Read it a few years ago Angelo. OLD NEWS.
NIST has come out and admitted an 8 second free fall. You do not need a fancy education to know that the only way a building like that can free fall "at the speed of gravity" is to remove ALL resistance below it.
NIST did not come to the 8 seconds of free-fall
{standard G} conclusion at all, that's complete and utter fantasy, i think it was 4 seconds they claim , the actual free-fall
{at over G} speed was only one second, NIST used the Dan Rather video to measure movement for their modeling, one of their errors was that they measured the start of collapse from a central parapet point.
Whereas collapse is clearly under-way before the first sideways movement of the roof as now evidenced by several other sources of live footage.
It was clearly under-way as other footage shows the pent-house sinking into the central core seconds before the rest of the building was pulled in over into the central core, by its pinning to the central core.
The building swayed for 6 seconds prior to the parapet started to descend, as it collapsed internally.
I am no expert in structural engineering either, but i can easily understand how the shell of 7 was all braced in to central columns, and the only second of free-fall
{at over G} is simple physics.
An example.
I park car at cliff edge, chain myself to the back with a 50 metre chain, [no stretching in a chain, well not under these circumstances} and then shove the car over the cliff, now for 50 metres the car travels at free-fall
{standard G}, whilst i am stationary, however as soon as the car passes 50 metres of falling i take off over the edge with it, but i travel faster than free-fall {over G}in that first second or so, as i instantly accelerate from being stationary to free-fall
{standard G} speed and proceed to then fall
{standard G} at the same speed as the car falls.
This is what happened with 7, the centre collapsed first pulling the rest over into it.
How the centre collapsed is anybodies guess, no-one has x ray eyes, NIST could only model it, many others have also modeled the collapse, only NIST were hired by the government so THEIR guess is the standard, however they steadfastly refused to release any of the modeling data, rendering independent verification impossible.
I do not for one second believe the buildings were wired and demolished, but why structural integrity was lost i have only theory which i will not trouble you with.
And that initial over G acceleration is the only example the world of engineering has on film, no other collapse has ever been shown to reach a period of over G speed during collapse no matter how collapse was initiated.
Feel free to show an example of any demolition or other type of collapse that has.
Nist did not allow for the over-G in their modeling, so they extended the period of free-fall by averaging.
It was Greening et al that corrected them, which they partially accepted during the 3 week consultation period prior to release,
and added foot-notes.
please note that "free-fall" is standard G {Gravity} i have indicated where i use "free-fall" to also mean a fall speed over G.
ok. so you believe simply setting a few office fires in a steel and concrete building will produce a very controlled, simultaneous column collapse resulting in the total destruction of the building and pulverization of the concrete floors in a way that is far more effective than that of a controlled demolition executed by licensed demolition professionals.... REALLY?!?
Your analogy is flawed, Imagine your car having to hit a tree growing out of the cliff every 10 feet of the way down, how can your car reach free fall speed if it has the resistance of each tree to deal with? by the end of 50 metres it would not be traveling very fast, if at all.
pixel please before replying next time be sure to read my posts carefully.
It was YOUR claim that the building fell at FREE fall speed for 8 seconds, it did not, and quite simply you cannot show ANY documentation that would verify the claim.
I am not interested in the rest of your global view 911 conspiracy, so please answer the points i make not ones you have wished up on my behalf, only in your false assertions concerning the NIST report.
My points concern your patently false claims about the free-fall duration of building seven, nothing else just the post you made, containing nothing but a fantasy, i have re quoted it.
I am not trying to burst your bubble about 911 your free to view events anyway you want, i only want to discuss this narrow issue at this time.
So please direct yourself to my points only, the vehicle over the cliff example is indeed appropriate for the example, it shows quite clearly how an initial over G acceleration is possible, the central core had been failing for 6 seconds prior to the external walls being pulled in, and the roof parapet initially descending.
Again i reiterate i couldn't careless at this point what made the central cores collapse, my only focus is on the collapse and YOUR claims about "free-fall".
Just so as you know, i have been discussing the collapses with engineers and film experts for the last 6 months, those boys can tell you the individual spandrel number, under any window you choose, they have vastly improved the NIST conclusions, still no hidden fireworks come to light no matter how accurately they map the collapses.
The conclusion is that 7 collapse into its own footprint because of the way it was designed, and as the core sank it pulled the spandrels inward and the walls followed.
No-one can be 100% sure what caused the central cores to fail, they can only model it, hence the conspiracy business, and silly claims like you made.
