT.

Then provide a sample of any explosive capable of blowing up the steel (before or after a "corrosive attack") which is not capable of being heard by EVERYONE within a mile.

60lbs of HE going off on a bridge caused EVERYONE to JUMP and shake when it detonated.
1000 lbs of TNT in a cement truck was heard over 3 miles away, and at over a mile you could hear the shrapnel.

now you are talking about hoffmans BS idea of 1,000,000 explosive ceiling tiles and trying to handwave away your ignorance of the subject of explosives (and obviously structural engineering, physics and math) by saying "semantics" and other handwaving.

and I love how you ignore the impacts and unfought FIRES in the collapse.

why is that? huh twoof?
it isn't
gravity or explosives
or gravity and explosives

it is impact damage, unfought fires, and progressive collapse. They are all part of the same issue, not individual things you can ignore.

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by kylebisme
I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone,

One of the many reasons why man-made demolition is impossible is that nobody with experience with demolition can conceive of how to to use explosives to cause a tower to collapse in a way that is consistent with all the evidence we have for the collapse.

Then there is the lack of a seismic and audible record too.

[Lupie]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.

Well, OK then, Bye. Let us know when you further your experience with explosives beyond the oxy-acetylene in a trashbag when I was in highschool phase. Until then, don't blow yourself up.

L.

[akama1]

Hoffman's hypothesis doesn't suggest anything which would produce intense sounds preceding the collapse, only throughout it, which was a period full of intense sound.


Hoffman's Hypothesis is Physically impossible.
It has been pointed out multiple times in this thread that even a well executed (correctly set up by professionals) demolition, the sound of the explosion would be magnitudes bigger than the sound of the building collapsing (like humming to muffle the sound of someone yelling at the top of there voice)

Hoffman then talks about having floating tiles, which would require even more powerful explosives due to inefficiency, increasing the dB reading produced (now attempting to hum to muffle out a rock band)

There is no point in the premise of Hoffman's Hypothesis that even comes close to obeying Physics. It is a Brainstorm that has not held up to reality.

Edit : Looks like a little late, After achieving nothing kylebisme is bailing

[LashL]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.


The stupid, it burns.

[Lupie]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.

One other thing, I do not "argue" about what various explosives are capable of. I state THE FACTS in regards to what I know can, or cannot be done with any given type of explosive. And, the last time I checked, nobody argues about gravity either.

Gravity is a constant, just like the characteristics of various explosive compounds and incendiaries that you fraudulently claim to know about. Since you have proven that you are utterly incompetent in your knowledge of anything that applies to the "conspiracy theory" you believe in, why don't you just shut up already, and go find another hobby that does not involve explosives, terrorism, or the murder of over 3000 people on 9/11/01.

L.

[Dave Rogers]

And this argument suggests "either gravity or explosives but not both", which is a false dichotomy.

Your false dichotomy is a strawman. Nobody is claiming "It had to be explosives or gravity, but not both; it was gravity, therefore it wasn't explosives." What is claimed, and has yet to be refuted, is that the physical characteristics of the collapse initiation are entirely incompatible with explosives, because the physical effects that would have been produced by explosives were not present.

So the question can easily be turned around; how did load bearing columns get damaged without explosives and perhaps corrosives of some sort?

I seem to remember there was some kind of report from NIST that answered this question. Of course, a number of load bearing columns were initially severed or severely damaged by the airliner impacts. The core columns were then subjected to very high temperatures (despite the efforts of truthers to distort the evidence, this is a well-supported conclusion), and both core and perimeter columns were subjected to very large lateral forces due to sagging floor trusses, forces far beyond their design capacity. Core columns failed in compression due to the high temperatures and transferred load to the perimeter columns through the hat truss; the perimeter columns, already overloaded by this process, failed in buckling due to the lateral forces. And this is not speculation; careful study of the Trinity Church WTC2 collapse video shows the moment of failure of the perimeter columns very clearly, and their inward collapse due to buckling is clearly visible. Also visible is the complete absence of any explosions at the exact time and place of collapse initiation.

Your questions have been answered long ago.

Dave

[Sam.I.Am]

Also visible is the complete absence of any explosions at the exact time and place of collapse initiation.

Which was at the heart of my challenge. There are no known conventional explosives that could survive the impacts and the 49 to 102 minutes of intense fires fueled by anything inside the impact zones and there is no way to blow in the perimeter columns at the collapse zones using explosives without a very obvious detonation.

All of you missed the most obvious answer to my challenge (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=5103808#post5103808).

any chemical reaction (explosives and Therm*te are chemical reactions but any other will do) that pulls or pushes inward any major element of a structureFire, which is a chemical reaction, can do it within a steel structure quite easily by creep.

Man. I thought I made it easy. No $1M (not bucks) notepad paper for you.

The Sam.I.Am Challenge (V 1.0) is now closed.

[HeyLeroy]

I've come to that the conclusion that there is no point in this thread either, particularly with so many people arguing that explosives couldn't have accomplished what they believe gravity did alone, as if the two are mutually exclusive. The glass from the windows argument was funny as well, as the glass would be the only thing blown out by the shockwaves while everything else would remain unaffected.

Where's the Kaboom? There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom?
http://cdn.vidilife.com/image/2006/10/10/946639/1750950L.jpg

Do you not get it? There has been EXACTLY ZERO evidence oaf ANY sort of explosive being used to cause the collapses of the Twin Towers.

You appear to acting in a deliberately obtuse fashion.