Explosions in WTC1 as WTC2 gets hit

[Bell]

Posted at LC in this thread:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=14389

Video 1 (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/outoftheskywtc.explosionsfiedtx.mov) (warning, disturbing content)
Video 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7BnTaWMyoc&search=squibs%20wtc)

What do you make of these? :confused: :boggled:

[MarkyX]

There is no way a bomb can survive fire like that, they would be burnt out.

An explosion in a fire? Not a bomb.

[uruk]

I used to work for a convieneance store that had a deep fryer. one night the fryer caught on fire and set a blaze the kitchen area. a fire extingusher exploded in the blaze and caused some damage to the concrete walls and floor. I'm not saying that it was exploding fire extinguishers, but with a fire that big would probably set off any pressurized or flammable material present in the building.

Most likely the blowouts or "squibs" were caused by initial collapses of floors in WTC2. The vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 would start shaking some stuff loose in WTC2

[G-K-4]

What do you make of these? :confused: :boggled:

Re: video 1
How much did the North Tower shake and swing when the South Tower was hit? How much of the fire within the North Tower was fanned by the fuel explosion next door?

Are we sure that's a person waving a shirt? (I expect that some TV camera operator would have gotten a close-up at some point.) It looks like he stops waving before the South Tower is hit.

Do we know that the two falling "people" really are people? If so, they could have been in the windows and could have been shaken out of them when everything shook? If they aren't people, maybe they are parts of the North Tower shaken loose by the impact next door?

The "explosion" at 00:19s in the North Tower near the impact zone: Was it an explosion, or a fanning of an already-existing fire? If an explosion on we know what was there that could have exploded? (Some part of the building, perhaps.)


Re: video 2
I'm not clear on the angle. Is this the North Tower obscuring the South Tower?

Does smoke always smoothly stream out of windows during a skyscraper fire at that altitude? Can there be momentarily heavy puffs from the fire? Is the timing right that the impact in the South Tower could have forced air into the North Tower and produced these extra puffs?

[Pardalis]

What do you make of these? :confused: :boggled:

Bottom line, these CT bastards will go to any lenghts to disgrace the memory of the poor victims of 9/11.

[Bell]

Yes, I don't agree they are bombs going off. I think G-K-4 may be right about the shaking of the building. A lot of those poor people where hanging even outside the windows. :(
Anybody ever been (remotely) close to a constructionsite where they hammer the foundation in the ground? (don't know the English word for it), everything in it's surrounding shakes.
Hard to tell what exactly happened here. I suspect the explosion created a giant shockwave trough the air, maybe travelleb trough broken windows of the upper floors.

[realitybites]

I can't see the videos here at work, but based off the comments here I think I have a pretty good idea what they show.

I'd like to know who in the CT crowd is the expert on the behavior of a multiple floor high-rise fire. Many of them seem to be under the impression that once the fire starts, conditions throughout the building will remain at a constant and any change of the "norm" is indicative of explosives.

What they can't comprehend is that the slightest change in anything will affect the behavior of the fire (and the resulting smoke).

A person breaking a window. An office wall collapsing. All these things change the dynamic of the fire. More oxygen in some cases. Backdrafts in others. Pressure building up and being released.

The book I'm reading (in the sig) depicts the absolute hell that not only the floors around the impact suffered, but the rest of the building as well.

The sounds, behaviors of the smoke and fire, all these things have numerous other logical explanations besides "bombs".

[rwguinn]

Yes, I don't agree they are bombs going off. I think G-K-4 may be right about the shaking of the building. A lot of those poor people where hanging even outside the windows. :(
Anybody ever been (remotely) close to a constructionsite where they hammer the foundation in the ground? (don't know the English word for it), everything in it's surrounding shakes.
Hard to tell what exactly happened here. I suspect the explosion created a giant shockwave trough the air, maybe travelleb trough broken windows of the upper floors.

I have not see the video--can't at work--
But has anybody considered that there is a large concussion-transmitted by air-when something like this happens? especially the fireball of fuel and parts from the impact?
The ground wave--travel time from the impact location,down the building system, and back up is measured in seconds--I don't have the figures, but if the fundamental frequency of those buildings was higer than 0.2 Hz, i'd be surprised.

[Bell]

I have not see the video--can't at work--
But has anybody considered that there is a large concussion-transmitted by air-when something like this happens? especially the fireball of fuel and parts from the impact?
The ground wave--travel time from the impact location,down the building system, and back up is measured in seconds--I don't have the figures, but if the fundamental frequency of those buildings was higer than 0.2 Hz, i'd be surprised.

They (NIST I think?) have stated the shockwave of the plane hitting travelled down and then again up the tower. Could very well have travelled up tower 1.

[realitybites]

So the CTers are once again suggesting that bombs went off at 9:03 so the building would collapse an hour and 25 minutes later.

I have no doubt that a demolition could be controlled that way, but the amount of precision (just the right sized explosives on precise points on certain columns) needed to do that is staggering. For the setup to survive and succeed in its intention of weakening the structure in an already well established fire is beyond comprehension.

Also, the "squibs" in the second video come through the windows, indicating that whatever charges that were placed were not on the exterior columns, but rather on the core. And I've never seen a controlled demolition where the charges and resulting squibs were strong enough to blow through half an office floor, but weak enough not to collapse the structure right then and there.

Nevermind that the "squibs" are the exact same color as smoke from the fire.

[Belz...]

Gah!

The first explosion they point to simply looks like flames. We can't tell what is labeled as "people" really is.

And none of those idiots over there shows ANY form of skepticism over anything; at any time!

[Bell]

Gah!

The first explosion they point to simply looks like flames. We can't tell what is labeled as "people" really is.

And none of those idiots over there shows ANY form of skepticism over anything; at any time!

I think you'll find them quite skeptic of us :boxedin:

[Dog Town]

I think you'll find them quite skeptic of us :boxedin:

I believe that is called fear, followed by hate!

[G-K-4]

I believe that is called fear, followed by hate!
Which means that eventually they'll be tempted by the Dark Side.

[Gravy]

Once again, the CTs are shocked and baffled at the existence and behavior of air. Remember that many windows on the south and east side of the north tower were broken, not just on the north face. The explosion of flight 175 partially enveloped the north tower. Push the air on one side and it comes out the other. It has to.

[gfunkusarelius]

good grief, this is an extremely clear example of someone trying really hard (using a confusing and awkward source video) to find the most difficult explaination for something. for those who cant see it at work, essentially the collision of the second tour is obscured by another shorter building so you see the reaction of the collision (camera shake and some debris ejecting from the other tower) before you see the fireball billow up into view. now, what decision would you come to based on this? that the huge explosion from the second impact had some sort of effect on the nearby burning tower or that charges were timed to coincide exactly with collision of this plane to make the building maybe fall a while later?
the fascination with the convoluted continues

[Shrinker]

Once again, the CTs are shocked and baffled at the existence and behavior of air. Remember that many windows on the south and east side of the north tower were broken, not just on the north face. The explosion of flight 175 partially enveloped the north tower. Push the air on one side and it comes out the other. It has to.

What they're willfully ignoring is that the impact happened before the camera shakes. From their position of ignorance they can then conclude the small explosion also happens before the impact.

If you scrub quickly through the video you can spot a very subtle orange glow at the left which presumably is the impact explosion. It happens just before the camera shake and at the same time as the small explosion.

[T.A.M.]

Video #1:

Poor Quality. Guy with shirt...maybe, or just a shirt hanging there, or a curtain...

Ground Shaking...yes, upon impact of UA175 on the opposite side of the tower (you notice just after the ground begins to shake, the fire ball comes out on the OPPOSITE side of where UA175 hit.

Side Explosion - so...I would be amazed if their were NOT explosions on the floors where there were raging fires...jhc.

Falling "people" maybe, if so, perhaps they just jumped, or maybe the force of UA175 hitting the other tower was enough to throw them off balance while they were precariously hanging out the window, trying to stay alive.

Video #2:

Explosions - yes. Unexpected...no. Relivance of their timing...nil.

TAM

[Bell]

Guy with shirt...maybe, or just a shirt hanging there, or a curtain...

No, definetly a man waving a shirt or table cloth. :(
There are many video's showing this person, for example "9/11, what we saw" time 9:11 aprox (not a joke)

[realitybites]

After watching the first video, I don't see anything that remotely resembles bombs going off. I mean, what would even be the point of planting an explosive in the area of the building where the man was waving his shirt? He looked to be a floor or two below Windows On The World, at the top of the building.

What purpose would that demolition charge serve?

The "explosion" that takes place lower, on the west face, is already on fire. Doesn't look anything like a bomb going off. Just looks like a larger lick of fire protruded through for a split second.

These tiny minutiae are what get the CT crowd off. They're fully aware that they will never be able to provide solid evidence of explosives, so they resort to pouring over these videos in search of anything that looks out of the ordinary to their simpleton minds.

The only solice I take in that fact is that they're obviously too busy doing this to breed.

[Bell]

He looked to be a floor or two below Windows On The World, at the top of the building.

Actually, AFAIK, he is in Windows on the World. The floor above is a mechanical floor.

Picture here. (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/World_Trade_Center_Building_Design_with_Floor_and_ Elevator_Arrangment.jpg)

But anyway, I'm wandering off track, and this is not really relevant, is it? That man probably died at that moment, that's relevant.

[T.A.M.]

Bell:

ok, point taken, I have not seen the other videos, so for me, all I saw was a very low rez something moving back and forth.

As to whether or not he died after that "explosion", once again, from the video I cannot tell. Maybe he just left the cloth there. Maybe he was killed, although I am not sure how he was hit hard enough to kill him, and not eject him out of the window... but from this video, it is all pure speculation.

TAM

[walthrup48]

NIST WTC FAQ (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm)

"4. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?

No. As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.

These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor. Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building."

[Bell]

I feel stupid for even bringing this topic up. Sorry peeps! :boxedin:

ETA: JimTheBrit, yeah, one of the points I thought of.

[realitybites]

Actually, AFAIK, he is in Windows on the World. The floor above is a mechanical floor.

Picture here. (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/World_Trade_Center_Building_Design_with_Floor_and_ Elevator_Arrangment.jpg)

But anyway, I'm wandering off track, and this is not really relevant, is it? That man probably died at that moment, that's relevant.
[off-topic]
The book I'm reading states that during the construction of the towers, the windows on the top floors would be widened to accomodate the view for the observation deck in the South Tower and for Windows on the World in the North. Just a little factoid about the buildings.

You're right though, Bell. Not relevant at all. That man, along with over a thousand others trapped in the North Tower died.
[/off-topic]

[Bell]

[off-topic]
The book I'm reading states that during the construction of the towers, the windows on the top floors would be widened to accomodate the view for the observation deck in the South Tower and for Windows on the World in the North. Just a little factoid about the buildings.

You're right though, Bell. Not relevant at all. That man, along with over a thousand others trapped in the North Tower died.
[/off-topic]

You know, this really frustrates me. I've been at the indoor and outdoor observation deck, but I can't recal exactly how much higher it was :(

(I so hate it that I have a bad memory about my visit to the WTC)

I'm looking at the picture of my father standing on the observaton deck now, with WTC 1 in the background. I think you're right, because if Windows on the World and the indoor observation deck was under that top part of the WTC, the escalator ride would be very long. That was not the case.

I wish I could remember it all more clearly...

[Gravy]

After watching the first video, I don't see anything that remotely resembles bombs going off. I mean, what would even be the point of planting an explosive in the area of the building where the man was waving his shirt?
In another thread, T1234 claimed that flashes seen when a tower collapsed were demolition charges. I asked why these would be planted on the 107th floor. He didn't answer then, and he won't answer now.

[Bell]

In another thread, T1234 claimed that flashes seen when a tower collapsed were demolition charges. I asked why these would be planted on the 107th floor. He didn't answer then, and he won't answer now.

Does he ever?

[realitybites]

In another thread, T1234 claimed that flashes seen when a tower collapsed were demolition charges. I asked why these would be planted on the 107th floor. He didn't answer then, and he won't answer now.
These guys positively love "flashes". In the comments section for the "What We Saw" video on Google, one of the more astute CTers noted that there were two quick flashes on the facade of the North Tower and arrogantly asked if anyone could explain them.

The flashes where there and gone in the span of a split second. My mind immediately jumped to falling debris catching the sun. Maybe even broken glass. After the flashes were gone, the facade seem unphased. No smoke. No deformed metal from an explosion. Nothin'.

So please add Acme's Pointless Non-Exploding Explosives to the list of equipment absolutely necessary to pull off their story.

[Pyrrho]

A hat tip and a thank you to anyone who engages the 9/11 CT people on a regular basis. Yikes.

[Bell]

A hat tip and a thank you to anyone who engages the 9/11 CT people on a regular basis. Yikes.

Hear hear!