# Flight 93 Responders

### Re: Flight 93

KLook wrote:Lets clear that up a bit. What is being said and ignored is that the speed of free fall is a known rate. The speed of gravity. If the buildings "pancaked" as the armchair experts and cover artists suggest, it would have to be slower as the resistance of each floor would slow the descent. In a measurable way. I will give you one building, I will argue about two, I will not hear of three buildings falling in perfect free fall into their own footprint EXACTLY like controlled demolition. Get with the program people. It is statistically impossible. There would have been a staggered effect as the floors impacted the floors below. But it just comes straight down with a roar.(And the sound of high explosives going off)
Just throw out all the other problems and focus on the physics of the perfect collapse of 3 buildings.

Kevin

Someone here dissed this video, but if you study this very closely you will see what is going on, this is not a collapse , the building is being blown apart and at a pace with the falling debris. Gravity cannot do that.

grumpy

### Re: Flight 93

KLook wrote:Lets clear that up a bit. What is being said and ignored is that the speed of free fall is a known rate. The speed of gravity. If the buildings "pancaked" as the armchair experts and cover artists suggest, it would have to be slower as the resistance of each floor would slow the descent. In a measurable way. I will give you one building, I will argue about two, I will not hear of three buildings falling in perfect free fall into their own footprint EXACTLY like controlled demolition. Get with the program people. It is statistically impossible. There would have been a staggered effect as the floors impacted the floors below. But it just comes straight down with a roar.(And the sound of high explosives going off)
Just throw out all the other problems and focus on the physics of the perfect collapse of 3 buildings.

Kevin

BTW Kevin , very well put.. thanks..
grumpy

### Re: Flight 93

grumpy wrote:
franco b wrote:You have given us a lot to think about. I can't understand why the penthouse on building 7 collapsed first. The entire inner structure would have to be destroyed.

The inner core was taken out first which is why the PH fell first, this allows the outer walls to fold in on the debris pile, Classic demo, I'll find a photo.

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/v ... O&fr=moz35
grumpy

grumpy

### Re: Flight 93

I found this to be a good read, basically the buildings were made as cheaply & quickly as possible using methods that were new. For all intents it was a prefab building using different suppliers for everything from steel to fabrication, even the concrete floors were prefabbed slabs as I had said earlier & was told they were poured. There were also many modifications which cut floors & installed additional stairways between some floors but everything went thru the series of center support from top to bottom & material was decreased at different levels going up. I just wonder now if this method was used in any other buildings & if they are being inspected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_o ... ade_Center
samhill

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

### Re: Flight 93

grumpy wrote:how did this happen...

Because news reporters never jump to conclusions and confirm what they are reporting.
Richard S.

Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

### Re: Flight 93

KLook wrote:Lets clear that up a bit. What is being said and ignored is that the speed of free fall is a known rate. The speed of gravity. If the buildings "pancaked" as the armchair experts and cover artists suggest, it would have to be slower as the resistance of each floor would slow the descent. In a measurable way. I will give you one building, I will argue about two, I will not hear of three buildings falling in perfect free fall into their own footprint EXACTLY like controlled demolition. Get with the program people. It is statistically impossible. There would have been a staggered effect as the floors impacted the floors below. But it just comes straight down with a roar.(And the sound of high explosives going off)
Just throw out all the other problems and focus on the physics of the perfect collapse of 3 buildings.

Kevin

EXACTLY.....not once....but THREE times !! I totally agree.
If ppl really understood how the towers were designed/constructed...they would realize the impossibility of how fast they came down.... Mathmatically impossible.
Rigar

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker A 150
Coal Size/Type: anthracite rice
Stove/Furnace Make: Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: A 150 warm air furnace

### Re: Flight 93

As the floors collapse it adds to the weight of everything above increasing the pressure & rate of collapse, these floors were never designed for anything but load bearing of files, furniture & such which with all that particle board & good quality files were probably maxed out already. And the buildings didn't totally collapse within themselves just look at all the damage done to the surroundings, the Bankers Trust Building was one that comes to mind & even that if I recall right had increased damage below the initial impact for the same reasons increased weight as gravity helps pull all new & old damaged material down.
samhill

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

### Re: Flight 93

the acceleration of gravity is a constant.
objects in free fall have no 'weight'...but do have mass.
as falling floors impacted a floor below...the would meet momemtary resistance (very brief)...but resistance just the same
...so...the ONLY factor that would accelerate the velocity of a falling object is TIME.
... THEY FELL TOO FAST
Rigar

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker A 150
Coal Size/Type: anthracite rice
Stove/Furnace Make: Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: A 150 warm air furnace

### Re: Flight 93

Rigar, if you read how those towers were constructed you can imagine how the towers for lack of a better word were disassembled on the way down. I know once again I'm wasting my time, people will believe what they want & only will accept evidence that goes along with what they want to hear & that's everyone's right but don't forget for all those who believe that only the left is evil & that I'm full of crap by saying follow the money, the only one's that could have possibly pulled this off is the one's in power at that time & the others that stood to gain are the very one's that are now "people" & will do nothing but make things better in the country & deserve a free ride.
samhill

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

### Re: Flight 93

Rigar wrote:
as falling floors impacted a floor below...the would meet momemtary resistance (very brief)...but resistance just the same

Go drop a cinder block on an empty soda can. The resistance becomes irrelevant.
Richard S.

Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

### Re: Flight 93

samhill wrote:Rigar, if you read how those towers were constructed you can imagine how the towers for lack of a better word were disassembled on the way down. I know once again I'm wasting my time, people will believe what they want & only will accept evidence that goes along with what they want to hear & that's everyone's right but don't forget for all those who believe that only the left is evil & that I'm full of crap by saying follow the money, the only one's that could have possibly pulled this off is the one's in power at that time & the others that stood to gain are the very one's that are now "people" & will do nothing but make things better in the country & deserve a free ride.

... I don't think you're full of crap... or wasting your time.
..... but my biggest problem with official reports on how the building fell is :
A.... their rate of fall
B.... and it happened THREE times.
I certainly do not claim to know how or why they came down like they did... I just can't get my head around the physics of it all...
as far as the money trail.... that is even more disturbing.... and deserves its own thread
Rigar

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker A 150
Coal Size/Type: anthracite rice
Stove/Furnace Make: Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: A 150 warm air furnace

### Re: Flight 93

Richard S. wrote:
Rigar wrote:
as falling floors impacted a floor below...the would meet momemtary resistance (very brief)...but resistance just the same

Go drop a cinder block on an empty soda can. The resistance becomes irrelevant.

... go compare an apple to an orange... you'll see a distinct difference in color
Rigar

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker A 150
Coal Size/Type: anthracite rice
Stove/Furnace Make: Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: A 150 warm air furnace

### Re: Flight 93

...with all due respect Richard
Rigar

Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker A 150
Coal Size/Type: anthracite rice
Stove/Furnace Make: Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: A 150 warm air furnace

### Re: Flight 93

Rigar wrote:
... go compare an apple to an orange... you'll see a distinct difference in color

It's very good comparison. At least the top quarter of those buildings are in free fall for the initial failure.
Richard S.

Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite