General 9/11 Conspiracy Discussion

[Axxman300]

No, ralfyman is right, you're the one who is blind but fancies yourself a skeptic with high standards.

Sent from my IBM Simon at Mount Hua Teahouse.

The high standard is using facts. There were none in ralfyman's post.

The majority of the WTC stell was not sold for scrap until much later,and each piece of steel was inspected by a team of experts before being removed from the pile. Some were sent to scrap, others were sent for more forensic work based on type of damage.

They only way to recreate the collapse is with computers, unless you think they should have rebuilt the entire WTC complex, and flown 767's into them.

That leaves computer modeling, and a lot of grease-board work by men and women way smarter than I am. I understand that my lack of education in physics, metallurgy, engineering, and a host of specific technical training means that when a bunch of qualified experts tell me what happened was "X x Y + Z = BOOM" then I have two options: One - go to college and get an Masters in structural engineering, and review their work. Two - STFU about it because I lack the ability to grasp the majority of the technical work.

CTists never acknowledge their intellectual shortcomings and insist on a level playing field where their hair-brained theories hold equal weight as the experts. That can't be allowed to happen in the real world.

 

[HSienzant]

The high standard is using facts. There were none in ralfyman's post.

The majority of the WTC stell was not sold for scrap until much later,and each piece of steel was inspected by a team of experts before being removed from the pile. Some were sent to scrap, others were sent for more forensic work based on type of damage.

They only way to recreate the collapse is with computers, unless you think they should have rebuilt the entire WTC complex, and flown 767's into them.

That leaves computer modeling, and a lot of grease-board work by men and women way smarter than I am. I understand that my lack of education in physics, metallurgy, engineering, and a host of specific technical training means that when a bunch of qualified experts tell me what happened was "X x Y + Z = BOOM" then I have two options: One - go to college and get an Masters in structural engineering, and review their work. Two - STFU about it because I lack the ability to grasp the majority of the technical work.

CTists never acknowledge their intellectual shortcomings and insist on a level playing field where their hair-brained theories hold equal weight as the experts. That can't be allowed to happen in the real world.

I'm reminded of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin asks his dad how they know the listed weight limit to put on signs for bridges. Calvin's dad says (jokingly): "They drive heavier and heavier trucks until the bridge collapses, and then they build it all over again."

I imagine that's how conspiracists think real engineers work.

Hank

 

[beachnut]

Tens of thousands of tons of steel debris, and they put them in some yards, spend several hundred hours selecting several hundred pieces, and then sell everything else as scrap several weeks later. After that, they pursue an investigation driven by videos and computer models. That alone makes the investigation open to a lot of skepticism.

Why did the FBI need to save steel until conspiracy theorists', with wild baseless fantasy claims, skepticism is satisfied?

You were debunked over 2 years ago, 19 terrorists did 9/11.

 

[Animal]

Tens of thousands of tons of steel debris, and they put them in some yards, spend several hundred hours selecting several hundred pieces, and then sell everything else as scrap several weeks later. After that, they pursue an investigation driven by videos and computer models. That alone makes the investigation open to a lot of skepticism.

Only if you are ignorant of statistics.

 

[skyeagle409]

Tens of thousands of tons of steel debris, and they put them in some yards, spend several hundred hours selecting several hundred pieces, and then sell everything else as scrap several weeks later. After that, they pursue an investigation driven by videos and computer models. That alone makes the investigation open to a lot of skepticism.

Why would anyone check each steel structural member of the WTC buildings? It would be a waste of time. If wings of an aircraft were known to have failed, why would investigators spend wasted time and money examining the tail cone mounts of that aircraft?

Certain steel members were selected for examination for a very good reason.

 

[ralfyman]

Perhaps in your mind it does?

In the minds of rational people, it was relatively obvious.

Everyone saw the planes strike the towers and the ensuing fireball and the fires afterwards.

Rational, sensible and logical people can derive that, that has pretty much everything to do with why they collapsed.

Logical, rational and sensible people would have understood that the likelihood of mysterious people sneaking in undetected for several months, ripping out dry walls, drilling into columns, placing in detonation charges, laying of thousands of meters of detonation charges, completely undetected is as near to zero as possible, would mean the collapse had something, if not everything to do with the impact and subsequant fires that followed the plane crashes.

So to examine every single member of steel would be superfluous and a reasonable engineer would understand that they would only need a select few structural members to examine the specific dynamics of the collapse.

But, lets be honest, even if they had studied and documented every single piece of steel recovered, you and the truth movement would still reject those findings as that would not satisfy your psychological cognitive bias that this tragic occurence must be a conspiracy.

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

For a rational person, an investigation of a crime of this magnitude would involve careful analysis of physical evidence. And it doesn't involve examining "every single member of steel" but storing them, which ironically they were able to do before the debris was sold off as scrap. Analysis could be done readily across many years (which is ironically what happened for this investigation) involving thousands of experts on the matter. Finally, the claim that such a process is not necessary because any findings would still be rejected is nonsense.

 

[ralfyman]

The high standard is using facts. There were none in ralfyman's post.

The majority of the WTC stell was not sold for scrap until much later,and each piece of steel was inspected by a team of experts before being removed from the pile. Some were sent to scrap, others were sent for more forensic work based on type of damage.

They only way to recreate the collapse is with computers, unless you think they should have rebuilt the entire WTC complex, and flown 767's into them.

That leaves computer modeling, and a lot of grease-board work by men and women way smarter than I am. I understand that my lack of education in physics, metallurgy, engineering, and a host of specific technical training means that when a bunch of qualified experts tell me what happened was "X x Y + Z = BOOM" then I have two options: One - go to college and get an Masters in structural engineering, and review their work. Two - STFU about it because I lack the ability to grasp the majority of the technical work.

CTists never acknowledge their intellectual shortcomings and insist on a level playing field where their hair-brained theories hold equal weight as the experts. That can't be allowed to happen in the real world.

According to the FEMA report, much of it was sold as scrap, and given a description of the selection process, not likely involved careful examination.

Also, there was no valid reason for selling the debris as scrap. They could have stayed at the yards for further examination.

Relying solely on computers without careful analysis of the debris is illogical.

 

[ralfyman]

I'm reminded of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin asks his dad how they know the listed weight limit to put on signs for bridges. Calvin's dad says (jokingly): "They drive heavier and heavier trucks until the bridge collapses, and then they build it all over again."

I imagine that's how conspiracists think real engineers work.

Hank

Exactly. The materials used for constructing bridges are examined and tested, among others, before the bridges are built.

Similarly, physical evidence is important in a crime scene, and must be stored and examined properly. That did not happen with 9-11.

 

[ralfyman]

Only if you are ignorant of statistics.

Even statistical information is based on physical realities.

 

[ralfyman]

Why did the FBI need to save steel until conspiracy theorists', with wild baseless fantasy claims, skepticism is satisfied?

You were debunked over 2 years ago, 19 terrorists did 9/11.

Your first sentence is not clear.

Your second sentence makes no sense at all. Whatever motive is given, physical evidence in a crime scene is always stored and examined carefully.

 

[ralfyman]

FBI's biggest investigation in history, ignored by 9/11 truth fantasy believers. 16 years of 9/11 truth spreading dumbed down lies fooling gullible CTers; mocking the murder of thousands by gullible followers of UBL.

Gullible truthers, gullible terrorists.

As I explained earlier, what's illogical about this investigation is that most of the physical evidence was sold off as scrap without careful examination, and the FEMA report reveals this.

BTW, I'm not a truther. My argument is actually based on being a skeptic.

 

[ralfyman]

Why would anyone check each steel structural member of the WTC buildings? It would be a waste of time. If wings of an aircraft were known to have failed, why would investigators spend wasted time and money examining the tail cone mounts of that aircraft?

Certain steel members were selected for examination for a very good reason.

Because that's what they do in aircraft crash investigations.

Also, it's a matter of storing the evidence and examining them later. There was no valid reason for selling them off as scrap, and the excuse that that happened because there would have been no time to examine them is illogical, either, as the investigation extended to many years.

 

[beachnut]

Because that's what they do in aircraft crash investigations.

Also, it's a matter of storing the evidence and examining them later. There was no valid reason for selling them off as scrap, and the excuse that that happened because there would have been no time to examine them is illogical, either, as the investigation extended to many years.

On 9/11 the aircraft had no need to be put back together, the planes were crashed by terrorists, it is a crime, not an accident. Aircraft are put back together to solve why, what caused the accident. On 9/11 the aircraft were crashed on purpose, there is no need to put Flight 93 back together, we have the black box, it shows the terrorists flew the plane into the ground. We know from passengers, black box, CVR, ATC tapes, who caused the crash.

There is video evidence fire caused the collapse. Steel saved, was unique, or near the impact zones; however damage to the steel made it hard to identify where the steel was from in the WTC towers. Don't need steel saved to know who did 9/11, 19 terrorists committed the crime. The massive crime was done by 19 terrorists, ignoring this fact is not being skeptical, it is ignoring evidence.

Do you know NIST Goals, and with a few samples of steel, able to confirm the WTC towers steel was right, as built. NIST was not out to solve crime, NIST had goals which you ignore. Don't need steel to know who did 9/11. Fire caused the collapse, what is your point; did you see fire, do you understand fire science, and the properties of steel.

Knowing the design of the WTC towers is enough to solve how they collapsed; what is the point. If you want a new investigation, what is the purpose - we already know the tower collapsed after the planes hit due to office fires, the biggest ones in history.

Fires has totaled highrise buildings in the past, nothing new on 9/11 except the fires were not fought in 1, 2, and 7. Fires not fought.

What are you skeptical about? Fire caused the collapse, unless you have other evidence.
19 terrorists took four planes and crashed them, nothing to be skeptical about that unless evidence is ignored.

Ignore the evidence, ignore engineers, that is not being skeptical. Why do we need to put the planes back together? 9/11 was not an accident, NTSB does accidents, FBI does crime. If the FBI thought the steel was needed to solve why 19 terrorists took four planes and murder Americans, they would have saved the steel. It was not needed to solve the crime.

If you don't understand steel fails in fire, and a WTC tower floor fails at 29,000,000 pounds, you are not a skeptic, you lack knowledge of the WTC structure, and the effects of fire, the properties of steel.

When we know a pilot crashed a plane on purpose, we don't have to build the plane - it makes no sense. You are confusing solving an accident cause, vs solving a crime. To solve 9/11 the FBI found who on the planes had motive, identified by last words from crew and passengers about who did what... 9/11 was solved on 9/11 because the terrorists used airline tickets, and left DNA behind in the impact areas, and in the places they were at before 9/11.

What are you skeptical about? 19 terrorists did it, due to evidence, fire caused the collapse, due to evidence, science, engineering etc.

Did you miss the FBI investigation, the biggest in history? Did you tell the FBI they needed to save the steel, and why? What did the FBI say. WDTFBIS

Because that's what they do in aircraft crash investigations.

Yes, for accidents, but not when a pilot crashes on purpose. Crimes and accidents are different.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Even statistical information is based on physical realities.

Another area in which Truthers display considerable ignorance.

 

[Sceptic-PK]

Because that's what they do in aircraft crash investigations.

Are you seriously telling me you can't tell the difference between an accident of unknown origin vs what happened on 911?

 

[skyeagle409]

Because that's what they do in aircraft crash investigations.

No they don't and I was an aircraft airframe inspector. You don't waste time on structural members that have no bearing to the primary structural failure. Ever wondered what the so-called black boxes are for? Why waste time checking the tail cone when the it was determined the failure was cracked wing spar? You concentrate on where the failure occurred.

Also, it's a matter of storing the evidence and examining them later. There was no valid reason for selling them off as scrap, and the excuse that that happened because there would have been no time to examine them is illogical, either, as the investigation extended to many years.

It is evident that you have no experience in making that determination. I might add that I have posed with some WTC steel and knew that some of the steel had made its way into the construction of the USS New York and knew that impact damage and fire were responsible for the collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7.

It was evident that some of the WTC steel was weakened by fire in addition to impact damage where structural loads were redistributed before fire finished the job in all three cases. I might add that WTC 5 had suffered an internal collapse due to fire only.

 

[skyeagle409]

As I explained earlier, what's illogical about this investigation is that most of the physical evidence was sold off as scrap without careful examination, and the FEMA report reveals this.

What physical evidence? Are you claiming that CD was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings?

The fact the WTC buildings were buckling during the fires before they collapsed was evidence enough that fire in conjunction with impact damage was responsible for the collapse of those buildings. Videos and seismic data proved that CD had nothing to do with the collapse of the WTC buildings. There was not a hint nor sound of explosions in the seconds before nor during the collapse of the WTC buildings.

 

[skyeagle409]

Similarly, physical evidence is important in a crime scene, and must be stored and examined properly. That did not happen with 9-11.

That is false and I have even posted photos of WTC steel that were being marked and examined by investigators.

 

[skyeagle409]

For a rational person, an investigation of a crime of this magnitude would involve careful analysis of physical evidence. And it doesn't involve examining "every single member of steel" but storing them, which ironically they were able to do before the debris was sold off as scrap. Analysis could be done readily across many years (which is ironically what happened for this investigation) involving thousands of experts on the matter. Finally, the claim that such a process is not necessary because any findings would still be rejected is nonsense.

Let's take a look here.

Why did NIST not Consider a “Controlled Demolition

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.
http://www.webcitation.org/5pvOUTcar

 

[BStrong]

No, ralfyman is right, you're the one who is blind but fancies yourself a skeptic with high standards.

Sent from my IBM Simon at Mount Hua Teahouse.

Wasn't that an accusation somebody directed at a certain JFK CTist?