I found the missing Jolt.

[DGM]

This goes back to the very charged debate on exactly what temperature the WTC dust was. Don't feel like doing that. All I can say is that Jennings is not a WTC 7 fire witness.

You "don't feel like doing that" because it's better for you to ignore facts that don't support your belief.

ETA: It also has nothing to do with dust temperature.

Typical.

 

[MicahJava]

Unless you know the engineer, and what he actually said, that is he based the probability of collapse in 5-6 hours on the fuel load in the buildings not on
Physical damage to the building, after six hours the fires would not have produced enough heat to weaken the steel.
Some of us here have actually spoken with the engineer personally.

This completely contradicts what you have said earlier when you postulated that the "5-6 hour" prediction came from measuring creep on the building.

If you can provide the identity of this person, along with a statement by him, and any number of firefighters who were there who can verify his identity, I will drop the CD stuff on a dime.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What can you show me about his original statement?
__

Here's my problem with the quote, as it is portrayed.

If I'm taking that measurement, and I the building has fires & unknown amounts of internal damage (but significant damage visible from the outside), and I know that all tall buildings are unique designs ...

... and I see from the transit measurements that the building is unstable ...

... and my best guess is 5 to 6 hours from now ...

... then there is absolutely no way that I'm going to tell anybody "I think that it'll collapse 5 to 6 hours from now."

Because some management dufus might report to somebody, "tfk said it's going to collapse between 5 & 6 hours from now." And based on that, some other dufus might decide, "well, let's fight the fire for another 3 hours. That'll give us a 2 hour margin to pull everyone out before it collapses."

I'm instead going to be REALLY clear, and say, "It might collapse any minute. It's unstable. But, if forced to make a guess, I'd guess 'sometime between 5 & 6 hours from now'."

I can easily see how the first part of the statement might be dropped in the re-telling of the story.

Now, perhaps I'm wrong about this.
Perhaps this guy has some tilt angle that his experience tells him is the critical angle. Perhaps this angle is the same for differing building heights (although I seriously doubt this). Perhaps he's got some chart of "critical angle vs. building height", although I kinda doubt this too.

Perhaps he was able to do some calculation of tilt rate, current angle & "time to reaching critical angle". But I doubt that, also.

Maybe he was going just by his gut.

But I believe it to be incredibly dangerous for him & for others to have said, "I think that it'll collapse between 5 & 6 pm."

Even if that is exactly what I thought would happen.

And I'm a guy who loves to take chances.
That's not one I'd take.

What he said was the building could collapse from damage and (fire with in 5-6 hours)
After that the fuel for the fires will be exausted., and the fires will die down, the building although damaged will then likely survive.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

This completely contradicts what you have said earlier when you postulated that the "5-6 hour" prediction came from measuring creep on the building.

If you can provide the identity of this person, along with a statement by him, and any number of firefighters who were there who can verify his identity, I will drop the CD stuff on a dime.

The creep was only one factor the other was the fires, no engineer would solely look at just one factor.

As the creep and fire continued everyone knew the building was going to collapse.

 

[MicahJava]

The creep was only one factor the other was the fires, no engineer would solely look at just one factor.

As the creep and fire continued everyone knew the building was going to collapse.

Crazy Chainsaw, you have made an extraordinary claim and I ask for extraordinary evidence.

 

[tfk]

I'm really not seeing that same effect on all of the other videos of WTC 7's collapse. You used one still, how do we know it's not an illusion from the camera lens or something else?

What you are "really not seeing" is irrelevant.

This is YOUR question.
I pulled a frame grab from NIST's Camera 2 video.
I did a little work to figure out if this was discernible, because of your questions.

If this interests you, as much as it seems to, DO SOME WORK.

Don't sit around like some *********** prima donna, demanding that others bring you what you want.

You can download the video.
Presumably you are not so clueless that you cannot use a couple of programs to import images, rotate them as needed and draw straight lines on them.

Any computer literate 15 year old can do all this.

The point is that one "doesn't see it" until one starts to take some measurements.

You should be able to generate a graph of "tilt angle vs. time" for the building.

When you get your results, post them back here.

Be aware that the only tilt angle that you can measure with any camera is "tilt with respect to the camera's image plane".

This will be a minimum amount of tilt, tho.
The real tilt is guaranteed to be equal to this or greater.

 

[tfk]

If you can provide the identity of this person, along with a statement by him, and any number of firefighters who were there who can verify his identity, I will drop the CD stuff on a dime.

So, let's see if I've got this straight...

ALL of your "WTC7 was a CD" hangs on this one, trivial little nit???

Do you accept that the towers were not a CD?

There are literally hundreds of the world's best structural engineers, who have assured everyone that this was not, could not possibly have been, a CD. That the evidence proves unequivocally that it was NOT a CD.

There is a friggin' encyclopedic body of work (the NIST report & the several independent reports done by other engineers) that conclude that it was not a CD.

But because of this one unknown statement by some unknown person, you've decided that they all might be wrong. Or fraudulent & evil.

Keerist on a bicycle, kid...
Have you ever heard the expression, "chasing an anomaly"??

 

[TJM]

This goes back to the very charged debate on exactly how hot the WTC dust cloud was. Don't feel like doing that. All I can say is that Jennings is not a WTC 7 fire witness.

Oh gawd, pyroclastic flow? Yeah, idiocy. Don't go there.

Look, I don't believe much of what Jennings said but when you take into consideration of what Hess said, it pretty much indicated fire in the building before their rescue. But you don't want to believe that because it's in direct conflict with the conspiracy theory you're trying to hatch.

But I should've known better - here we're talking about a building that had two ******* enormous buildings come crashing down around it and you're genuinely stumped about when it caught fire.

OK....

 

[tfk]

What he said was the building could collapse from damage and (fire with in 5-6 hours)
After that the fuel for the fires will be exausted., and the fires will die down, the building although damaged will then likely survive.

Ahhhh, thank you.

This is a completely different message than "the building will collapse between 5 & 6 hours from now."

Micah, you seem to be the person all driven atwitter by this quote.

Please post the exact quotes that you have, from the several people, along with links to their original quotes (NOT links to truther sites, please).

 

[MicahJava]

Ahhhh, thank you.

This is a completely different message than "the building will collapse between 5 & 6 hours from now."

Micah, you seem to be the person all driven atwitter by this quote.

Please post the exact quotes that you have, from the several people, along with links to their original quotes (NOT links to truther sites, please).

I already posted two quotes from Chief Peter Hayden and one from Firefighter Michael Currid.

On 8/25/2008, Graeme McQueen and Shayam Sunder had a half-hour discussion on Ontario Radio, and at some time Shayam briefly mentions the existence of this engineer person.

However, Crazy Chainsaw is claiming that he has literally spoken to this person and now I'm not satisfied without proof.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Crazy Chainsaw, you have made an extraordinary claim and I ask for extraordinary evidence.

Why is the fact I know the engineer, extraordinary, I know lots of people, my fiend Thomas W. Eagar I believe, was the one who gave me his email address, I promised to keep his name and email confidential.

I have also shaken hands with Jay Leno, and was on his show, so what?

Life is experiences, where you go and who you meet on the journey.

 

[NoahFence]

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

Are you physically incapable of discussion?

 

[MicahJava]

Why is the fact I know the engineer, extraordinary, I know lots of people, my fiend Thomas W. Eagar I believe, was the one who gave me his email address, I promised to keep his name and email confidential.

I have also shaken hands with Jay Leno, and was on his show, so what?

Life is experiences, where you go and who you meet on the journey.

Naaaah, I don't want to go emailing Mr. Eagar and have him ignore me. I'm wondering if you're lying. You claim to have personally spoken with the walking, talking holy grail of CD debunking.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Naaaah, I don't want to go emailing Mr. Eagar and have him ignore me. I'm wondering if you're lying. You claim to have personally spoken with the walking, talking holy grail of CD debunking.

I have talked with a lot of people on 9/11 after the news article in 2006 featuring me so what?

PS. I have also talked personally with Steven Jones, Dr.Frank Greening, Fetzer, and many others so what?

People respect and respond to you when your truthful and respectful.

 

[MicahJava]

I have talked with a lot of people on 9/11 after the news article in 2006 featuring me so what?

PS. I have also talked personally with Steven Jones, Dr.Frank Greening, Fetzer, and many others so what?

People respect and respond to you when your truthful and respectful.

Why should I believe you?

 

[NoahFence]

Why should I believe you?

So everyone is suspect to you?

 

[MicahJava]

So everyone is suspect to you?

What website are you on?

 

[NoahFence]

What website are you on?

The one that has taught me a ton about engineering, science, critical thinking and humor.

I'm every bit the dumbass that truther are when it comes to engineering and architecture. Yet these people make this stuff very easy to understand. EVEN WITH PICTURES.

Why do you refuse to learn?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Why should I believe you?

I really do not care if you (believe me or not), up to you, oh incidently there is a joke hidden in that sentence for the old timers here who know me.
Something About why I have the name I have on my avatar.
I also happen to be some what famous as a one of a kind.

PS. I can tell you the engineer your looking for had detailed knowledge of building 7 his firm built it.

 

[ozeco41]

I really do not care if you (believe me or not), up to you, oh incidently there is a joke hidden in that sentence for the old timers here who know me.
Something About why I have the name I have on my avatar.
I also happen to be some what famous as a one of a kind. PS. I can tell you the engineer your looking for had detailed knowledge of building 7 his firm built it.

That cannot be true - truthers assure us that nothing happens for the first time.