The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


The impending war against Iran thread

Everything related to politics in Cyprus and the rest of the world.

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Paphitis » Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:16 am

Londonrake wrote:From 37C downtown Sydney 8) (having survived crossing 2000 miles of Outback. :D ). Evidence of the recent cataclysm coming into this city was quite sobering. Literally Mile upon mile of blackened landscape. :(

Mr Hood well fits the definition of Troll. He’s always sown discord and in fact delights in it. Loves a good row, in order to “prove his superiority”. It’s a consuming hobby and principle priority of his. In that endeavour he’s fallen out with more people than anybody else I know. A pariah. None of which has affected his obnoxiousness in the slightest.

If he were to decide the world was flat tomorrow he’d produce well researched and irrefutable “proof” on the matter and his view would be unshakeable. You would be yet another inferior idiot for not acknowledging the “well informed” obvious. Furthermore, he would have absolutely no interest at all in anything anybody else had to say to the contrary, other than to use it as springboard for yet more his own endless output. Bludgeon, bludgeon, bludgeon, until you gave up, in exasperation. There to be one of the “shot down”. Adding to his countless victories.

Which is why I reiterate. It’s a total waste of time engaging with him on any issue of substance.

Ohh, he’s also prone to the occasional outburst of idiocy. That and intelligence not of course being mutually exclusive.


Australia is one of those very tricky countries which require significant local knowledge. There are those things we tell people, and there are the things we keep secret and to ourselves.

For instance, Sydney is an International Icon, very LAesque, and like San Francisco has a city and Harbour to die for which attracts the international tourists. But there are better places than Sydney, like Melbourne, Adelaide and Hobart.

The cities I like thebest for instance are as follows (in order of preference):

1) Adelaide - easily the most gorgeous Australian City. Full of European Culture, food, wine, hills and pristine beaches. The most under rated city by a long stretch. This city has the best vibe and they know how to party and host sporting events such as the F1 Australian Grand Prix which was the best circuit by a long mile.

2) Melbourne - also very European and cultural, like Adelaide. Their only downfall is you need to travel to get to a nice beach but the Great Ocean Road is magical. Melbourne is certainly a Jewell.

3) Hobart - Tasmania is gorgeous and Hobart has a similar vibe to Adelaide and Melbourne.

4) Sydney - this is where Australia starts to change from European to very American. Sure, Sydney is pretty and an icon, but if you live there, that will start to wear very thin. Overall a nice city but it lacks a soul, architecture, and cultural experience of other cities mentioned above...Australians promote Sydney to the foreign tourists to keep them concentrated in Sydney because Australians generally don't like foreigners or Sydney and want to keep the rest of the place tidy, clean and exclusively for themselves. Such selfish buggers we are... :lol:

5) Canberra - Canberra is great as our Capital City. Great war Museum and memorials but the best part to Canberra are its close proximity to the Snow Fields where I grew up. The countryside of the Snowey Mountains is just divine.

6) Perth - see Sydney. isolated and lacks soul. Yes very pretty and clean but like Sydney, it lacks something.

7) Brisbane - shit! The place should be leveled to the ground. No beaches and very hot. I don't know what people see in Brisbane. Give Brisbane a skip and go to the Gold Coast which is the play ground of the rich and famous. It's Australia's Miami! Every girl is gorgeous and has fake boobs and they are not afraid to flaunt them. :D

8. Darwin - look it has some redeeming features if you are a safari type and want to go into Kakadu National Park. Don't go into any rivers or waterways as there are Dinosaurs that will eat you.

The best kept secrets are many.

Noosa
Proserpine - Airlie Beach
Lorn
Great Ocean Road
Tasmania - all of it
Port Douglas
Whitsundays
Great Barrier Reef
Cairns
Batemans Bay - near HMAS Albatross, and HMAS Creswell which you should be familiar with
NSW South Coast
Bright
Kangaroo island
Port Lincoln to swim with Great White Sharks
Moonta and Edithburgh
Hanhdorf
Barrossa Valley, Clare Valley and Maclaren Vale
Monkey Mia and Shark Bay
Coral Bay, Exmouth and Ningaloo Reef
Albany
Margaret River
Esperence

That should keep you occupied.

Let me know your movements via pm to see if we can arrange for a meet up. :wink:
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25684
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Londonrake » Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:49 am

Not really a lot left now. We’re at the Holiday Inn, Darling Harbour. The whole area’s absolutely teeming with people, nearly all of whom are Asian. Chinatown is right next door, which is great.

Here until Saturday, when we board ship for NZ. We only got a few hours in Adelaide, which was taken up with a tour. I haven’t even opened the first of 3 books I brought to read. :lol: Back here on 8 Feb then it’s straight from ship to airport. :(

Outside right now it’s pushing 40C. Just like being “back home” in mid August. 8)
Londonrake
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Paphitis » Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:09 am

Londonrake wrote:Not really a lot left now. We’re at the Holiday Inn, Darling Harbour. The whole area’s absolutely teeming with people, nearly all of whom are Asian. Chinatown is right next door, which is great.

Here until Saturday, when we board ship for NZ. We only got a few hours in Adelaide, which was taken up with a tour. I haven’t even opened the first of 3 books I brought to read. :lol: Back here on 8 Feb then it’s straight from ship to airport. :(

Outside right now it’s pushing 40C. Just like being “back home” in mid August. 8)


Yes well its unusually hot and dry at the moment. Plus we have a drought which has been devastating for the fires.

We got lucky in that in the last 2 weeks, we just so happen to have large amounts of rainfall, even over bush fire areas which has helped to extinguish most of them. Phew!

Also, you are lucky to be in Sydney now as the visibility should be improved. Over the last few weeks, it was covered in a blanket of smoke, On approach to Kingsford Smith International, as we get below the inversion layer of about 3000FT on approach to Runway 16L or 16R or 34R/34L, you couldn't see the city or the Bridge which we almost fly over the top of on the MEPIL 3 arrival to intercept the ILS. Couldn't see the runway until about 400Ft from the ground with visibility as low as 400m (cough as it doesn't meet minima) and a Runway Visual Range of 1000m (cough cough).

It was like a movie set and looked like Armageddon. It was very dire. :shock:
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25684
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Londonrake » Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:24 am

It just hit 46C :shock: 8)
Londonrake
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Robin Hood » Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:32 am

Londonrake wrote:From 37C downtown Sydney 8) (having survived crossing 2000 miles of Outback. :D ). Evidence of the recent cataclysm coming into this city was quite sobering. Literally Mile upon mile of blackened landscape. :(

Mr Hood well fits the definition of Troll. He’s always sown discord and in fact delights in it. Loves a good row, in order to “prove his superiority”. It’s a consuming hobby and principle priority of his. In that endeavour he’s fallen out with more people than anybody else I know. A pariah. None of which has affected his obnoxiousness in the slightest.

If he were to decide the world was flat tomorrow he’d produce well researched and irrefutable “proof” on the matter and his view would be unshakeable. You would be yet another inferior idiot for not acknowledging the “well informed” obvious. Furthermore, he would have absolutely no interest at all in anything anybody else had to say to the contrary, other than to use it as springboard for yet more his own endless output. Bludgeon, bludgeon, bludgeon, until you gave up, in exasperation. There to be one of the “shot down”. Adding to his countless victories.

Which is why I reiterate. It’s a total waste of time engaging with him on any issue of substance.

Ohh, he’s also prone to the occasional outburst of idiocy. That and intelligence not of course being mutually exclusive.


As you seem to be holding Court again ............ and expounding your opinion on your favourite defendant ..... I will post this. I wasn’t going to bother, but feel free to comment even though the reply is to Cyprusgrump, although for you it is a TLDR!

Cyprusgrump:
I rest my case!

What case?

You have done nothing but ridicule and insult and you have not provided a single comment that has credibility, only inane remarks expressing your rather academically limited opinions. That makes me very different from you! You would make a rotten Lawyer!

I will now present MY case! You failed miserably to work it out for yourself so I will explain it to you ..... of course, whether you understand it or not, is another thing! All you have to do is identify what in your opinion is wrong or inaccurate, in any of the following, with an explanation of why, to prove your point. In fact your own version of this would be interesting ...... if you have one ..... but the Official story doesn’t fit the evidence!

WTC1 Collapse.

The official explanation and the dismissal of controlled demolition being the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers by NIST/FEMA, is a cover up on the same scale as Saddam’s WMD’s and the Gulf of Tonkin incident! It is only supported by obfuscation, misrepresentation of the Laws of Physics, selective evidence, a string of downright lies and ............ an audience too stupid and ill-informed to see through the deception!

THE PROOF? It all comes down to two cameras, at two different locations recording the same event. Both these cameras clearly indicate a short but noticeable movement at exactly the same moment, about 10-11 seconds before the start of the collapse of WTC 1. That sudden movement can only be the result of a seismic shock as the two cameras were both at different physical locations. Watch the video from the start until the debris cloud then obscures all views of the top section of the tower. You may have to repeat, as events happen in very short spaces of time. The following sequence is observed. (Using camera #1 as the event time line for the time scale.)

Scene from first camera #1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfSAiDq15ys

Same scene from second camera #2 as a confirmation of the shake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYzIja6mlRs&list=PLyFB3IONZSLkeJh8vRquSVti2XgRM1uXD&index=192

1. @00.22 Camera #1 shakes noticeable for just maybe just ½ a second.

2. @00.22+ almost coincident with the movement, a sudden and significant increase in the eruption of smoke from the roof and visible North face of WTC1, is clearly visible . ....... structure/mast remains static with no visible movement.

3. @00.33 The mast appears to dip slightly ........ but still remains vertical therefore it is obviously still fixed to the hat truss.

4. @00.33+ The roof line begins to drop ...... and then descends at the same acceleration as the still attached mast, maybe ½ sec after the mast first moves.

5. @00.34+ Total top structure collapse starts from the impact point ‘UP’ and the roof accelerates down with the top structure collapsing into the impact zone. The main and virtually undamaged structure below the impact point remains static.

6. @00.37 Mast, still falling, begins to tilt toward the south.

7. @00.40 Last view of roof and top structure as it is then obscured by the cloud of dust and debris at the impact zone.

The collapse in slow motion; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5V3JTO4kmM&list=PLyFB3IONZSLkeJh8vRquSVti2XgRM1uXD&index=95

A few simple pointers:

1. Camera #1 is clearly fixed, not hand held, so it is fixed within or onto the building it is located in. The shake is slight but noticeable. When checked against similar shots from camera #2, also fixed but clearly on a tripod and viewing WTC 1’s collapse, but from a different location and angle, it indicates the shake has to be a seismic event because static camera #2 also shook at EXACTLY the same point in time, which was 10-11 seconds before the start of any movement due to structural collapse.

Both cameras responded to what can only be described as a seismic shock from a sudden and violent event. A shock wave travels much faster than a sound wave in air does and, had it been an explosion, it would have been heard and recorded. The seismic wave reached the mountings of both cameras at exactly the same moment. This ‘shock wave’ was obviously not apparent with hand held cameras.

2. Almost immediately after the camera shake, there was a clearly visible and significant increase in the volume of smoke ejecting from the structure visible at roof level and also emanating from the visible North face, but there was no immediate visible effect on the flames. This suggests that there was clearly an ‘event’ inside the structure and unseen from outside except for the tell-tale change in the smoke volume. As it had no visible effect on the flames it occurred most probably within the central core structure.

3. The mast is attached to the hat truss which in turn connects all 47 core columns and, via 8 outriggers, links it to the outer steel spandrel tube. For the mast to drop, ALL the columns supporting the Hat Truss have to have been removed simultaneously, otherwise the structure would have tilted and tumbled. (Newton) So all the 47 centre columns must somehow have been removed simultaneously, thus removing the counter force (Up-thrust) to resist the gravitational load (Down-thrust) of the mass of the truss, allowing for a near free fall gravitational acceleration.

4. The roof line descent starts about ½ a second after the mast first moves, but the mast and structure remained intact and without independent movement, indicating the Hat Truss was also still attached to the outer spandrel tube structure.

5. The top structure and the mast, remains on what appears to be a vertical axis and with no noticeable tilt until about 3 secs after the mast first moves @00:33.

6. Then @00:37, the mast begins to tilt. The top main structure is not clearly visible but appears to also start to tilt in the same direction (South) which was the face subject to the most smoke/fire, as it was the downwind side, even though it was the opposite side to the impact. This tilt could be the structure complying with Newtons Laws of motion by taking the line of least resistance, the weaker side. Had fire and/or damage been the cause, this motion would have been the first movement to be seen ..... but it wasn’t ........... it trailed behind the first visible movement by about 15 seconds!

7. The whole top structure accelerated at near free fall acceleration, still appearing to rotate to the South, until it disappeared into the debris cloud.

8. The collapse of the top structure is clearly seen as a bottom-up collapse. There is no view that shows the remaining bottom section in motion at all, only the accelerating debris field. The assumption can only be that the lower and structurally intact section was a top down collapse. But neither the collapse of the top section or the bottom section debris front, showed any significant reduction in the free fall acceleration until it hit the debris pile toward ground zero.

Conclusion:

Had the collapse been CAUSED BY fires softening the damaged steel to the point it became malleable and started bending, then, according to both Bazant and NIST and also as defined by Newton’s Three Laws of Motion, there would have been a progressive gravitational collapse unarguably causing a tilt toward the North side of the building, that being the impact point and line of least resistance to the collapse. WTC1 would have quite likely toppled according to Bazant’s reports rather than a collapse of the complete structure, as the lower structure was undamaged, was designed for a greater load and was not subject to fire.

This tilt of the top section did happen, but not until 3-4 seconds after the first visible signs of collapse and also to the South, when the mast dropped and after the main structure started to descend vertically about ½ sec. later at almost free fall acceleration. Therefore as the structural failure of the columns started after the collapse when the top section toppled @ 00:37, it WAS NOT and COULD NOT have been, the initiator of the collapse as promoted by the official conspiracy theory.

If the collapse had been due to the failure of the 47 centre columns that then resulted in the free fall collapse seen in the videos, all 47 columns would have been required to fail simultaneously within milliseconds, otherwise a fall to the line of least resistance (A tilt.) would have occurred. (Bazant/Newton)

(This symmetrical and free fall collapse scenario is covered in detail by Dr Hulsey in his report on the collapse of WTC7 for Alaska University.)


The instantaneous collapse scenario (the official conspiracy theory) apparently due only to gravitational progressive failure, can be nothing but an impossibility as the structure did not topple and ‘something’ somehow managed to destroy all the 47 columns on multiple floors simultaneously and in sequence. Firstly from the impact zone upward to bring down the top section, and from the impact zone downward to bring down the undamaged bottom section of the tower. This is the epitome of 'CONTROL' and is an impossible scenario, defies the Laws of Physics without there being some sort of physical intervention ..... such as some method of controlled demolition.

The seismic ‘event’ that occurred at @00.22 is unexplained but was clearly big enough to initiate a seismic ground wave displayed as movement of two static camera’s .... maybe more. It has to be more than just coincidence that this ‘event’ was coincident with the increase in the amount of smoke emanating from within the structure. It would also be rather naive to believe that this ‘event’ was not in turn related to the initiation of the collapse just 10-11 seconds later. This ‘event’ preceded all movement seen before the collapse commenced @00.33 - 34!

Thus, structural damage from the aircraft impact, fuel fires, followed by office fires could NOT have been the reason WTC1 collapsed or, based on probability, for the collapse of WTC2 and WTC7 either!


The two videos are simple raw, visual, undeniable evidence and need no interpretation
. They cannot be even remotely regarded as either ‘fake news’ or a ‘conspiracy theory’ and the observations are factually correct and based on simple logic. It shows without any doubt that the official claim CANNOT BE TRUE! The understanding of that fact boils down to simply knowing how to measure time, having a basic knowledge of Physics and the application of Newton’s Laws of Motion, set against an event sequence determination time line ................ and some common sense! :roll:
Robin Hood
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Paphitis » Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:58 am

Guys, the guy is clearly a lunatic and can't be reasoned with.

JUST IGNORE HIM!

In fact feel sorry for him. He has serious issues. probably needs help.

We are partly to blame for giving these conspiracists the airtime they clearly do not deserve.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25684
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Robin Hood » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:09 am

Paphitis wrote:Guys, the guy is clearly a lunatic and can't be reasoned with.

JUST IGNORE HIM!

In fact feel sorry for him. He has serious issues. probably needs help.

We are partly to blame for giving these conspiracists the airtime they clearly do not deserve.


But you can't refute what I say can you? :lol: :lol:

You don't have a credible argument or even an opinion to express, because what you have between your ears is full of conspiracy theories and propaganda, most of it proven to be so ...... but you ignore anything you don't understand.
Robin Hood
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby cyprusgrump » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am

Robin Hood wrote:
Londonrake wrote:From 37C downtown Sydney 8) (having survived crossing 2000 miles of Outback. :D ). Evidence of the recent cataclysm coming into this city was quite sobering. Literally Mile upon mile of blackened landscape. :(

Mr Hood well fits the definition of Troll. He’s always sown discord and in fact delights in it. Loves a good row, in order to “prove his superiority”. It’s a consuming hobby and principle priority of his. In that endeavour he’s fallen out with more people than anybody else I know. A pariah. None of which has affected his obnoxiousness in the slightest.

If he were to decide the world was flat tomorrow he’d produce well researched and irrefutable “proof” on the matter and his view would be unshakeable. You would be yet another inferior idiot for not acknowledging the “well informed” obvious. Furthermore, he would have absolutely no interest at all in anything anybody else had to say to the contrary, other than to use it as springboard for yet more his own endless output. Bludgeon, bludgeon, bludgeon, until you gave up, in exasperation. There to be one of the “shot down”. Adding to his countless victories.

Which is why I reiterate. It’s a total waste of time engaging with him on any issue of substance.

Ohh, he’s also prone to the occasional outburst of idiocy. That and intelligence not of course being mutually exclusive.


As you seem to be holding Court again ............ and expounding your opinion on your favourite defendant ..... I will post this. I wasn’t going to bother, but feel free to comment even though the reply is to Cyprusgrump, although for you it is a TLDR!

Cyprusgrump:
I rest my case!

What case?

You have done nothing but ridicule and insult and you have not provided a single comment that has credibility, only inane remarks expressing your rather academically limited opinions. That makes me very different from you! You would make a rotten Lawyer!

I will now present MY case! You failed miserably to work it out for yourself so I will explain it to you ..... of course, whether you understand it or not, is another thing! All you have to do is identify what in your opinion is wrong or inaccurate, in any of the following, with an explanation of why, to prove your point. In fact your own version of this would be interesting ...... if you have one ..... but the Official story doesn’t fit the evidence!

WTC1 Collapse.

The official explanation and the dismissal of controlled demolition being the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers by NIST/FEMA, is a cover up on the same scale as Saddam’s WMD’s and the Gulf of Tonkin incident! It is only supported by obfuscation, misrepresentation of the Laws of Physics, selective evidence, a string of downright lies and ............ an audience too stupid and ill-informed to see through the deception!

THE PROOF? It all comes down to two cameras, at two different locations recording the same event. Both these cameras clearly indicate a short but noticeable movement at exactly the same moment, about 10-11 seconds before the start of the collapse of WTC 1. That sudden movement can only be the result of a seismic shock as the two cameras were both at different physical locations. Watch the video from the start until the debris cloud then obscures all views of the top section of the tower. You may have to repeat, as events happen in very short spaces of time. The following sequence is observed. (Using camera #1 as the event time line for the time scale.)

Scene from first camera #1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfSAiDq15ys

Same scene from second camera #2 as a confirmation of the shake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYzIja6mlRs&list=PLyFB3IONZSLkeJh8vRquSVti2XgRM1uXD&index=192

1. @00.22 Camera #1 shakes noticeable for just maybe just ½ a second.

2. @00.22+ almost coincident with the movement, a sudden and significant increase in the eruption of smoke from the roof and visible North face of WTC1, is clearly visible . ....... structure/mast remains static with no visible movement.

3. @00.33 The mast appears to dip slightly ........ but still remains vertical therefore it is obviously still fixed to the hat truss.

4. @00.33+ The roof line begins to drop ...... and then descends at the same acceleration as the still attached mast, maybe ½ sec after the mast first moves.

5. @00.34+ Total top structure collapse starts from the impact point ‘UP’ and the roof accelerates down with the top structure collapsing into the impact zone. The main and virtually undamaged structure below the impact point remains static.

6. @00.37 Mast, still falling, begins to tilt toward the south.

7. @00.40 Last view of roof and top structure as it is then obscured by the cloud of dust and debris at the impact zone.

The collapse in slow motion; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5V3JTO4kmM&list=PLyFB3IONZSLkeJh8vRquSVti2XgRM1uXD&index=95

A few simple pointers:

1. Camera #1 is clearly fixed, not hand held, so it is fixed within or onto the building it is located in. The shake is slight but noticeable. When checked against similar shots from camera #2, also fixed but clearly on a tripod and viewing WTC 1’s collapse, but from a different location and angle, it indicates the shake has to be a seismic event because static camera #2 also shook at EXACTLY the same point in time, which was 10-11 seconds before the start of any movement due to structural collapse.

Both cameras responded to what can only be described as a seismic shock from a sudden and violent event. A shock wave travels much faster than a sound wave in air does and, had it been an explosion, it would have been heard and recorded. The seismic wave reached the mountings of both cameras at exactly the same moment. This ‘shock wave’ was obviously not apparent with hand held cameras.

2. Almost immediately after the camera shake, there was a clearly visible and significant increase in the volume of smoke ejecting from the structure visible at roof level and also emanating from the visible North face, but there was no immediate visible effect on the flames. This suggests that there was clearly an ‘event’ inside the structure and unseen from outside except for the tell-tale change in the smoke volume. As it had no visible effect on the flames it occurred most probably within the central core structure.

3. The mast is attached to the hat truss which in turn connects all 47 core columns and, via 8 outriggers, links it to the outer steel spandrel tube. For the mast to drop, ALL the columns supporting the Hat Truss have to have been removed simultaneously, otherwise the structure would have tilted and tumbled. (Newton) So all the 47 centre columns must somehow have been removed simultaneously, thus removing the counter force (Up-thrust) to resist the gravitational load (Down-thrust) of the mass of the truss, allowing for a near free fall gravitational acceleration.

4. The roof line descent starts about ½ a second after the mast first moves, but the mast and structure remained intact and without independent movement, indicating the Hat Truss was also still attached to the outer spandrel tube structure.

5. The top structure and the mast, remains on what appears to be a vertical axis and with no noticeable tilt until about 3 secs after the mast first moves @00:33.

6. Then @00:37, the mast begins to tilt. The top main structure is not clearly visible but appears to also start to tilt in the same direction (South) which was the face subject to the most smoke/fire, as it was the downwind side, even though it was the opposite side to the impact. This tilt could be the structure complying with Newtons Laws of motion by taking the line of least resistance, the weaker side. Had fire and/or damage been the cause, this motion would have been the first movement to be seen ..... but it wasn’t ........... it trailed behind the first visible movement by about 15 seconds!

7. The whole top structure accelerated at near free fall acceleration, still appearing to rotate to the South, until it disappeared into the debris cloud.

8. The collapse of the top structure is clearly seen as a bottom-up collapse. There is no view that shows the remaining bottom section in motion at all, only the accelerating debris field. The assumption can only be that the lower and structurally intact section was a top down collapse. But neither the collapse of the top section or the bottom section debris front, showed any significant reduction in the free fall acceleration until it hit the debris pile toward ground zero.

Conclusion:

Had the collapse been CAUSED BY fires softening the damaged steel to the point it became malleable and started bending, then, according to both Bazant and NIST and also as defined by Newton’s Three Laws of Motion, there would have been a progressive gravitational collapse unarguably causing a tilt toward the North side of the building, that being the impact point and line of least resistance to the collapse. WTC1 would have quite likely toppled according to Bazant’s reports rather than a collapse of the complete structure, as the lower structure was undamaged, was designed for a greater load and was not subject to fire.

This tilt of the top section did happen, but not until 3-4 seconds after the first visible signs of collapse and also to the South, when the mast dropped and after the main structure started to descend vertically about ½ sec. later at almost free fall acceleration. Therefore as the structural failure of the columns started after the collapse when the top section toppled @ 00:37, it WAS NOT and COULD NOT have been, the initiator of the collapse as promoted by the official conspiracy theory.

If the collapse had been due to the failure of the 47 centre columns that then resulted in the free fall collapse seen in the videos, all 47 columns would have been required to fail simultaneously within milliseconds, otherwise a fall to the line of least resistance (A tilt.) would have occurred. (Bazant/Newton)

(This symmetrical and free fall collapse scenario is covered in detail by Dr Hulsey in his report on the collapse of WTC7 for Alaska University.)


The instantaneous collapse scenario (the official conspiracy theory) apparently due only to gravitational progressive failure, can be nothing but an impossibility as the structure did not topple and ‘something’ somehow managed to destroy all the 47 columns on multiple floors simultaneously and in sequence. Firstly from the impact zone upward to bring down the top section, and from the impact zone downward to bring down the undamaged bottom section of the tower. This is the epitome of 'CONTROL' and is an impossible scenario, defies the Laws of Physics without there being some sort of physical intervention ..... such as some method of controlled demolition.

The seismic ‘event’ that occurred at @00.22 is unexplained but was clearly big enough to initiate a seismic ground wave displayed as movement of two static camera’s .... maybe more. It has to be more than just coincidence that this ‘event’ was coincident with the increase in the amount of smoke emanating from within the structure. It would also be rather naive to believe that this ‘event’ was not in turn related to the initiation of the collapse just 10-11 seconds later. This ‘event’ preceded all movement seen before the collapse commenced @00.33 - 34!

Thus, structural damage from the aircraft impact, fuel fires, followed by office fires could NOT have been the reason WTC1 collapsed or, based on probability, for the collapse of WTC2 and WTC7 either!


The two videos are simple raw, visual, undeniable evidence and need no interpretation
. They cannot be even remotely regarded as either ‘fake news’ or a ‘conspiracy theory’ and the observations are factually correct and based on simple logic. It shows without any doubt that the official claim CANNOT BE TRUE! The understanding of that fact boils down to simply knowing how to measure time, having a basic knowledge of Physics and the application of Newton’s Laws of Motion, set against an event sequence determination time line ................ and some common sense! :roll:



Of course Robin, of course.... :roll:

Nurse! The screens! :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
cyprusgrump
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:35 pm
Location: Pissouri, Cyprus

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Paphitis » Thu Jan 23, 2020 12:07 pm

Robin Hood wrote:
Paphitis wrote:Guys, the guy is clearly a lunatic and can't be reasoned with.

JUST IGNORE HIM!

In fact feel sorry for him. He has serious issues. probably needs help.

We are partly to blame for giving these conspiracists the airtime they clearly do not deserve.


But you can't refute what I say can you? :lol: :lol:

You don't have a credible argument or even an opinion to express, because what you have between your ears is full of conspiracy theories and propaganda, most of it proven to be so ...... but you ignore anything you don't understand.


The facts are very clear and the books of history remain adamant. You are pushing shit uphill.

I don't need to respond to ANY of your drivel. I wouldn't even dare give one iota of credence to your ramblings by responding to them as if your ideas or opinions were serious.

You don't get a podium from me sunshine! But keep rambling as it can be quite entertaining.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25684
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: The impending war against Iran thread

Postby Londonrake » Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:56 pm

Paphitis wrote:Guys, the guy is clearly a lunatic and can't be reasoned with.

JUST IGNORE HIM!

In fact feel sorry for him. He has serious issues. probably needs help.

We are partly to blame for giving these conspiracists the airtime they clearly do not deserve.


I appreciate the sentiment and agree absolutely with the “issues” comment. He’s a man with huge chips on the shoulder and a pile of paranoid resentments. But, no, I don’t feel sorry for him on forums. Which is why.......... :wink:


Holding court isn’t too easy on a small iPad in a hotel room on the other side of the planet. It’s even tomorrow! Ain’t the internet wonderful? :mrgreen: .

Actually, you are my only “defendant”. Even Lordo didn’t achieve that status.

Not exactly TLDR. It’s just I’ve seen, or heard, it all from you before.

Do you not even understand your own MO? Let me help.

You first hijack an OP. Or, pounce upon a comment, in order to change the entire context to one of your obsessions (the US, West, Jews - I would incorporate anti-semitism, Israel and banking as sub-categories there) you’ve had the hots for 9/11 as long as I can recall. In this case you jumped upon a single sentence comparison made by CG, on the filming of the Iranian missile strike and 9/11, turning it into reams of your views on the latter. As always you discount any sources from others as being inadmissibly untrustworthy. There, you’re attempting to confine any discussion purely to areas which are supportive of your agenda. You then drag your unwitting victim down into the long grass where you smother them to death in mind numbing trivia or semantics. Minute by minute analysis (Here/Skripal) Newton’s laws. Etc, etc. It’s all though - as ever - CT BS.

After making Herculean efforts to “prove” that the WTC was a very sophisticated inside job, when asked the simple, straightforward question “ Do you think the US blew them up?” you go into a hissy fit and post another book. :roll: Because, even in that self loathing mind of yours, I suspect you understand the absurdity of the idea. So, the inside job becomes down to “them”. :roll:

Your earlier “Do you honestly believe that a plan like this was all carried out by a handful of Muslims ...... and nobody noticed?” Pretty well sums up your “open minded” attitude and approach.

Finally, you’ve never seemed to understand that the vast majority of your posts have always been acrimoniously directed at those who disagree with your views. You’re a Troll and rely totally on being fed.

In that respect Paphitis is right. We are your oxygen.
Londonrake
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1909
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Elections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests