Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]William Seger
(11,294 posts)Gordon Ross disappeared from the "truth movement" in 2007 when his "Momentum Transfer Analysis" collapsed at near-freefall acceleration when a gigantic error was found: In his "energy balance" analysis, he counted the kinetic energy lost in the inelastic collision of the falling section as one line item, and energy lost to deforming steel and pulverizing concrete as separate line items. In fact, the kinetic energy lost in the inelastic collision is the energy that went into deforming steel and pulverizing concrete -- that's where the kinetic energy went. With that one error corrected (even without correcting several other less significant errors), his analysis actually shows that total collapse was unavoidable. It must have been pretty embarrassing for a Master Engineer to make a blunder like that.
But regarding this video, there are three general classes of errors: inaccurate observations; imaginative and unsubstantiated speculations for things that have simple explanations; and ignoring facts that don't fit his speculations. He begins his argument with a great example of all three, starting with the inaccurate observation that the antenna started falling before the corner of the roof, which he concludes "must" be because the 47 core columns were destroyed first. In reality, that's an optical illusion caused by the fact the collapse began with the tower tipping away from that camera, which can be seen in videos from different angles. In fact, it is well known (and was known when Ross made this video) that the perimeter columns on one side were observed to be bowing inward for at least 20 minutes prior to the collapse, and that the collapse began when those columns buckled inward -- behavior which simply cannot be explained by Ross' demolition hypothesis. One might think that a Master Engineer would also wonder why there were no sounds or seismic waves anywhere near the magnitude that would be produced by enough explosives to destroy the core columns -- not just once, but every three floors according to Ross. And in fact, it is known that most of the columns in the building were simply broken at the column splices because they were pushed aside when the floors that held them vertical were simply ripped away by the collapsing debris. It must take a lot of determination to convince yourself that silent, sucking explosives is the best explanation.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)