North Tower Exploding...

[William Seger]

7. Chandler doesn't explain what he's talking about, either

He just wants to imply that a controlled demolition explains those things, but apparently he hasn't given any serious thought to why a controlled demolition is an extremely dubious explanation for any of those things. And mentally lazy "truthers" swallow it by the spoonful.

Actually, NIST did explain the "squibs" in their Q&A as being a pneumatic effect caused by air being forced out of the building. If Chandler was more observant and more scientifically oriented, he might have picked up on the tell-tale evidence that supports that hypothesis and refutes the "squib" hypothesis. But it's clear that not only does Chandler not know what explosives sound like, he doesn't know what they look like, either. The thing that Chandler misses is simply that the smoke clouds he calls "squibs" accelerate as they exit the building. Somehow, I doubt that you're going to understand this any better than any of the other physics-based arguments you've been given, but the smoke cloud from an explosive expands because it is accelerated by the explosion itself. As obvious as that is, the subtle thing Chandler misses is that that means all of the acceleration happens within a very small fraction of a second. That's why, when you see a real squib in a video, the smoke cloud appears very suddenly and the expansion is only seen to decelerate in subsequent frames, because there is no longer any force pushing it. The clouds Chandler calls "squibs," however, are seen to accelerate over several frames as they exit the building. A continued acceleration can only have one explanation: a continued force. In this case, the obvious explanation is the air that is still being pushed out of the building is exerting that continuing force. As obvious as this, I suppose I will need to explain this to you over and over and over and over, but I'm going to ask anyway that you give this some thought before responding and don't waste everyone's time and bandwidth with non-responsive nonsense.

As for the pulverization of the concrete and steel components hurled hundreds of yards, no controlled demolition hypothesis is necessary to explain those things given the amount of kinetic energy that was unleashed. But Chandler really should talk to an actual CD expert and ask how much additional explosives would be required to do that, over and above just cutting the columns, and how those additional explosives would need to be placed to get those effects. Then, if he were forced to come up with an explanation for why the alleged perps would do such a difficult and completely unnecessary thing, he might began to suspect that maybe that's not really a plausible explanation. Whether or not he arrived at that insight, anyone who has some appreciation for what that much explosives would sound like realizes that Chandler is just a crackpot.

Sensible people don't need NIST to explain these simple things, and conspiracy crackpots will ignore all explanations, regardless of the source, so please spare us the posturing.