Cairenn
Senior Member.
When you only cherry pick something to get the answer you want, your conclusions will often be wrong
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center
debunked, let's move on
Not only that but there were OTHER seismographs in the area and I notice that they are totally ignored. I wonder why?
FACT: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."
The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.
On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear — misleadingly — as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves — blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower — start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center
debunked, let's move on
Not only that but there were OTHER seismographs in the area and I notice that they are totally ignored. I wonder why?