Davis Straub; Idiot Statist, Endless Wars & Tyranny

[Free]

SPEED OF COLLAPSE is all that I am asking you to consider.

Why is this so hard for you to acknowledge?

Everything on the surface of the earth experiences an acceleration of gravity of about 9.8 m/s/s (that's from my memory). Are you saying that the buildings experienced an acceleration greater than that?

The NIST report ~finally~ had to acknowledge, by their own measurements that WTC Building 7, the building that was not hit by a plane and collapsed around 5:20pm, 20 minutes ~after~ its collapse was erroneously reported by the BBC, fell ~at~ the speed of gravity for a distance of eight stories at the onset of its collapse into its own footprint.

~At the speed of gravity~ not greater than the speed of gravity.

No space aliens.. no flying monkeys.. no JFK..

Sorry, none of those speculations are addressed at http://ae911truth.org/

[Bob Kuczewski]

I'm not trying to battle head to head with you Bob. I'm honestly trying to find an understanding of how the obvious holes in the official "conspiracy" theory are swallowed by the American public, leading us to accept a horrible police state tyranny.

I fear the horrible police state tyranny as well. Whenever we demand 100% safety (whether from terrorists or motorists or hamburgers) we end up losing some of our liberty. That concerns me greatly.

On the other hand, I have no doubt that there are people who want to destroy us. That's been happening between people since the dawn of history (and well before). So we do have to strike a balance that protects both our liberty and our people. I think radiating our citizens in airports while our borders remain wide open doesn't strike that balance well at all.

But to address your topic, I can argue those points without needing to resort to any "inside job" regarding 9/11.

[Bob Kuczewski]

~At the speed of gravity~ not greater than the speed of gravity.

First of all, there isn't a "speed of gravity", there's an "acceleration of gravity". Gravity accelerates any mass within its field. So the "speed" of a falling object is the integral of its acceleration and that speed grows with time (goes faster and faster).

So whenever anyone mentions the "speed of gravity", I'm already doubtful that they understand what they're saying.

But let's skip all the guessing games. Please tell me - in your own words - what you think happened. Please give me your best theory and we can discuss it. I'm not against discussing it, but I'm just doubtful whether we'll find ourselves in any greater agreement after the discussion than we were before.

So please put down your best theory and we can start the discussion.

Thanks.

[Free]

~At the speed of gravity~ not greater than the speed of gravity.

First of all, there isn't a "speed of gravity", there's an "acceleration of gravity". Gravity accelerates any mass within its field. So the "speed" of a falling object is the integral of its acceleration and that speed grows with time (goes faster and faster).

So the "speed" of a falling object is the integral of its acceleration and that speed grows with time (goes faster and faster).

Correct, if there is no resistance.
We aren't talking about bowling balls falling in free air.
We are talking about massive steel core collumns being the resistance that you are somehow ignoring.

http://ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html

[Free]

So please put down your best theory and we can start the discussion.

Thanks.

My theory is that the "official" theories.. (as in all of the several that have been promulgated) are scientifically proven impossibilities.

Buildings can not fall at anywhere near free fall speed without those pesky inner steel collumns (resistance) being removed beforehand so as to accomplish that task.

I have no theories of space monkeys or ill rated Cessna pilots altering the known laws of physics on that day.

Arguments on both sides that are above your and my pay grade are located here
http://ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html
http://ae911truth.org/

I side with the experts there.

[Bob Kuczewski]

OK, I spent 18 minutes and 15 seconds watching that video.

They seem to be claiming that it had to be a controlled demolition. If that's true, then why bother to have planes flying into the building? Why not just say the terrorists planted the explosives needed for a controlled demolition?

I'm looking for a complete theory that's more plausible than what is commonly believed. You still haven't given me one. You can't just say that it seems unlikely for this to happen or that to happen. You have to give me something that's MORE likely.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Buildings can not fall at anywhere near free fall speed without those pesky inner steel collumns (resistance) being removed beforehand so as to accomplish that task.

Have you ever considered how a down tube buckles under pressure? At first it bends imperceptibly until it reaches a critical point. Then it buckles with almost no resistance at all.

Again, please give me a complete theory that's more plausible than believing that the planes brought down the buildings alone. Thanks.

[Free]

Bob, are you still employed in the military industrial complex?

[Free]

I'm looking for a complete theory that's more plausible than what is commonly believed.

Demolition by some undefined means is more plausible than accepting the latest official conspiracy theory that says that known laws of physics were somehow altered on that day.

Have you ever considered how a down tube buckles under pressure? At first it bends imperceptibly until it reaches a critical point. Then it buckles with almost no resistance at all.

Of course! That explains everything! Not..

Again, please give me a complete theory that's more plausible than believing that the planes brought down the buildings alone. Thanks.

The 'official' conspiracy theory that you cling to doesn't even claim that 2 planes brought down 3 buildings alone. Yet, in your mind you have made that great leap of faith while at the same time demand a complete, plausible theory giving all the answers and a written diagram to prove otherwise.

My question is why is it that people are so gullible in believing a government that has repeatedly been proven to lie and murder its own citizens, time and again?

Give me a plausible theory for that, please.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Bob, are you still employed in the military industrial complex?

I have been in my own business (mostly consulting) for about a decade. In that business, I've done work for schools (as an educational expert), private non-military-related companies (writing software), and for companies that you might term "the military industrial complex". At this time, I have not had any contract work at all for over a year and a half. That's the time that I've been dedicating to my personal life and to building the US Hawks Hang Gliding Association.