• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gage and Szamboti to speak at New Jersey Institute of Technology

Dave Rogers said:
Hearsay report of an on-the-spot reaction of someone who isn't alive to comment on it? Bugger all.

Dave
Click to expand...

I heard that the truth movement was going to pay every shill a billion bucks for our truthfulness.
Not! :D

No wonder hear say is not evidence and that Truthers are so desperate that he would stoop so low as to use it!
 
WilliamSeger said:
It would be right to say that there are several videos that are NOT "from a significant distance."
Click to expand...

Which is accurate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6NhA8bIn5Q

I had this discussion on another site about a year ago posting footage as close to the towers as possible both right before, and during the collapses just to set a baseline for the noise level since the closest footage to WTC 2 would have guaranteed the highest probability of picking up noise levels, shrapnel propagation, and the like. The FOIA releases contain a lot of video recorded from the base of the towers as well, but last time I had this discussion with someone they claimed that there was a time delay and that there was actually an explosion in the same video, which would qualify the explosion as "soundless".....

XM10rKW.gif


....now
 
DGM said:
It did take time. It started when the planes struck the buildings. :p
Click to expand...

Yes, I was thinking of mentioning that minor point myself; some of the columns were already severed, some were damaged, some had their lateral support partly or completely removed, different columns were at different temperatures due to variation in fire temperature from place to place, and some may even have been close to their nominal strength. All these different conditions could very easily result in different dimensions and characteristics of the initial buckling failures, and this alone would be enough to eliminate the jolt even if it were geometrically possible in the first place. But Tony's model has always been predicated on the laughable assumption that the support structures of the towers were pristine up to the moment that the upper block began to descend at a visibly detectable rate, and he's so determined to ignore evidence to the contrary that he'll simply declare it to be faked, which is rather boring because we've seen all that before from him. Baiting him over the self-contradictory stupidity of the latest imaginary law of physics he's had to invoke to paper over the cracks just seemed more fun.

Dave
 
DGM said:
It did take time. It started when the planes struck the buildings. :p
Click to expand...

What an unsophisticated silly comment you indulge yourself in here, when we know that the planes only severed or severely damaged about 15% of the columns. However, I would imagine you might think the fires caused a lot more damage to the columns, in spite of the fact that the recovered core columns showed no evidence of being heated to more than 250 degrees C, where steel has essentially not lost any of its strength.

The lack of sophistication behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is frighteningly low. God help us all if there are many more like this.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
People who were involved in any sort of new installations of equipment and material. Law enforcement knows how to interrogate and would develop the right questions to narrow down the field of those who could have planted the charges. An investigation would then continue on a smaller group to see what connections those people had on the outside etc.

Any criminal investigator will tell you that investigations involve a developmental process and they converge.
Click to expand...
With nothing but an opinion that doesn't even rise to the level of circumstantial evidence of the existence of explosives, and which is disputed by experts in the field of demolitions, you think any LEO is going to do this,,,,EVER?
 
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
However, I would imagine you might think the fires caused a lot more damage to the columns, in spite of the fact that the recovered core columns showed no evidence of being heated to more than 250 degrees C, where steel has essentially not lost any of its strength.
Click to expand...

Ah, memories, memories. Much though I enjoy your new material, Tony, it's nice to see that you can still bring out the classic lies from time to time. Would you like to follow this one up by saying something about molten steel being recovered from the collapse site, just so we can all see how you don't have a sense of irony?

Dave
 
DGM said:
Wouldn't this mean the sophistication is high, seeing as the lack is low? :boggled:
Click to expand...

That would explain why he finds it frightening. (Yep, that's a cheap shot, but it also explains why he has such difficulty responding to valid criticism.)
 
Dave Rogers said:
Ah, memories, memories. Much though I enjoy your new material, Tony, it's nice to see that you can still bring out the classic lies from time to time. Would you like to follow this one up by saying something about molten steel being recovered from the collapse site, just so we can all see how you don't have a sense of irony?

Dave
Click to expand...
Ah.......the classics. Fire could not have taken the buildings down because there's no evidence of high temperatures. Must have been "thermite" because what else would explain the "rivers of molten steel". :rolleyes:
 
Tony Szamboti said:
What an unsophisticated silly comment you indulge yourself in here, when we know that the planes only severed or severely damaged about 15% of the columns. However, I would imagine you might think the fires caused a lot more damage to the columns, in spite of the fact that the recovered core columns showed no evidence of being heated to more than 250 degrees C, where steel has essentially not lost any of its strength.
Click to expand...

I am curious about these core columns you refer to. Can you be more specific... which ones? from which floors?

I would like to see the core columns recovered... all of them presumably would tell us a lot more about what happened.
 
"Only severed or severely damaged about 15%"?

In video games, nothing happens until the damage reaches 100%. Still having 85% (or even 1%) of your "armor" or "hit points" or "health" is as good as being undamaged.

In the real world, not so much. If something severed or severely damaged a mere 15% of the logic gates in your computer, or a mere 15% of the water pipes in your home, I think the results would be decidedly chaotic.
 
DGM said:
Wouldn't this mean the sophistication is high, seeing as the lack is low? :boggled:
Click to expand...

Good catch. I'll give you that one. It is like a double negative and wasn't my intent.

It should have said

The lack of sophistication behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is incredible or The sophistication level behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is frighteningly low.

It doesn't actually say you are dumb, just that your claims lack sophistication.
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
I am curious about these core columns you refer to. Can you be more specific... which ones? from which floors?

I would like to see the core columns recovered... all of them presumably would tell us a lot more about what happened.
Click to expand...

See the NIST report.
 
JSanderO said:
I am curious about these core columns you refer to. Can you be more specific... which ones? from which floors?

I would like to see the core columns recovered... all of them presumably would tell us a lot more about what happened.
Click to expand...

Specifically NIST NCSTAR 1-3: Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of Structural Steel (there are a few sections to this, couldn't recall off hand the exact one). NIST identified a few samples whose as-built locations could be determined and from paint spalling and cracking found a minimum temperature base line that is is required for that the be observed. But said condition could not discriminate between pre-collapse and post-collapse fire.

Since no other samples with markings coinciding with the impact/fire regions were found, the conclusion is that the 250oC figure must be a maximum, rather than a minimum - at least according the the position he's held for a number of years.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
Good catch. I'll give you that one. It is like a double negative and wasn't my intent.

It should have said

The lack of sophistication behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is incredible or The sophistication level behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is frighteningly low.

It doesn't actually say you are dumb, just that your claims lack sophistication.
Click to expand...
I can't see where sophistication comes into observation. There were plane impacts that caused damage and started fires. This is the start of ordered stability to chaotic collapse. You said it takes time, reality shows more than adequate time. I won't even get into the inward bowing you like to deny.


Do you deny this?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom