Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
I don't really have any theories.
NIST went with pancaking, then changed their theory because they were called out on it.
|
But it DID pancake. Prove that NIST said it didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
NIST said WTC 7 did not fall at the speed of gravity, then changed their theory because they were called out on it - by a high school physics teacher.
|
This is incorrect, and you are over simplifying. You need to take in acceleration, initial velocity, and especially resistance due to air and debris. A dropped object starts its fall quite slowly, but then steadily increases its velocity--accelerates--as time goes on. Galileo showed that (ignoring air resistance) heavy and light objects accelerated at the same constant rate as they fell, that is, their speed (or "velocity") increased at a constant rate. The velocity of a ball dropped from a high place increases each second by a constant amount, usually denoted by the small letter g (for gravity). In modern units (using the convention of algebra, that symbols or numbers standing next to each other are understood to be multiplied) its velocity is
at the start -- 0 (zero)
after 1 second-- g meters/second
after 2 seconds-- 2g meters/second
after 3 seconds-- 3g meters/second
and so on. This is modified by the resistance of the air, which becomes important at higher speeds and usually sets an upper limit ("terminal velocity") to the fall velocity--a much smaller limit for someone using a parachute than one falling without.
The number g is close to 10--more precisely, 9.79 at the equator, 9.83 at the pole, and intermediate values in between--and is known as "the acceleration due to gravity." If the velocity increases by 9.81 m/s each second (a good average value), g is said to equal "9.81 meters per second per second" or in short 9.81 m/s2
There was much more resistance than just air when the colapse occurred but there was much more weight too, and most importantly, the Velocity of the top floors WERE NOT ZERO. When the first floors gave way, their total weight PLUS the velocity that it was falling was more energy than the support of the floor below it was designed to handle, causing it to collapse. Then the TOTAL weight PLUS the now slightly higher veolicty crushed the floor below that, and so on and so on. It doesn't take a physics major to figure this out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
NIST corrected their findings unwillingly several other times.
|
Prove it. Links please!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
The 9/11 Comission report, and the administration's story, and most outlandishly the NIST report, are theories that go against basic physics, and so should be questioned.
|
It is extremely unlikely that NIST, the "National Institute of Standards" would say, write or publish anything that goes against any physics, not just basic physics. Nist is a Physical Measurement Laboratory made up of scientists of all kinds. Whoever said this is truly out of their mind. Do you really think that they would make a mistake like that? Come on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
Government and military inaction and the huge amount of coincidences that day,...
|
Stop right there. Coincidences are just that - coincidences. If you really want to find the truth about any thing, any object, any event, you must rule out coincidences. Coincidence is the basis of all nut job conspiracy theorists. A true scientist may use coincidence to follow a path towards discovery but will know when to abandon that path when it leads to a dead end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
... all the pre-9/11 warnings, the shut-down or obstructed investigations into the supposed hijackers before 9/11, the ties to the Saudis that were ignored and overlooked, the disposal of all the proof of what the FBI called a "crime scene", the FBI's own assertion they had no evidence tying Ben Laden to 9/11 and finally the fact that Ben Laden denied being involved multiple times - these are all good reasons to start doubting the official story, and to launch an actual investigation into what happened.
|
Good! Fine! Interesting! I would say that all or most of that is true or at least very interesting but this is a completely different subject. You are saying that all of this is connected with the "Demolition" of WTC. I don't think WTC was demolished at all despite the connections you have pointed out. Did the Saudis do it? Yes. Could Bush have prevented it? Probably. Did "The Government" have a part in it? Unlikely. Did certain people and companies benefit? Absolutely. Was WTC demolished? NoooOOOoooo.. and nothing points to it. All of the puffs of smoke, sounds of "explosions" etc are all confidence, conjecture and caca.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
The government is the one with the crazy theories.
|
Um... No...