@doniston. This response will need two parts:
- the first part sets up the scenery for the explanations and covers some preliminary bits.
- my responses to your "Four Main Issues" will be in the second part - a later post.
Whether or not I believe your tale is of little importance. HOWEVER you make the claim "it is relevant to this thread." IMNSHO you are spot on - it is very relevant because it shows that you are proficient at forming and processing "mental images" - you can operate in the "visual" domain to understand the 3D mechanics of "how it happened". Very many 9/11 discussers cannot do that. In fact I would claim that most of the big issue misunderstandings about WTC 9/11 collapses have arisen because many of the engineers and technical people involved are strong on numeric skills and weak in visualising skills. I am strongly biased towards "visual". But let me not drift too far into the side track - I want to address the technical points you raise. You have a lot of true bits of visual there - I want to splice them into their proper place in the movie "WTC Collapse - What Really Happened".
Very interesting experiences and thanks for posting them but let's focus on how your visual imagery skills are relevant to comprehending WTC collapses.
(Wait for the next post - if you want the answers to your "four main issues" - the following are a few point from the preceding quoted section.
The bits indexed
A, B, C... are about our similar thinking processes:
A Exactly my first step - Visualise WTF is going on?
B Agreed - "SAW" meaning "formed a mental image of" - I prefer to shut my eyes so I can "see" clearer.
C I do the same myself when reading other peoples' posts - especially when they are "numbers biased" and don't have a clear "view" of what they are trying to describe.
The bits indexed
T1, T2, T3....etc are technical aspects that we will need to get clear at some stage - my preliminary comments follow:
T1 We will need to develop a broad "view" of how the various stages progressed - then you can revisit this aspect.
T2 "being done" - the crash was over in fractions of a second. So a valid view would be "damage that had been done" - seen after that event OR you are visualising in high speed camera mode.
T3 The OOS ("Open Office Space") was clear of stanchions - that was the deliberate design to give unobstructed clear space for the offices. The "stanchions" (columns - vertical members of structure) - were in the outer perimeter walls AND in the central service core - bathrooms, stairs and lifts area - oops "elevators" - pardon my UK/AU English bias.
T4 Five is about right for the vertical dimension of the "impact and fire zone - minimum three and bits affected five .
T5 The broad picture is OK. We need to work on some details. This is the main feature of the "initiation stage" i.e. "How did the cascade failure progress?"
T6, T7, T8 Yes. We will need to work on that - it another aspect of "How did the cascade failure progress?"
T9 WTC2 Top Block tilted over 20[SUP]o[/SUP] and involved "many" floors on the low side. Another aspect of "How did the cascade failure progress?"
I'll leave it there and start on Part 2 - my response to your "Four Main Issues".
If you want to do some research go to
this thread Start with my post #1075 on that page. (And ignore KokomoJojo's nonsense - my stuff and Kat Dorman's is correct - Koko was trying to deceive truthers.)
