Is there a legitimate reason to question the official narrative*?

[Tony Szamboti]

Oh, I'm sorry. Where did you post the videos of the nanothermite and silent explosives doing the damage again?

Oh wait. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY? Well how can that be tony?

You don't even have a NIST FEA of it? Say it aint so!

Oh well then surely you MUST have at least an artist rendition then, right?

NO?

You mean to tell me all you have is a ridiculous theory that you cooked up with absolutely ZERO supporting evidence? And you have the gall to ***** about the animations I posted?

Tisk-tisk tony. Bad form.

I am saying your videos of inward bowing being caused by sagging trusses are cartoons that have no basis in reality. That is why NIST couldn't cause it with sagging trusses in their FEA.

The fact that you seem to have believed it says a lot about your ability to judge the merits of what I am saying. I have said several times that you don't need video if you have a mechanism. The problem here is no mechanism for the contention.

Dave Rogers said there was inward bowing minutes before the collapse but he can't provide a mechanism. Your bogus artist's renditions (cartoons) don't do the job. We are still waiting for Dave to put up or shut up.

 

[cntdrv55]

I am saying your videos of inward bowing being caused by sagging trusses are cartoons that have no basis in reality. That is why NIST couldn't cause it with sagging trusses in their FEA.

The fact that you seem to have believed it says a lot about your ability to judge the merits of what I am saying. I have said several times that you don't need video if you have a mechanism and other supporting data. The problem here is no mechanism for the contention.

The animations explain the mechanism tony.

But let's humor the ol boy for a bit since my material is apparently unacceptable. How about you post up the mechanism and supporting data that shows how your hush-a-booms and thermite paint can cause the observed bowing minutes before the collapse.

I'll wait.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

The animations explain the mechanism tony.

But let's humor the ol boy for a bit since my material is apparently unacceptable. How about you post up the mechanism and supporting data that shows how your hush-a-booms and thermite paint can cause the observed bowing minutes before the collapse.

I'll wait.

Your animations are cartoons with no basis in reality. The NIST FEA model could not produce the inward bowing with sagging trusses.

The core collapse is what caused the inward bowing and it has been produced that way in an FEA model. To make it clear, it happened at the time of collapse, not minutes before.

How the core collapsed is a separate argument.

 

[cntdrv55]

The core collapse is what caused the inward bowing and it has been produced that way in an FEA model. To make it clear, it happened at the time of collapse, not minutes before.

How the core collapsed is a separate argument.

So then what you're saying is that your pet theory can't produce the observed bowing minutes before the collapse? Is that correct?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So then what you're saying is that your pet theory can't produce the observed bowing minutes before the collapse? Is that correct?

No theory can produce it minutes before the collapse. It happened when the core collapsed and the exterior went down seconds afterward.

 

[cntdrv55]

No theory can produce it minutes before the collapse. It happened when the core collapsed and the exterior went down seconds afterward.

So the observed bowing minutes before the collapse was caused by magic? It obviously happened tony. Photographic evidence and eyewitness observation trumps your unsupported "gut feeling" every time.

Or perhaps it happened exactly like the animation I posted... yep I'll stick with that. Thanks for playing.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

So the observed bowing minutes before the collapse was caused by magic? It obviously happened tony. Photographic evidence and eyewitness observation trumps your unsupported "gut feeling" every time.

Or perhaps it happened exactly like the animation I posted... yep I'll stick with that. Thanks for playing.

The mechanism was called gravity, as in intense
gravitational loading not present in the NIST fire
Tests.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The core collapse is what caused the inward bowing and it has been produced that way in an FEA model. To make it clear, it happened at the time of collapse, not minutes before.

Well-documented reports and photographs disagree with you. Regardless of who provides a mechanism - and let me remind you we can all read, so we know you're lying when you say nobody's provided one - the bowing happened in reality minutes before the collapses. Observation does not need to be validated by theory.

Dave

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Well-documented reports and photographs disagree with you. Regardless of who provides a mechanism - and let me remind you we can all read, so we know you're lying when you say nobody's provided one - the bowing happened in reality minutes before the collapses. Observation does not need to be validated by theory.

Dave

In truther universe observation only.happens
In videos, never in real life.

 

[tsig]

For those who have difficulty understanding, in their report on the Twin Towers NIST admitted that the sagging trusses did not cause inward bowing of the exterior in their model and stated that they had to add artificial lateral forces to the columns to cause it to happen.

So all the belly aching about catenary forces etc. isn't going to change the reality that they couldn't get it to happen in their model. I am not saying catenaries don't generate horizontal forces, just that it apparently wasn't enough force in this case to be the cause for the inward bowing of the exterior columns.

How do explosives cause the exterior to bow in?

 

[Mark F]

Can you possibly make a technical argument for anything or are you just a utility player type wise guy?

Can you engage in a discussion without resorting to ad hom?.

Just pointing out one of many obvious flaws in your case - and your tendency to want to have your cake and eat it too.

 

[tsig]

I wouldn't use the word 'comical' here. The m/a probably bars me from using more appropriate words.

We've got magic dust that extinguishes fire, ninja arsonists and explosive riggers, the impossibility of hot materiel traveling 350 feet and sagging beams that do not exert any force on the exterior surfaces, so bring on the comics.

 

[Animal]

No theory can produce it minutes before the collapse. It happened when the core collapsed and the exterior went down seconds afterward.

It doesn't matter if no theory can produce it. Despite all your denial...IT HAPPENED.........there is photographic evidence and corroborating eye witnesses that it occurred long before the collapse.

your insistence that it happened only at the time of the collapse is willfully ignorance or simply a lie.

(i am betting on the latter)

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Well-documented reports and photographs disagree with you. Regardless of who provides a mechanism - and let me remind you we can all read, so we know you're lying when you say nobody's provided one - the bowing happened in reality minutes before the collapses. Observation does not need to be validated by theory.

Dave

The photos could be from when the core pulled the exterior inward and that was when the collapse commenced and it is the only capable mechanism.

A video would provide evidence of just when it happened and you don't have it. More importantly you don't have a mechanism for inward bowing minutes before collapse.

 

[tsig]

It seems you might be missing the reality that controlled demolition of the buildings requires additional perpetrators (other than those on the planes) to have been involved. That most certainly requires investigation.

When are you going to start?

 

[Animal]

The photos could be from when the core pulled the exterior inward. A video would provide evidence of just when it happened and you don't have it. More importantly you don't have a mechanism for inward bowing minutes before.

Another swing and a miss. Eyewitness accounts, has have been previously posted, prove your claim is a fantasy.

No mechanism is required when it is an observed fact.

No amount of tap dancing changes this. You just dig yourself deeper into the lunatic fringe of the "Cult of dicky Gage vacation fund"

 

[tsig]

No, lack of funds,,,, wait,,, no they do have funding.

Its lack of expertise,,,, um ,,, no they do claim 2000 relevant experts who, one supposes, could at least give them a cut rate price on services.

Its the short time period available,,,, um ,,, no , in fact its been as long since the final NIST report came out as it took NIST to produce reports on all WTC structures. One would assume that at least one or two research reports could have been done in that time, to counter one or two NIST reports or studies.

Now didn't I read that AE911T was in fact planning on doing an FEA and to that end would be publishing monthly progress reports on that effort. How's that coming along (albeit a decade late in beginning)?

If they wanted to find out about all those accomplices then a good private investigator would do the trick.

ETA: and probably cost less than one of Gage's jaunts.

 

[tsig]

There is no video of anyone placing tons
of sand inside the buildings to muffle the
Detonation waves from cutter charges.

So I guess since there is no.video of cutter charges
being placed, that means none existed.

No video of the two million radio controlled explosive ceiling tiles being installed by illegal aliens.

 

[GlennB]

In truther universe observation only.happens
In videos, never in real life.

The bar is set a little higher here - it has to be video of a specific side of one of the buildings.

Curiously (is it pure coincidence?) this would either have to be filmed from an area that was made inhospitable (to say the least) from the ground by the prior collapse of WTC2, or from the air by a helicopter that would, I guess, be reluctant to get too close to the smoke plume.*

I suspect Tony is deliberately demanding evidence that he knows doesn't exist. However, when you've spent so much effort, for so long, being so dramatically wrong so publicly then it's perhaps understandable that you might resort to such measures rather than face the horrible reality.

* a major reason we have no visual info of WTC7's collapse taken from the S side too.

 

[tsig]

There have been a lot of private individuals who have looked into this, including myself, and in my opinion they have done more than enough to justify a new investigation by law enforcement. Just in this thread I have shown the NIST WTC report to be flawed with their minutes before collapse inward bowing, as they have no mechanism for it. I have done a lot more than that over the past nine years. I have also been involved with groups who sent evidence to Congressional and Senate people.

Private individuals do not have subpoena power and an appropriate investigation cannot be done without it. There is no question that there are individuals at large who had something to do with planting and detonating charges in those buildings and it is disingenuous and downright silly to even suggest private individuals do more than they already have.

You are wanting the same government that you say lied to begin with to investigate itself?

Tony, how do PI's work without subpoena power?