1
New Theories / Does freefall absolutely prove controlled demolition on 9/11?
« on: 19/04/2010 04:43:14 »
This is a question relating to the third highrise that fell on 9/11, WTC 7 otherwise known as building 7, if any reader has not seen the collapse of this third building then please have a look at this very short video:
Freefall occurs early in the very symmetrical collapse of WTC 7 for 2.25s or approx 8 stories, it was first accurately measured by a physics teacher (David Chandler) who challenged NIST about freefall when they accepted comments on the draft copy of the final report.
When challenged, NIST denied freefall occurred and said that freefall could only occur to the building if there were no structural components components below it(1), but then in the NIST final report there was an admission of freefall for 2.25s(2) but no explanation accompanying the change.
If freefall means that all the buildings potential energy is being used to accelerate the building downwards, then what energy source did the significant work of removing the 80+ steel columns?? Can freefall occur if the falling building is also doing the 'work' of overcoming the 80+ steel columns??
In controlled demolitions precisions placed and precision timed explosives are used to near simultaneously remove all the structural elements, once the columns are removed freefall is possible.
Most people intuitively recognise the symmetrical collapse of WTC 7 through the path of most resistance as a controlled demolition, does freefall prove controlled demolition on 9/11???
(1)
(2)"Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)"
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html
Freefall occurs early in the very symmetrical collapse of WTC 7 for 2.25s or approx 8 stories, it was first accurately measured by a physics teacher (David Chandler) who challenged NIST about freefall when they accepted comments on the draft copy of the final report.
When challenged, NIST denied freefall occurred and said that freefall could only occur to the building if there were no structural components components below it(1), but then in the NIST final report there was an admission of freefall for 2.25s(2) but no explanation accompanying the change.
If freefall means that all the buildings potential energy is being used to accelerate the building downwards, then what energy source did the significant work of removing the 80+ steel columns?? Can freefall occur if the falling building is also doing the 'work' of overcoming the 80+ steel columns??
In controlled demolitions precisions placed and precision timed explosives are used to near simultaneously remove all the structural elements, once the columns are removed freefall is possible.
Most people intuitively recognise the symmetrical collapse of WTC 7 through the path of most resistance as a controlled demolition, does freefall prove controlled demolition on 9/11???
(1)
(2)"Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)"
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html