Photocosm

The Red Towers

As a general rule, I don't post photos which aren't mine. There's one shot from a May post this year, a NASA photograph of Saturn. Stunningly beautiful. This photo today isn't beautiful at all, it's stunning and deadly. A friend of mine died on one of the planes that got hijacked, maybe that explains my continuing interest in 9/11.

So, what have we got here? We have a steel skyscraper that's being blown apart, blasted to kingdom come from the top down. Those dots on the outside of the clouds are not desks or chairs, they're huge pieces of heavy metal being thrown sideways and upwards by the force of the detonations.  This World Trade Center tower is self-destructing as it falls. Is this the way things fall down? As somebody observed, imagine a logger bringing a tree down. He saws the tree, he shouts "Timber!", but the tree turns completely into sawdust on the way down. That isn't the way things fall down.

But wait, you might be thinking. Didn't an airliner hit this tower? Didn't fuel burn and ignite other fires? Didn't the steel weaken to the point that parts of tower sagged and then broke up?  Let's yield to the defenders of the official story on all those points for the sake of argument. All of that could not have produced the outcome you see here. This is not a collapse, it isn't something falling down from steel failure. This is annihilation.

When I was a kid, there was a wind-up toy car. It was a lot of fun till the novelty wore off and you went back to television. You'd wind the key on it and put the car onto the floor. It would race to the wall and hit the wall and blow up. Pieces of the toy car would go flying. It was great fun, the comic image of a car hitting the wall and those car parts flying off. The comedy came in part from understanding this was overreacting. Toy cars hitting the wall of a living room don't blow up.

It's like the movie, "Top Secret!"  There's a scene that got a massive laugh in the theater. Car 1 gets lightly tapped from behind by Car 2.  No big deal, right?  Car 1 then explodes into flames. Why did that get a huge laugh in the theater? It was a Ford Pinto, which had a design problem with its gas tanks.  There had been deaths, lawsuits, so the audience knew about this when they saw the movie.  The audience wasn't laughing at the Nazis in the Pinto getting burned alive, that would be cruel. Well, maybe they were laughing at the Nazis, but I think it was the wind-up toy car all over again.

Accepting the official story of the World Trade Center means you believe an airliner can hit a massive steel tower and make it self-destruct, and then a second airliner can hit a massive steel tower next to it and also make it self-destruct. Twice!  Who knew about this safety defect in skyscraper design?  Put differently, accepting the official story means you believe the toy car blew itself up all because it hit a wall.  It means you believe the twin towers were Ford Pintos.  Anyway, back to the picture of the day.

What's in those clouds in the photograph?  To start with, you're looking at microscopic bits of concrete.  Each floor had something like four inches of concrete.  Gone.  There are people in those clouds, too. They've been blasted apart so badly a thousand were never found in the rubble.  Somebody is blowing a modern skyscraper apart with the force of a small atomic bomb.  That's why the computers and staplers and chairs and filing cabinets in this building disappeared.  They ceased to exist before they could hit the ground.

Towers 1 and 2 of the World Trade Center collapsed at about free-fall speeds, roughly ten seconds, maybe a dozen.  Because of the way modern steel towers are constructed, this is impossible for a mere collapse.  Also, the structural failure of a building isn't self-correcting.  It falls with the failure, which is unbalanced, asymmetrical. If it falls to one side, it falls toward that side even more, and then you have a building tipping over.  If by some extraordinary failure an entire floor falls straight down, the resistance of the floor below will slow the fall, and eventually the floors below them will hinder the pancaking. The speed of the collapse does not pick up, by the way, it slows down, because the steel and construction techniques make a tower stronger near the bottom than the top. The resistance increases.

That said, how did this tower violate those principles of physics and construction? How did the floors on top fall straight down as if the floors below weren't in the way? Because they weren't there anymore. This tower came straight down at free-fall speed because simultaneous explosive charges were racing ahead to destroy the floors below.  This isn't pancaking at work, one floor dropping into the next, and then the next.  This is pancake obliteration.

A third tower fell straight down on 9/11, also, World Trade Center 7.  No plane ever hit it, and the fires were never a genuine threat.  Its fall was textbook controlled demolition, which led Dan Rather or Peter Jennings to observe it was just like a controlled demolition. They got it right the first time, and then you never saw them mention it again. Did somebody get to these guys and tell them it was a controlled demolition, so don't say it was controlled demolition? Nobody had to, these guys were professionals.

If you believe the official story about Islamic terrorists seizing airplanes and flying them into buildings, do you believe they also made the towers self-destruct?  And if you aren't convinced that the towers could ever self-destruct the way they did, what's the next part of the official story worth doubting?

My source for this photo is www.ae911truth.org.

RED moon red SUN

Well, I'm back.  Summer vacations around the USA are ending. I didn't take one, but living in the Bay Area seems like a perpetual vacation.

We had a rich lunar eclipse recently, a week or two ago. If you were on the west coast, you got the totality. I got up early and went out to see what a red moon looks like. It was red.

Maybe going out to see the eclipse was a mistake. It looked great, no doubt about it, but later in the day, things happened.  For starters, I was driving in Berkeley soon after the eclipse and I got hit by another driver. I was waiting at a red light, the light changed, and then the driver behind me tapped my back bumper. He looked very unhappy with himself as I checked the rear view mirror. He had seen the green light, but he had not looked at my vehicle in front of his. Anyway, no harm done. My bumper was fine, and the only apparent damage was his license plate, big deal. He was sorry, respectful.

And then we had our earthquake later that day, about a 3.0.  It came the day of the lunar eclipse, and only a few hours after the minor traffic accident in Berkeley. And where was said earthquake? About three miles from my home. Well, at least it wasn't the location of the last earthquake. Who could forget that? I drove over the darn thing, no kidding. First time I've been on the epicenter of an earthquake as it occurred.

And then we had a red sun. The fog cleared for about a week last week. Temperatures in the 90's in some places, mostly in the 80's where I drove around in Berkeley and Marin County. And what happens in California when the weather is hot and dry? FIRES!  I forget where the fires were, someplace near the coast, but the smoke drifted around and ended up in Marin County.

So here's the sun when smoke gets in your eyes.

I was in Corte Madera at a park with a pond, and got to see the sun long after sunrise. This image doesn't capture the luminous beauty of the sun. The solar disk was perfectly even, and it glowed with a red-orange light that you don't see often. For a moment, it felt as if Earth weren't the home planet, it had been replaced by a planet where the sun was always luminous red. Very beautiful.

But the next wave of the Marine Layer has blown the smoke out in the last few days and replaced it with fog. We'll get the real Indian Summer in about two weeks, this was just the preview.