I found the missing Jolt.

[Dave Rogers]

Okay, well whatever fires existed at 11:30, they weren't that bad. There's your assessment.

Since your starting point is that there's insufficient recorded evidence to assess how severe the fires were at 11:30, you have no basis, by your own admission, to make an assessment fifteen years later that over-rides the assessment made by the people on the scene at the time who were trained to make precisely that sort of assessment. This is Monday morning quarterbacking by someone who doesn't even know the eligible receiver rules.

Dave

 

[Dave Rogers]

You asked what silent demolition fittings exist. If the WTC was a demolition, it is possible that whoever planned it was inspired by Verinage.

Causality violation. You do know that verinage demolition post-dates the WTC collapses, right?

Dave

 

[thedopefishlives]

That's your explanation for the certain and precise "5 to 6 hours" prediction?

An engineer looks at a large building on fire. He notes that there is no fire suppression in the building, the firefighters are not involved in the building, and that it is an office building with much flammable material. He makes a quick guesstimate as to how long it will take for the fire to cause enough damage to bring the building down. And you call that "certain and precise"? That's the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

 

[NoahFence]

Okay, well whatever fires existed at 11:30, they weren't that bad. There's your assessment. Even assuming the engineer's prediction was partially based on existing fires, how would he predict they would appear on more floors and get hot enough to weaken steel?

Highlighted is a blatant lie.

 

[MicahJava]

Since your starting point is that there's insufficient recorded evidence to assess how severe the fires were at 11:30, you have no basis, by your own admission, to make an assessment fifteen years later that over-rides the assessment made by the people on the scene at the time who were trained to make precisely that sort of assessment. This is Monday morning quarterbacking by someone who doesn't even know the eligible receiver rules.

Dave

So you admit that the official story requires someone knowing for certain if and when WTC 7 would collapse only about an hour after the North Tower collapsed? A yes or no would suffice.

 

[GlennB]

You asked what silent demolition fittings exist. If the WTC was a demolition, it is possible that whoever planned it was inspired by Verinage.

Utter gibberish. Verinage couldn't have been applied to the WTC buildings, and "inspired by" would only be useful if a similar technique could have been applied there.

Maybe I was wrong and you *are* just trolling for laughs. You're certainly not making any sense.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

1. That clip comes from 2 hours before the collapse.

2. What "leaning" is he referring to? Does anybody have any photographic study that proves leaning? If not, then he is obviously repeating what he was told.

He is an expert on fire fighting and realizes the to fight the fire people have to inter the building, to restore electrical powers with standby generators to the risers inside, so the water can be lifted by the risers against gravity.
They work similar to water towers only in reverse, and you have no clue he might have actually been near the building helping with the assessment of the structure, and had first hand knowledge.
He is on site, and proves by his statement to have more specific knowledge than you.

 

[MicahJava]

Highlighted is a blatant lie.

Please provide strong evidence for fires before 12:10 PM.

 

[GlennB]

Please provide strong evidence for fires before 12:10 PM.

The eye-witness testimony of experts in the subject.

 

[NoahFence]

So you admit that the official story requires someone knowing for certain if and when WTC 7 would collapse only about an hour after the North Tower collapsed? A yes or no would suffice.

False. Nobody knew for certain, in the same way I know for certain you have no idea what you're talking about.

They made an educated guess.


I've taken the liberty of subtly displaying the difference between what they did and why you can't see it as being true.

 

[MicahJava]

He is an expert on fire fighting and realizes the to fight the fire people have to inter the building, to restore electrical powers with standby generators to the risers inside, so the water can be lifted by the risers against gravity.
They work similar to water towers only in reverse, and you have no clue he might have actually been near the building helping with the assessment of the structure, and had first hand knowledge.
He is on site, and proves by his statement to have more specific knowledge than you.

The person in that video stated that you can clearly see WTC 7 leaning with the naked eye. Please provide evidence for that. Otherwise, it would seem that what he's saying is influenced by the fire chiefs, who were influenced by the engineer.

 

[MicahJava]

The eye-witness testimony of experts in the subject.

Are you referring to the recollections and deductions of firefighters, or government scientists who never considered that the fires could have come later?

 

[NoahFence]

Please provide strong evidence for fires before 12:10 PM.

10:28:22:[10] The North Tower of the World Trade Center collapses. Due to the destruction of the gypsum-encased stairwells on the impact floors (most skyscraper stairwells are encased in reinforced concrete), no one who was above the impact zone in the North Tower escapes the collapse. The Marriott Hotel, located at the base of the two towers, is also destroyed. The second collapse is also viewed live on television and heard on radio. The North Tower collapses 1 hour, 42 minutes after the impact of Flight 11—the building had burned during the whole duration of the attacks. 7 World Trade Center burns after the collapse of the North Tower. New York City's 1010 WINS reports the collapse live as it happens, broadcasting a live phone call with a witness.[37] On NBC News, Katie Couric says: "The South Tower of the World Trade Center has just collapsed..."

10:28:22 the North tower collapsed. By 10:28:30, fires started in WTC 7.

Any non-idiot would know that.

 

[MicahJava]

False. Nobody knew for certain, in the same way I know for certain you have no idea what you're talking about.

They made an educated guess.


I've taken the liberty of subtly displaying the difference between what they did and why you can't see it as being true.

My argument is that there doesn't seem to have been any basis at 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM for anybody to judge if and when WTC 7 would collapse from any kind of structural failure. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

The person in that video stated that you can clearly see WTC 7 leaning with the naked eye. Please provide evidence for that. Otherwise, it would seem that what he's saying is influenced by the fire chiefs, who were influenced by the engineer.

You have no way to verify your theory he is on site, you are not, lack of photograph does not mean an event does not take place.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

My argument is that there doesn't seem to have been any basis at 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM for anybody to judge if and when WTC 7 would collapse from any kind of structural failure. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

That's because your theory is fallacious to begin with, he said it could, he did not say it would.

You assume for knowledge of collapse where none is indicated because you want to simply perceive the statements out of context.

 

[NoahFence]

My argument is that there doesn't seem to have been any basis at 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM for anybody to judge if and when WTC 7 would collapse from any kind of structural failure. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

And you're argument is wrong.

It's not the end of the world. Just move on from it.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

So you admit that the official story requires someone knowing for certain if and when WTC 7 would collapse only about an hour after the North Tower collapsed? A yes or no would suffice.

Goal post teleported to another Galaxy.

The official story only requires a knowledgeable person to make an educated guess, and give a chance for collapse probability, not a certainty.

 

[Georgio]

I would really like to debate tfk one on one with no interference from other posters on a different forum. Maybe the 911 free forum will host it if tfk agrees.

@tfk and Tony Szamboti - How about a restricted thread here?

 

[Dave Rogers]

So you admit that the official story requires someone knowing for certain if and when WTC 7 would collapse only about an hour after the North Tower collapsed? A yes or no would suffice.

No, then. It requires someone noticing that the North Tower and the South Tower both collapsed, that WTC7 was on fire and had severe structural damage, and making a good guess from these rather obvious pieces of information.

And, of course, if they'd been wrong, you would now be arguing that the survival of WTC7 despite serious fires and structural damage proved that WTC1and WTC2 shouldn't have collapsed.

Dave