Advertise with Kiwi Biker
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 92

Thread: WTC 7 - University of Alaska Fairbanks report.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    15th February 2005 - 15:34
    Bike
    Katanasaurus Rex
    Location
    The Gates of Delirium
    Posts
    8,781

    WTC 7 - University of Alaska Fairbanks report.

    So now that a far more comprehensive and transparent study than NIST's attempt has been completed on the collapse of WTC 7, does anyone still stick to the theory that the building collapsed due to office fires?

    http://ine.uaf.edu/media/222439/uaf_...09-03-2019.pdf
    Quote Originally Posted by husaberk View Post
    Oh I must really irk you to be repeatedly proven to be a total utter moron in public.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    20th January 2008 - 17:29
    Bike
    1972 Norton Commando
    Location
    Auckland NZ's Epicentre
    Posts
    3,509
    Watched a BBC doco on you tube, showed the twin towers from many angles and the WTC 7 building too. All three bore the hallmarks of controlled demolition . There was a lot of on he day interviews saying similar. Concrete apparently does not turn to dust without addition of explosives.
    DeMyer's Laws - an argument that consists primarily of rambling quotes isn't worth bothering with.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    25th October 2002 - 17:30
    Bike
    GSXR1000
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    8,322
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Voltaire View Post
    Concrete apparently does not turn to dust without addition of explosives.
    I'm not getting into the 9/11 debate (and tbh I'm thinking this thread needs to go with the 9/11 thread already here) but have you never smashed a piece of concrete with a sledge hammer? I have, and I've seen it turn to dust.
    http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/signaturepics/sigpic31_1.gif

  4. #4
    Join Date
    4th December 2009 - 19:45
    Bike
    2008 Honda VFR800
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    160
    I know that we have discussed 911 earlier, and I can recall commenting
    at the time (that modern steel frame skyscrapers built to appropriate
    standards are approx 5x over-engineered; that their designs would have
    allowed for events such as aircraft collision, and that building structural
    engineering standards were not significantly revised post 911).

    While the latest study is more robust, I still come back to one of the
    simplest pieces of explanation performed very early on, that by physics
    teacher David Chandler:

    https://www.911tap.org/evidence/what...david-chandler

    and which was used to help force NIST admit to "free fall acceleration"
    of the WTC7 building during collapse.

    Once you realise that this occurred - and that this outcome could only be
    accomplished by action such as "controlled demolition", then the official
    911 story becomes an absolute fairytale.

    Politicians may lie, but basic physics doesn't.

    I happened to more recently come across a blog posting (link below) that
    also contained a number of items relating to physical evidence:

    https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2011/...ful-questions/

    See point 13 regarding concrete pulverisation. See point 17 regarding free
    fall of building floors.

    [Edit]

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZjBAjZQVns

  5. #5
    Join Date
    20th January 2008 - 17:29
    Bike
    1972 Norton Commando
    Location
    Auckland NZ's Epicentre
    Posts
    3,509
    Quote Originally Posted by onearmedbandit View Post
    I'm not getting into the 9/11 debate (and tbh I'm thinking this thread needs to go with the 9/11 thread already here) but have you never smashed a piece of concrete with a sledge hammer? I have, and I've seen it turn to dust.
    It's time for a new thread, be disappointing if you move just because you can, probably a name for that.
    Yes I have broken up concrete, looks easier with explosives.
    DeMyer's Laws - an argument that consists primarily of rambling quotes isn't worth bothering with.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    10th October 2017 - 18:07
    Bike
    aprilia
    Location
    rotovegas
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by onearmedbandit View Post
    I'm not getting into the 9/11 debate (and tbh I'm thinking this thread needs to go with the 9/11 thread already here) but have you never smashed a piece of concrete with a sledge hammer? I have, and I've seen it turn to dust.

    Thats fine but you also have to severe or rip out the steel reinforcing inside said concrete. Thats going to take longer than the few second's of complete freefall those buildings fell at. You can watch bits of steel beam being ejected from the building at right angles and faster than freefall. Again impossible.


    It is physically impossible for it to of been anything other than a controlled demolition.

    Nano thermite and explosives.

    And imo the evidence points most likely to israeli groups behind rigging that.


    More and more people are slowly waking up that we have all been lied to. And they continue to do it with the likes of climate change and other charlatan bullshit.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    5th January 2007 - 14:58
    Bike
    motocompo
    Location
    Buttfuck nowhere
    Posts
    4,701
    Quote Originally Posted by onearmedbandit View Post
    I'm not getting into the 9/11 debate (and tbh I'm thinking this thread needs to go with the 9/11 thread already here) but have you never smashed a piece of concrete with a sledge hammer? I have, and I've seen it turn to dust.
    The concrete workshop yard is turning to dust & it's only getting trucks turned around on it.
    Going a bit far to say that explosives are the only thing that turns it to dust.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    15th February 2005 - 15:34
    Bike
    Katanasaurus Rex
    Location
    The Gates of Delirium
    Posts
    8,781
    Quote Originally Posted by sidecar bob View Post
    The concrete workshop yard is turning to dust & it's only getting trucks turned around on it.
    Going a bit far to say that explosives are the only thing that turns it to dust.
    Let us know if it starts happening in nano-seconds.
    Quote Originally Posted by husaberk View Post
    Oh I must really irk you to be repeatedly proven to be a total utter moron in public.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    25th October 2002 - 17:30
    Bike
    GSXR1000
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    8,322
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Voltaire View Post
    It's time for a new thread, be disappointing if you move just because you can, probably a name for that.
    Yes I have broken up concrete, looks easier with explosives.
    I'm not going to move it 'just because I can', but as with any thread in the past which has covered the same subject as another they often get merged. Let's see how it goes huh.

    Quote Originally Posted by austingtir View Post
    Thats fine but you also have to severe or rip out the steel reinforcing inside said concrete...... other charlatan bullshit.
    I did say I wasn't being drawn into the 9/11 debate, simply stating that it doesn't require explosives to turn concrete into dust. Surely you could have read that from my post. It's exactly what I said.

    Quote Originally Posted by sidecar bob View Post
    The concrete workshop yard is turning to dust & it's only getting trucks turned around on it.
    Going a bit far to say that explosives are the only thing that turns it to dust.
    And this was my point.
    http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/signaturepics/sigpic31_1.gif

  10. #10
    Join Date
    20th January 2010 - 14:41
    Bike
    husaberg
    Location
    The Wild Wild West
    Posts
    9,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sidecar bob View Post
    The concrete workshop yard is turning to dust & it's only getting trucks turned around on it.
    Going a bit far to say that explosives are the only thing that turns it to dust.
    Im picking hes never seen a ball mill.
    Or what happens under massive loads
    If i could be assed i could do a video with testing concrete under compression. there is a reason they are crushed done straight out of the water or Humidifier.
    but must be conspiracy etc............
    this latest thread just seems to be a sad attempt to troll up another thread.

    i wonder how much explosives were needed to produce this dust after the CHCH.



    or all the dust when a building is demo'd



    Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken

  11. #11
    Join Date
    10th October 2017 - 18:07
    Bike
    aprilia
    Location
    rotovegas
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by onearmedbandit View Post
    I'm not going to move it 'just because I can', but as with any thread in the past which has covered the same subject as another they often get merged. Let's see how it goes huh.



    I did say I wasn't being drawn into the 9/11 debate, simply stating that it doesn't require explosives to turn concrete into dust. Surely you could have read that from my post. It's exactly what I said.



    And this was my point.
    I wasnt saying that either. The whole where did the concrete thing go is a rabbit hole for the uninitiated. Its as simple as this the concrete was ground to dust as the building fell. Once the building started to fall the concrete was being ground up... of course explosives helped this along.

    I dont want to see this head the way of every other thread I have seen on the matter on multiple forums where people are arguing over how the bloody concrete turned to dust..... Honestly who gives a shit.

    The crux of the argument has to be around was it a controlled demolition and who REALLY did it. Nothing else matters.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    20th January 2008 - 17:29
    Bike
    1972 Norton Commando
    Location
    Auckland NZ's Epicentre
    Posts
    3,509
    Google suggests a magnitude 6 is about 30 ww2 atom bombs. Both being sudden energy releases. Hard to see why a multi story building with some office fires would do it. Please no massive quotes as only have 3 line attention span.
    DeMyer's Laws - an argument that consists primarily of rambling quotes isn't worth bothering with.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    20th January 2010 - 14:41
    Bike
    husaberg
    Location
    The Wild Wild West
    Posts
    9,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Voltaire View Post
    Google suggests a magnitude 6 is about 30 ww2 atom bombs. Both being sudden energy releases. Hard to see why a multi story building with some office fires would do it. Please no massive quotes as only have 3 line attention span.
    You get more than three lines regardless as you raised about four topics.
    With the dust from ChCH you missed the point, concrete when its crushed under pressure creates huge amounts of dust.
    Due to the sand and cement particles that make up about 1/2 of the concrete when its cured.
    off the top of my head Concrete sand is generally less than 4mm with an average partical size of 1.8-2.8mm to start with its doesn't turn into a different form, but it forms a composite.
    Concrete is about 1/2 ag (Ie Gravel) which i either 13mm or 19mm max size. Plus 1/2 sand and various amounts of Cement. but around 200-250KG per 2.5 tons for GP stuff 400 kg plus for bridges etc./M3
    the fine dust from breaking down concrete, actually kills thousand of people a year. this is due to the ultra fine silica content of most sands and also was often used in concrete as an ad mixture Mirco silica.
    that's why when you crush it,As when you test it you keep it wet, same when you cut it, also why you wear masks when you cut it.
    No need for nukes or earthquakes.
    There was a shit load of energy concentrated when the buildings collapsed F=MA.
    its a accumulated collapse with each floor adding to the mass and speeding up the collapse, therefor adding for and more energy as it collapses, this energy is concentrated over a small area,
    The bomb blasts on the other hand dissipate energy in the open atmosphere. from memory one of the Japanese sites was chosen as it was in a basin to concentrate the effects of the blast. To maximize the damage.
    No one has ever produced a single piece of conclusive evidence that the WTC attacks were anything other than plane crash related.
    if you look at the videos i posted the dust was from the concrete simply falling and breaking.



    here is dust from a building collapsing due to shoddy construction. Notice the dust and its only a small building.



    Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken

  14. #14
    Join Date
    15th February 2005 - 15:34
    Bike
    Katanasaurus Rex
    Location
    The Gates of Delirium
    Posts
    8,781
    Quote Originally Posted by husaberk View Post
    or all the dust when a building is demo'd
    You didn't really think that comment through, did you?
    Quote Originally Posted by husaberk View Post
    Oh I must really irk you to be repeatedly proven to be a total utter moron in public.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    20th January 2008 - 17:29
    Bike
    1972 Norton Commando
    Location
    Auckland NZ's Epicentre
    Posts
    3,509
    Quote Originally Posted by husaberg View Post
    You get more than three lines regardless as you raised about four topics.
    With the dust from ChCH you missed the point, concrete when its crushed under pressure creates huge amounts of dust.
    Due to the sand and cement particles that make up about 1/2 of the concrete when its cured.
    off the top of my head Concrete sand is generally less than 4mm with an average partical size of 1.8-2.8mm to start with its doesn't turn into a different form, but it forms a composite.
    Concrete is about 1/2 ag (Ie Gravel) which i either 13mm or 19mm max size. Plus 1/2 sand and various amounts of Cement. but around 200-250KG per 2.5 tons for GP stuff 400 kg plus for bridges etc./M3
    the fine dust from breaking down concrete, actually kills thousand of people a year. this is due to the ultra fine silica content of most sands and also was often used in concrete as an ad mixture Mirco silica.
    that's why when you crush it,As when you test it you keep it wet, same when you cut it, also why you wear masks when you cut it.
    No need for nukes or earthquakes.
    There was a shit load of energy concentrated when the buildings collapsed F=MA.
    its a accumulated collapse with each floor adding to the mass and speeding up the collapse, therefor adding for and more energy as it collapses, this energy is concentrated over a small area,
    The bomb blasts on the other hand dissipate energy in the open atmosphere. from memory one of the Japanese sites was chosen as it was in a basin to concentrate the effects of the blast. To maximize the damage.
    No one has ever produced a single piece of conclusive evidence that the WTC attacks were anything other than plane crash related.
    if you look at the videos i posted the dust was from the concrete simply falling and breaking.



    here is dust from a building collapsing due to shoddy construction. Notice the dust and its only a small building.
    That's impressive recall from the 3 lines I read.
    DeMyer's Laws - an argument that consists primarily of rambling quotes isn't worth bothering with.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •