Steve Ulman Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Jack – you didn't answer my question / request for information. Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Jack, or anyone. do you know how long after impact this photo was taken. And roughly how far from the centre of impact it is. I have a good reason for asking. Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 7, 2005 Author Share Posted October 7, 2005 Jack-On page three the last two sentences you state: “The entire sequence lasts just a few seconds, and the part showing the intense fire lasts only three seconds, and is mostly outside the building. After that, all smoke came from the burning interior…yet the official story is that intense fire melted the building steel structure to cause the collapse!” The official story doesn’t state that the fires “melted” the steel – just weakened it enough to cause the collapse. I assume that you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse. Also, please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you check, I believe you’ll find that the footage is of the collapse of WTC-2, not at 9:03 AM, and the dust cloud near WTC-7 is caused by the collapse of WTC-2. There are hundreds of websites devoted to the melting temperature of steel. A kerosene fire cannot melt steel. Check it out. See attachment. The complete CNN video sequence is widely available on the internet. Comparison of it with the collapse of the south tower shows two completely different events. The south tower collapsed FROM THE TOP DOWN, with no dust cloud initially at ground level. The CNN cloud is from an explosion at ground level. You obviously have not studied the evidence. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 7, 2005 Author Share Posted October 7, 2005 Jack, or anyone. do you know how long after impact this photo was taken. And roughly how far from the centre of impact it is. I have a good reason for asking. Steve. Steve...the Pentagon wall collapsed about 30 minutes after the explosion. In this photo the wall is still standing, so it is within the first 30 minutes. The burning cars are less than 50 feet from the "point of impact". Note the unbroken windows at the point of impact. Most of your questions will be answered at my website: http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies1.htm Thanks. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Jack – you still didn't answer my question / request for information. Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? Not melted - weakened! Hopefully you understand the difference! 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you cannot provide a link to the information you are using, how can anyone be assured of its validity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 8, 2005 Author Share Posted October 8, 2005 Jack – you still didn't answer my question / request for information.Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? Not melted - weakened! Hopefully you understand the difference! 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you cannot provide a link to the information you are using, how can anyone be assured of its validity! Why are you so CONFRONTATIONAL? I answered your questions. Just as I did, you can go to the internet sites I provided and get the same information I got. I cannot spoon feed it to you. The articles are written by metalurgists and physicists. I did not make it up as you accuse me of. You can use Google like I did to find the COMPLETE VIDEO CLIP. It is there. Just Google for it. It is on several sites. It will play in QuickTime or RealPlayer. I played it and did SCREEN CAPTURES of individual frames. Are you accusing me of fabricating the frames? Do your own research. I have pointed the way. Do not accuse me of fabrication. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Jack – you still didn't answer my question / request for information. Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? Not melted - weakened! Hopefully you understand the difference! 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you cannot provide a link to the information you are using, how can anyone be assured of its validity! Why are you so CONFRONTATIONAL? I answered your questions. Just as I did, you can go to the internet sites I provided and get the same information I got. I cannot spoon feed it to you. The articles are written by metalurgists and physicists. I did not make it up as you accuse me of. You can use Google like I did to find the COMPLETE VIDEO CLIP. It is there. Just Google for it. It is on several sites. It will play in QuickTime or RealPlayer. I played it and did SCREEN CAPTURES of individual frames. Are you accusing me of fabricating the frames? Do your own research. I have pointed the way. Do not accuse me of fabrication. Jack And like all of Jack's work - he avoids answering the 'tough' questions. As soon as you question any of his findings, you become an enemy. Even though Steve never said any such thing (see above), Jack says he "... did not make it up as you accuse me of.". You have dared to challenge Jack's work, Steve; you're now on his 'xxxx list' and he won't reply to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 (edited) Jack – you still didn't answer my question / request for information. Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? Not melted - weakened! Hopefully you understand the difference! 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you cannot provide a link to the information you are using, how can anyone be assured of its validity! Why are you so CONFRONTATIONAL? I answered your questions. Just as I did, you can go to the internet sites I provided and get the same information I got. I cannot spoon feed it to you. The articles are written by metalurgists and physicists. I did not make it up as you accuse me of. You can use Google like I did to find the COMPLETE VIDEO CLIP. It is there. Just Google for it. It is on several sites. It will play in QuickTime or RealPlayer. I played it and did SCREEN CAPTURES of individual frames. Are you accusing me of fabricating the frames? Do your own research. I have pointed the way. Do not accuse me of fabrication. Jack Jack - Why are you so confrontational? I asked two really simple things - one requires a simple yes/no answer. Are you going to provide evidence that the fires in the towers not hot enough to weaken the steel in the floor trusses? The second requires you to provide an URL so all of us participating in this forum may have the benefit of viewing the same thing you are. Really simple. Edited October 8, 2005 by Steve Ulman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 9, 2005 Author Share Posted October 9, 2005 Jack – you still didn't answer my question / request for information. Again - 1. Are you are going to provide evidence the interior fires were not intense enough to cause the damaged floor structures to weaken and deflect enough to cause the progressive collapse? Not melted - weakened! Hopefully you understand the difference! I PROVIDED URLs WHERE YOU CAN READ TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT ABOUT METALURGY AND HEAT REQUIRED TO MELT STEEL, AND ABOUT THE BURNING TEMPERTURE OF KEROSENE. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. 2. Can you please provide a link to where you got the screen captures from the CNN feed on Page 8. If you cannot provide a link to the information you are using, how can anyone be assured of its validity! THE VIDEO CLIP IS AVAILABLE AT SEVERAL SITES ON THE INTERNET. YOU CAN LOOK IT UP LIKE I DID. I KEPT NO LOGBOOK OF WHERE IMAGES CAME FROM, AND I AM NOT GOING TO WASTE TIME LOOKING IT UP FOR YOU. I WOULD POST THE VIDEO HERE, BUT IT REQUIRES MORE MEMORY THAN IS ALLOWED. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Why are you so CONFRONTATIONAL? I answered your questions. Just as I did, you can go to the internet sites I provided and get the same information I got. I cannot spoon feed it to you. The articles are written by metalurgists and physicists. I did not make it up as you accuse me of. You can use Google like I did to find the COMPLETE VIDEO CLIP. It is there. Just Google for it. It is on several sites. It will play in QuickTime or RealPlayer. I played it and did SCREEN CAPTURES of individual frames. Are you accusing me of fabricating the frames? Do your own research. I have pointed the way. Do not accuse me of fabrication. Jack Jack - Why are you so confrontational? I asked two really simple things - one requires a simple yes/no answer. Are you going to provide evidence that the fires in the towers not hot enough to weaken the steel in the floor trusses? The second requires you to provide an URL so all of us participating in this forum may have the benefit of viewing the same thing you are. Really simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Jack yells - "THE VIDEO CLIP IS AVAILABLE AT SEVERAL SITES ON THE INTERNET. YOU CAN LOOK IT UP LIKE I DID. I KEPT NO LOGBOOK OF WHERE IMAGES CAME FROM, AND I AM NOT GOING TO WASTE TIME LOOKING IT UP FOR YOU. I WOULD POST THE VIDEO HERE, BUT IT REQUIRES MORE MEMORY THAN IS ALLOWED. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH." So you are telling us you have no idea what your sources are. Very interisting. How are we to know that the time of the video is 9:03AM. - just take your word for it? How do we know the video you used as a source is not altered before you saw it - just take your word for it? Since you won't you give us the link for your source, I've PM'ed my email address to you - please email me the video so that I can view what you are looking at. Thanks - Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 9, 2005 Author Share Posted October 9, 2005 SEND ME YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS AND I WILL SEND YOU THE ANIMATED GIF FILE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 SEND ME YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS AND I WILLSEND YOU THE ANIMATED GIF FILE. Jack - I sent you a PM on this board with my email address earlier today. Why an animated gif? Why not the actual video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 10, 2005 Author Share Posted October 10, 2005 YOU ARE LESS COMPUTER LITERATE THAN I AM, GOODNESS! I GUESS YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT VIDEO CANNOT BE SHOWN ON A COMPUTER SCREEN WITHOUT CONVERSION TO A PLAYABLE FORMAT, LIKE QUICKTIME OR REAL PLAYER. A GIF FILE IS A WAY OF DOING THIS. I SAVED THE GIF AND PLAYED IT AS A VIDEO FILE IN QUICKTIME. GIVE ME YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS AND I WILL EMAIL IT TO YOU. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT A PM IS. I HAVE RECEIVED NO MESSAGES FROM YOU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 (edited) So far I haven't read about any. This makes me wonder about all the supposed anomalies. Why aren't they being raised by people who know what they are talking about? Economists, atomic physicists, ad. execs, neo-Nazi journalists and water safety specialists don't count. I refer specifically to questions as to whether the collapses of the WTC buildings can be explained by impact damage, fires and falling debris cause by the planes crashing into the towers. Len Edited October 14, 2005 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 15, 2005 Author Share Posted October 15, 2005 So far I haven't read about any. This makes me wonder about all the supposed anomalies. Why aren't they being raised by people who know what they are talking about?Economists, atomic physicists, ad. execs, neo-Nazi journalists and water safety specialists don't count. I refer specifically to questions as to whether the collapses of the WTC buildings can be explained by impact damage, fires and falling debris cause by the planes crashing into the towers. Len A good place to learn such is PHYSICS911: http://keyword.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.j...ysics911.net%2F Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now