A Challenge From the ATS'ers

[Mr.Herbert]

Hi ~
I have posted a few times here seeking answers about the Engineering aspects of 911. I love debunking the chaps at ATS. Typically they are all loose change junkies, so they are easy. Some although claim they are engineers and have quite a bit of knowledge. Well, I have been challanged by some guys that run a website called studyof911dotcom (i cant post URLS)
anyway...in the middle of a discussion i was challanged and I am reaching out for some assistance.

If you guys can find some time to look into theses.. I know how much you like this crap. :)

Here it is:

It's all about GPS timestamps, and simple additions of available data from sources from 2 government institutes, LDEO and NIST.
Which both used the exact same GPS timestamps, but NIST can't fit theirs to cover the LDEO timestamps. Even after revamping, in quite a blatant manner, their original timestamps. They still are way off.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROOF ME WRONG.

EDIT: forgot the links,
abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread277921/pg1
and:
studyof911.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=286

[R.Mackey]

It's not entirely clear what, in that long and multi-topic thread, you're asking us to find. I suspect you're talking about this:

The seismic spikes for the collapse of the WTC Towers are the result of debris from the collapsing towers impacting the ground. The spikes began approximately 10 seconds after the times for the start of each building’s collapse and continued for approximately 15 seconds. There were no seismic signals that occurred prior to the initiation of the collapse of either tower. The seismic record contains no evidence that would indicate explosions occurring prior to the collapse of the towers.

I'm assuming here that they took a video with the time on it (e.g. 9:00) and lined up the seismograph at 9:00 and figured this out???

Considering the recording equipment was located at Columbia University, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, then allowing for the speed of sound of the shockwaves through the earth to travel from the WTC to the recording equipment:

Speed of sound through the Earth: approx. 4 miles/sec through rock. (Source: http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/seismic-waves.html )

21 (miles) / 10 (seconds delay) = 2.1 miles per second, which is within the realms of possibility for the speed of seismic waves.

What's missing here is the LDEO signals are time-corrected for the expected siesmic travel time. The actual source of the 10 second delay is the time between the start of the collapse and anything massive hitting the ground.

Thus, no conflict.

If you have a more specific argument, feel free to state it here with clarity. We had a lengthy discussion (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=63740) of this topic, exposing as a fraud Craig Furlong of the "Scholars" for 9/11 Truth, who had written a paper claiming the siesmographic record indicated events prior to collapse. They do not.

[Mr.Herbert]

Sorry for the confusion R.Mackey and anyone else who may have read my OP., I should have been more specific with what he was asking for. Anyway...I asked him to be more specific in what his challenge was and he provided me with one link with the seismic graphs that he states prove the following: ( from LaBtop @ his website studyof911.com) Black font is mine.

"Interpretation of Seismic 9/11 charts from LDEO, compared to NIST photo time stamp, Time stamps from NIST and LDEO do not compare to the official collapse":

Seismic events :

I still strongly believe and am convinced that those 5 seismic charts from PAL EHE proved without a doubt in my mind that 3 equally strong bombs or packs of bombs were used in WTC 1, 2 and 7. They didn't have a smaller one for WTC 7, so they used identical one's.

Proof of that is to be found in the (comparable, nearly identical) pre-peaks in the seismic charts from LDEO.

And the fact that in the very beginning of all the turmoil right after 9/11, a few -very telltale- seismic facts slipped under the radar from the huge team of damage and risk controllers lurking around, payed by all those agencies which clearly knew what huge positive effects the day of 9/11 would have on their longterm political and geo-strategical wish lists.

And I wrote about it more than a year ago, and am still baffled that anybody else still does not see the significance of these anomalies in the 3 collapse charts of the five charts, which can be compared to the other 2 charts (the plane impacts).

911research.wtc7.net has removed the text lines ABOVE those seismic charts of LDEO, depicting the EDT collapse times proposed by LDEO for the seismic events received at the Palisades NY seismic station, which STILL can be viewed at this LDEO site page :

ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/WTC_20010911.html (Record of the Day, 5 seismic WTC graphs).
(Note:I still can't post URL's)
Do yourself a favour, and open this page in another tab of your browser, so you can see the text above the graphs clearly, since this text does not show up in the next 5 LDEO graphs !!!

There was f.ex. a 7 seconds difference in actual EDT collapse time proposed by LDEO and the PAL EHE graph start times on the WTC 7 collapse chart. So we lost 7 important seconds at the front of that chart.
So 911research does not see the importance of those small details above each chart.
They also did not see that the 17 seconds time interval between origin of the signals in New York and receiving them at LDEO was definitely not clearly indicated.

(This very important EDT collapse time proposed by LDEO has now been deleted as a text line from above all 5 of the 911research graphs!!!
It only reads now inside the Bldg7.jpg graph top : start time 21:20:40, it's a 7 seconds difference between 33 and 40, which makes all the difference in the world for the interpretation of that WTC 7 graph! As you could see in numerous videos, the visual implosion time of building 7 for example only took about 8 seconds! )

Here is the link to the website that has all the graphs etc:

studyof911.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=286

LaBtop is one of the prize pupils over at ATS and studyof911, so it would be incredible to shoot this guy down!

Thanks in advance for any help!

Mr. Herbert

[Kent1]

See
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_1-8.pdf section 3.5 pg22
Note that the building collapse times are defined to be when the entire building was first observed to start to collapse. In the case of WTC7 a penthouse on the roof sank before the main collapse started.
The Adjusted time was 5:20:52
The total visible collapse time is about 14/15 seconds. The outer wall collapse took about 6.5 seconds. So then minus roughly 8 seconds to the point of the kink, and you get roughly 5:20:44.

LEDO time is 5:20:42

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0gElTyejWs4
The total time of the seismic activity is 18 seconds. Note again the ADJUSTED time for television broadcast is 5:20:44. I would expect some seismic activity just before the kink. There is also a slight margin of error within in the times. Note (in the video) at about 51 seconds in, the kink starts, at 59 sec. the outer wall starts falling, at roughly 1:06 the collapse ends.

The other paper by Gordon and quickandthedead is toast. The Pavel-Hlava video ended that with time stamps of both impacts.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Anyone that uses a noun (proof) in place of a verb (prove) needs smacked upside the head.

[Kent1]

See
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_1-8.pdf section 3.5 pg22
Note that the building collapse times are defined to be when the entire building was first observed to start to collapse. In the case of WTC7 a penthouse on the roof sank before the main collapse started.
The Adjusted time was 5:20:52
The total visible collapse time is about 14/15 seconds. The outer wall collapse took about 6.5 seconds. So then minus roughly 8 seconds to the point of the kink, and you get roughly 5:20:44.

LEDO time is 5:20:42

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0gElTyejWs4
The total time of the seismic activity is 18 seconds. Note again the ADJUSTED time for television broadcast is 5:20:44. I would expect some seismic activity just before the kink. There is also a slight margin of error within in the times. Note (in the video) at about 51 seconds in, the kink starts, at 59 sec. the outer wall starts falling, at roughly 1:06 the collapse ends.

The other paper by Gordon and quickandthedead is toast. The Pavel-Hlava video ended that with time stamps of both impacts.
I found another error post by LaBTop
http://www.studyof911.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=286&st=0&gopid=797&#entry797

Aside from a few minor changes in my last post it seems he doesn't understand that I agree that we have to add 8 seconds to the penthouse dent. (2 sec. NIST timing conflict aside)
This matches the video I linked to. (I said roughly 8 seconds)
Maybe what LaBTop doesn't seem to understand is that I EXPECT seismic activity before the global collapse. So does NIST. There were internal collapses before the global collapse. Or maybe he doesn't understand section 3.5 pg22 of the NIST report. Looks like the later. Either way, I don't care.
Also please give credit next time.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread282640/pg6

[T.A.M.]

Arkan;

What about a MATHEMATICAL PROOF?

TAM;);)

[sackett]

[galloping derail]

Proof as a verb does exist. Gunmakers proof a barrel by firing a very heavy charge in it. That may only be a short way of saying proof fire. Gunmakers can be lazy sometimes.

[/galloping detail]

[aggle-rithm]

[galloping derail]

Proof as a verb does exist. Gunmakers proof a barrel by firing a very heavy charge in it. That may only be a short way of saying proof fire. Gunmakers can be lazy sometimes.

[/galloping detail]

Your opening and closing tags don't match.

ETA: Why did I post that? That was stupid. Oh well, back on topic.

[Aggs]

I've found this video to be a little better at showing the real collapse time of WTC7...and it doesn't contain any troother cynicism often found on YouTube...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CLHwvwJCmgk

[Kent1]

I've found this video to be a little better at showing the real collapse time of WTC7...and it doesn't contain any troother cynicism often found on YouTube...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CLHwvwJCmgk

The other part of his claims are in contrast with LDEO's findings. He claims that there were seismic signals that LDEO is not telling us about. He claims this from reading the graph LDEO has given us.

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/WTC_20010911.html

[kookbreaker]

[galloping derail]

Proof as a verb does exist. Gunmakers proof a barrel by firing a very heavy charge in it. That may only be a short way of saying proof fire. Gunmakers can be lazy sometimes.

[/galloping detail]

I think its actually from old English. The word 'proof' was shorted from the bad spelling 'Proof'd'. Which is a bad spelling of 'Proved'.

[rwguinn]

[galloping derail]

Proof as a verb does exist. Gunmakers proof a barrel by firing a very heavy charge in it. That may only be a short way of saying proof fire. Gunmakers can be lazy sometimes.

[/galloping detail]

In engineering, we have a Proof Test, which is a test to proove that the device will hold design load/pressure/whatever, plus a specified margin.
For example, a web sling for lifting is rated at 500 lb. You Proof it to 750 lb.

[T.A.M.]

ahh...I miss read Arkan...sorry...you are correct sir.

TAM:)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

WAIT! I FIGURED IT OUT! They're asking to be "proofed wrong", we should combine them with sugar and yeast, and then set them in a cold place to rise instead of a warm, moist place.

[JimBenArm]

WAIT! I FIGURED IT OUT! They're asking to be "proofed wrong", we should combine them with sugar and yeast, and then set them in a cold place to rise instead of a warm, moist place.
Hmm. Sugar? They live on Coke, so plenty of that. Yeast? Twinkies have yeast, don't they? And more sugar, too! Cold? Well, basements are cold, usually. So, they are being "proofed wrong"!
Oh, this explains so, so much!

[rwguinn]

Hmm. Sugar? They live on Coke, so plenty of that. Yeast? Twinkies have yeast, don't they? And more sugar, too! Cold? Well, basements are cold, usually. So, they are being "proofed wrong"!
Oh, this explains so, so much!

So, the Food Network is in on it, too?
Emeril LaGasse is from New Orleans---Katrina, FEMA, 9/11! OMG! 11!!!!!. It all makes sense now!