Cataloging the crimes of 9/11

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

September 11th Chips Oxide Earthquakes and Judy Wood

Comment on Carlo Landolfi's answer to There are people who claim that the September 11 attacks were a False Flag Operation. Do such claims have any merit or evidence to support them? · View Parent

Dan Plesse

Mon

Problem #1

The only recordings on the graphs so far are explosives, because quarry blasts as you know they use explosives, right? I doubt all this quarry blast activity just so happens to be on 9/11.

Notice at #18 - #22 two-three things happen 1. the cause is dropped i.e “very weak” and the location is trimmed i.e 40.71 and 74.01

Depth is “Zero” when depth could be < 0.1 they use less then sign! NOT DETAILED

All this editing is clear signs of criminal activity!

problem #2

One problem with your data is that every earthquake should have a detailed GPS location. Since each earthquake labeled “quarry blast” does not have a accompanying GPS location signal, you can’t rule what it is unless you do have those details.. Judy is writing in “quarry blast” right? For Example 40.711??? and 74.013??? i.e the question marks are missing details Judy didn’t provide, right?. Your data shows 40.71 -74.01 is Broadway & Cortlandt another “1″ on each data point array would have the signal placed right under the Twin towers. Notice they cropped off numbers or trimmed off location details but only for the towers. HOWEVER if you provided “40.711 and -74.013” this gives you WTC Cortlandt, New York, NY 10006, USA i.e you are basically under the towers.

problem #3

Top graph is PAL and everything is larger so 100.00 K on BRNJ graph means its smaller gain. So you wrong with the K 100.00 gain concept.

problem #4
no “quarry” exists at 40.71 -74.01 Broadway & Cortlandt St, New York, NY 10007, USA or under the Twin Towers and more details numbers would place the blast right at the World Trade Center location i.e the explosions i.e explosives and are not “quarry blasts” on 9/11. “quarry blasts” use explosives! The starting time #18 at 11:00 AM is after the trade center fell. 11:15 is BRNJ PAL 11:20 or seems edited two different times that close? . BRNJ should have been later at 11:20 and PAL should have 11:15 because its closer to WTC. So they deleted the spike on PAL. All other signals on each graph match perfectly! in time and size but ONE! Can you see that. You keep pointing to other graphs. Stop doing that.

Problem #5 No oxide was reported the USGS in their dust study.
A search of that document returned ZERO RESULTS!!

The chips however DID contain Copper Oxide. So WHY IS Judy Wood conflate the Chips with the WTC dust? Why would she do that? Can you answer that? thanks Why did Judy leave out the cause of blasts #18 - 22? and trim the GPS numbers?

Carlo Landolfi

20h ago

Problem #1

Yes, in a quarry they use explosives for sure and they use them frequently! Why not on 9/11? And what are you trying to prove, as those explosions happened after both Towers were destroyed. Do you claim they were destroying WTC7?

“Notice at #18 - #22 two-three things happen 1. the cause is dropped “very weak” and the location is trimmed i.e 40.71 and 74.01.″ I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

If you read the NCSTAR 1–9 Vol.2 it’s all explained. The signals were too weak to be significant and to be reported precisely (depth and magnitude). (too weak for who, PAL Station?)

problem #2

Every seismic signal registered DOES have detailed data. Those latitude and longitude and pretty precise. The data is not coming from Dr. Wood but from Columbia University and summarized on the NIST report.

Correct, the source of those (weak) signals are coming from the WTC as they are the origin/source of those (weak signals) and are happening late in the afternoon. So? What’s so strange?

problem #3

Please prove that a higher gain results in smaller seismic signal amplification. If you do so, only then I’m wrong.

problem #4

Of course no qurry exists at those coordinates, because it is the location of the WTC. Please read the table carefully. You are seeing ghosts regards to the PAL vs. BRNJ seismic charts. As a matter of fact I see other signals which are recorded by PAL but not by BRNJ and viceversa. And So what? That all depends on the earth composition, on the seismic instrumetation (if already told you the stations did not have the same sensitivity, etc) and on other complex factors. Are you a seismologist to explain it correctly for me? The signals do not match perfectly!

You say I’m referring to another seismic graph, then please provide the link to where you took the PAL vs. BRNJ graphs.

You say they edited/deleted the spikes. What for if they happened after the buildings where destroyed?

problem #5

It is true if you search the USGS fact sheet no iron oxides are found but then why did Steven Jones find iron oxides in the dust? Don’t you think it’s normal to find rust in the dust coming from the steel which made up the buildings? Check this out World Trade Center USGS environmental assessment. Here you are: iron oxide found Fe2O3- iron rust.

· Upvote

· Downvote

· Report

Dan Plesse

16m ago

WTC 7 was reported as being “ATTACKED” on the news.

What else would be “attacking” WTC 7 but explosives?

The GPS location details were trimmed enough so you can’t find out for sure. Do you have the rest GPS numbers?

Problem #2 They trimmed the GPS i,e shorten the length of GPS signal so you can’t find the exact location of the signal. i.e WTC 1 or WTC 2 WTC 6 or WTC 7

Judy wood then removed the CAUSE OF SIGNAL! with “ “very weak” in her graph.

problem #3 look at the two graphs this proves it btw

please provide the link to where you took the PAL vs. BRNJ graphs. Select 2001
LCSN Catalog Archive

Select 2001
LCSN Catalog Archive

“You say they edited/deleted the spikes.” one spike one spike
15:15 spike of BRNJ was deleted

“It is true if you search the USGS fact sheet no iron oxides are found but then why did Steven Jones find iron oxides in the dust?” HE DID FIND IT IN THE DUST. HE FOUND IT THE CHIPS !!!!! JESUS

Fe2O3 is Hematite its NOT even RED! Hematite

There are several different oxides of iron, with different fractions of oxygen. They are Fe0, Fe2O3, and Fe3O4. Rust consists mostly of Fe2O3, with additional water molecules attached. There are several forms of Fe2O3, and a common mineral composed of Fe2O3 is called hematite, which is a shiny-blackish mineral.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-chemical-formula-for-rust

Iron + Water + Oxygen = Rust

i.e. 4 Fe(s) + 6 H2O(l) + 3 O2(g) → 4 Fe(OH)3(s)

Then Fe(OH)3 dehydrates to produce Fe2O3.nH2O(s).

Thereby, the chemical formula for rust is Fe2O3.nH2O.

So you didn’t even get that right!

Zero

hello

Carlo Landolfi

23m ago

Oh yes, the news said it so it must be true! Sure!

The locations are not GPS but latitude and longitude and were not trimmed, cut, or anything else! I don’t have the rest because thay are complete and are the available ones provided by Columbia University and reported in the NIST report.

They couldn’t find the exactly location, so they assigned events 18–22 roughly to be at the WTC (40.71 N -74.01 E) because the signal was too weak and not recorded by all the stations. Work has to be done to determine where a signal originates and it is not easy at all!

Your seismic graph proves nothing and why did no one ever mention this to NIST? No one from the truth movement raised this alleged editing out. Is it your original discovery? I don’t even know what your trying to prove!

Again, that data is not Dr. Wood’s data, she did not remove anything! You are wasting my time and yours.

I cannot believe you are honestly doing what your doing. If your are so sure Columbia University and/or NIST edited the data then I suggest you sue them just as Dr. Wood did. Good luck!

· Upvote

· Downvote

· Report

Dan Plesse

Just now

1. Oh yes, the news said it so it must be true! Sure! BRNJ graphics back the BCC news report up which was the point! Early news reports are correct, not the news in general. You are grouping the two together. Stop doing that!

2. GPS coordinates are most commonly expressed as latitude and longitude

3. latitude and longitude numbers are trimmed and no this is NOT true “I don’t have the rest because thay are complete and are the available ones provided by Columbia University and reported in the NIST report.”

NO COMPLETE NUMBERS EXIST, PERIOD !!!!

4. Your seismic graph proves nothing. Answer not my graphs!

5. ” No one from the truth movement raised this alleged editing out. “ They don’t do much of anything. Sorry!

6. “They couldn’t find the exactly location?” really and you believe that all stations in NY could find the location. All 13 stations! FOR is 12.51.19 miles away!

AMNH 5.15 miles away
CPNY 6.15 miles away
CNY 8.37 miles away
CUNY 10.19 miles away
FOR 12.51.19 miles away
MONJ 13.25 miles away
N61a 13.25 miles away

NIST, USGS, Judy Wood and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory couldn’t find the details with all these closer stations?

I published the third number already BTW

40.711 and 74.013

somehow you missed that. So the third number does exist. The forth number and fifth number does not exit. You are only on the second number.

Others might have forth and fifth digital latitude and longitude coordinates .

Monday, November 5, 2018

The Missing Seismology Mystery of 9/11

World Trade 9/11 Earthquake Catalog

9/11 BRNJ Verses 9/11 PAL Station 5 - 6 HZ

Dan Plesse

17h ago

They wrote “local explosion” write on the 9/11 seismic graph and only large explosions could only be explosives showing up 29 miles away so Dr. Wood is wrong.

...

(more)

Carlo Landolfi

3h ago

Again, explosions does not mean EXPLOSIVES at the WTC !! Do you understand this simple fact!?

I suggest you read carefully NIST NCSTAR 1–9 Vol.2 beginning from page of 311 of 382 (pdf format) in which the sesmic data is discussed. You will learn many useful concepts. The direct download link is here: https://ws680.nist.gov/publicati...

This seismic chart is from page 314 of 382.

Below the copy & paste from page 312 of the Report which explains the graph above and the purpose of this study:”

So, with this study NIST was trying to identify the sources of the signals between WTC 1 destruction and .

The seismic chart below is taken directly from Dr. Wood’s book on page 67. It is the same chart adapted from figure B-2 of the pdf Report (the same chart you see above).

So, the signal YOU SO STRONGLY INSIST BEING ABSENT from PAL but present in BRNJ is clearly visibile in both the original and adapted charts at 15:15 EDT.

Furthermore, the source of the signal is identified as a distant earthquake (event #6) with a magnitude of 6.5 almost superimposed with a quarry blast (event #8) with magnitude 1.3.

All those events (from #6 to #22) are recorded on the chart and reported on table B-3 of page 323 of the pdf Report which I paste here below and explained starting on page 322:

So, again, no mysteries here !!! The “local explosions” are indeed local quarry blasts !! And, note that events #6 and #8 are registered almost at the same time but event #6 actually originates almost 20 minutes before event #8. The same applies to event#17, the distant Fox Islands earthquake.

You can 1) acknowledge to yourself you need more in depth research and study or 2) you can continue on your tracks spreading your disinformation. It’s up to you…

And it’s not even clear wht you are trying to prove with your claim of the alleged missing 15:15 EDT signal at PAL: that explosions caused by planted explosives went off after the collapse of WTC !?!? And what for, if the building where already destroyed!?! With what purpose, to destroy WTC 7

By the way, I took the time to write this comment and retrieve the information for all the curious readers who are willing to study and take time to understand what happened on 9/11. I did not do this for YOU, as you just seem interested in discrediting Dr. Wood with nonsense and ridiculous claims. What is your agenda may I ask?

· Upvote

· Downvote

· Report

Dan Plesse

20m ago

One problem with your data is that every quake should have a detailed GPS location. For Example 40.711??? and 74.013??? the question marks are missing details. Your data shows 40.71 -74.01 Broadway & Cortlandt another “1″ on each data point array would have placed you under the towers. Notice they cropped off numbers or trimmed off location details but only for the towers. 40.711 and -74.013 gives you WTC Cortlandt, New York, NY 10006, USA basically
you are under the towers. problem #2

no “quarry” exists at 40.71 -74.01 Broadway & Cortlandt St, New York, NY 10007, USA more details numbers would place the blast right on top of the World Trade Center location i.e the explosions i.e explosives and not “quarry blasts” on 9/11. “quarry blasts” use explosives! The starting time #18 at 11:00 AM is after the trade center fell.

Problem #3 No oxide was reported the USGS in their dust study.
A search of that document returned ZERO RESULTS!!

The chips however DID contain Copper Oxide. So the Judy is conflating Chips with dust, why would she do that?

Carlo Landolfi

6h ago

I’m afraid you need to do your reaserch more thoroughly !!

The patent you are referring to is not for Thermite, as it does not use iron oxide as main ingredient, but for Nano-engineered Explosives as the title indicates. Please check here: United States Patent: 5505799. There is no mention of iron oxide in that patent, however iron oxide (which is the main ingredient of thermite/thermate) and aluminum were found in the dust !! So stop claiming such nonsense and spreading disinformation please!

In the video Dr. Wood is not claiming thermite was used or found on 9/11.

What Dr. Wood is explaining is that the “ingredients of thermite” (iron oxide and aluminum powder) were indeed found in the dust because the buildings were made of iron oxide (rusted steel) and aluminum powder (aluminum cladding) !!.

Basically, she observes that the building’s main constituents were found in the dust and that it would be very strange if they weren’t !! She is speaking against the use of thermite on 9/11. I hope you do get it…

I see you don’t comment on the photos/article debunking the incorrect claims that the angle cut columns were done using thermite and not thermic lances/oxyacetylene torches. Nor do you comment on my observations regarding the alleged extremely hot rubble. Interesting…

· Upvote

· Downvote

· Report

Dan Plesse

just now

Dr. Judy Wood is wrong because No iron oxide powder was found by the USGS dust study or Nano sized Aluminum . The only object that was found and was studied was layered chips that contained copper oxide which should not have been found. The copper oxide is included in the patent Nanoengineered explosives US-Patent Nr. 5.505.799. US5505799A - Nanoengineered explosives - Google Patents

ingredients of thermite was never found in the dust, since the chips are separate objects and the dust studied by USGS http://file:///C:/Users/zilo5648/Downloads/fs-050-02_508.pdf

Search results Iron Oxide was zero! Dr. Wood never talks about the chips because she is a fraud!

angle cut columns was seen by first responders so they existed before the iron workers got to the site. Another false claim by you!

What caused the “thud”? Why are you using official account from PAL station? What about the draft reports? What did they say? What did the other stations say about the event?

9/11 Determining the source characteristics of explosions near the Earth

Carlo Landolfi

1h ago

The seismic signals from Palisades, NY, are the official data used by NIST in their report. Palisades is also the closest seismographic station to the WTC complex so the choice is a natural one as the signals would be larger and hold more information as they would be less dampened compared to farther seismic stations such as BRNJ.

I have not checked what the draft reports say compared to the final (official report) but I don’t think they changed the location of the data source.

I don’t know if Dr. Wood analysed the signals from other seismic stations, but as she filed a Request for Corrections to NIST, and later sued the contractors appointed by NIST to help draft the report, it is normal she addresses the data that NIST present and discuss.

I see you have written Michael Pasyanos a question, did you get an answer? And what are you trying to prove? What is your point? I believe you support the nuclear demolition theory.

Please read this report by Columbia University which is running the 34 seismographs including BRNJ: https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/.../WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf.

I quote from the report: “The modern stations record over a broad frequency band; some like PAL sample three components of ground motion, but others, only the vertical.” So PAL is probably the best choice for analysis.

Quote “Seismic waves from Collapse 2 were recorded by at least 13 stations ranging in distance from 34 km to Lisbon, NH at 428 km. The magnitude of the event was only 2.3. The predominant signals at distances greater than 200 km are short-period surface waves.”

Quote “Surface waves were the largest seismic waves observed at various stations. The presence of seismic body waves is questionable even at Palisades for the two largest collapses; they are not observed at other stations.” They are saying that not even the nearest station, that is PAL, picked up the body waves and that practically only surface waves were measured. Surface waves do not travel through the earth as body waves (that is, shear waves and transverse waves). Surface waves are generated when you remove the load from a surface, for example, as happened with the two Towers when they were turned mostly to dust in 10 seconds. Simply, the earth will react to the weight being removed by oscillating on the surface just like when you get out of bed each morning and your mattress recoils and waves propagate on its surface (ok, a mattress is an extremely damping medium).

Quote “Six stations within the greater Metropolitan New York region (Fig. 2) recorded the two tower collapses. Vertical-component records are shown in Figure 3 as a record section of distance as a function of travel time. The dotted lines indicate velocities from 1.5 to 2.5 km/s assuming propagation along straight paths from the WTC to the stations. Unlike signals at distant stations, the predominant waves are surface waves of short period (about 1 s)…” and:

“Relatively simple and similar pulses with durations of about 5 to 6 s arrive at stations BRNJ, TBR and ARNY starting at a group velocity of 2.0 km/s.” So BRNJ signal was indeed considered and:

“Thus, we conclude that the pulse duration at those four stations reflects mainly that the generation of seismic energy from the collapse was delivered over 5-6 s.” So the main energy from the collapse lasted just 5–6 s, consistent with little mass slamming to the ground and the buildings disappearing into dust.

Quote “The gravitational potential energy associated with the collapse of each tower is at least 10^11 J. The energy propagated as seismic waves for ML 2.3 is about 10^6 to 10^7 J. Hence, only a very small portion of the potential energy was converted into seismic waves. Most of the energy went into deformation of buildings and the formation of rubble and dust. The perception of people in the vicinity of the collapses as reported in the media seems to be in full accord with the notion that ground shaking was not a major contributor to the collapse or damage to surrounding buildings.” So again, the buildings did not slam to the ground!

Dr. Wood not only questions the relatively small magnitude registered at Palisades but also questions the nature of the seismic signals.

· Upvote

· Downvote

· Report

Dan Plesse

44m ago

“but others, only the vertical.” Simply not true and I posted a video to this effect.

So PAL is probably the best choice for analysis.” This is also wrong.

You don’t have anything right.

pulse duration has nothing to do the topic. surface waves are the first 20 miles, so all explosions fall inside this zone. They write “local explosion” on the draft reports.

“Relatively simple and similar pulses with durations of about 5 to 6 s arrive at stations BRNJ, TBR and ARNY starting at a group velocity of 2.0 km/s.”

TBR is Table Rock, NY 132 miles away
ARNY Arden House, NY 41.680 miles away

I see you have written Michael Pasyanos a question, did you get an answer? If I did you would see the email response.

PAL is not the closest. BRNJ is only 9 miles more then PAL. If your facts are wrong even at the most basic level, what makes you think you have anything right? NIST did not model the only connection they modeled for WTC 7 correctly, so that’s a reason NOT to use their data, but as Judy Wood guy you would not know about the NIST modeling issues would you?

AMNH 5.15 miles away
CPNY 6.15 miles away
CNY 8.37 miles away
CUNY 10.19 miles away
FOR 12.51 .19 miles away
MONJ 13.25 miles away
N61a 13.25 miles away

draft reports say “local explosive”

Everything is missing. The exact location of these earthquakes can’t be found!

Lisa A Wald

4:21 PM (2 hours ago)

to me, archive

I asked the head of the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) about this, and he said:

The Sept 11 2001 events are not in the NEIC catalog because our station spacing was too sparse to get a good location and magnitude. We do not have classified information about the events. The events were carefully studied by the local seismic network at Lamont-Doherty. Reference: Kim et al., EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union, volume 82 no. 47 November, 20 2001.

-Lisa

--------------------------------------------------

Lisa A Wald

Geophysicist & Web Design,Content,IA,UX

USGS Earthquake Hazards Program

--------------------------------------------------

The Missing Seismology Mystery of 9/11