Let us have a fact check.

[Without Rights]

Show me the facts is a common statement made here against so-called truthers. Lets reverse the roll shall we?

What are the facts that prove the Government's account?

I have asked several times but never get a response, so maybe a thread dedicated to the facts will finally get an answer.

 

[Pardalis]

http://www.9-11commission.gov/

 

[uk_dave]

I'll chip in on this one.

The collapse of the towers

Fact:
Steel performs very poorly in conditions of fire and small steel sections such as those used in the floor trusses can easily fail if not adequately protected.

Fact:
The redundancy built in to the design of the buildings allowed for structural damage from a slow moving passenger jet which had dumped most of its fuel. The effect of fire was impossible to model when the towers were designed and could not be included in any meaningful way into the redundancy design

Fact:
The towers were constructed from many thousands of individual members, which were welded or bolted together to form a whole. As such, those connections often prove to be the weakest points of a structure and can be the first to fail if the structure is over stressed.

Fact:
Photographic records show significant sagging of the floors in the affected area, causing inward bowing of the external columns and subsequent failure of those columns

Fact:
The towers were never designed to remain standing to their full height if the floor assemblies were removed

Fact:
The towers performed remarkably well given the amount of structural damage they experienced, but this damage coupled with the fires ultimately resulted in catastrophic failure.

 

[Gravy]

Let us have a year check, O factless one.

It's March, 2002! I know the hijackers and plotters have been identified during the world's largest criminal investigation, and that the world's largest engineering investigation is underway, but why won't anyone tell me why a "truth" movement that's founded, funded, and populated by incompetents, liars, and lunatics hasn't formed to stem this unwelcome tide of facts?

Oh, wait, it's 2007. There is such a "truth" movement, and it's perhaps the worst-named thing on the planet.

Nevermind.

 

[DavidJames]

This document has at least 2 facts, now are you going to continue being obtuse?

 

[WildCat]

In case you missed it in the other thread...

NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, photos on pages 62, 63, and 64 showing the dropped (sagging) floors prior to collapse.

Page 65 is a photo of the kink in the building as it starts to collapse.

Pages 58 and 59 show the outer columns being pulled in prior to collapse.

All consistent with the NIST collapse theory.

But this should be old news to you, because you've already read all this right?

 

[Without Rights]

I'll chip in on this one.

The collapse of the towers

Fact:
Steel performs very poorly in conditions of fire and small steel sections such as those used in the floor trusses can easily fail if not adequately protected.

If steel performs poorly in conditions of fire then alot of steel structures would collapse because of fire. Throughout history steel structures have performed just as designed regardless of size of the fire.

Fact:
The redundancy built in to the design of the buildings allowed for structural damage from a slow moving passenger jet which had dumped most of its fuel. The effect of fire was impossible to model when the towers were designed and could not be included in any meaningful way into the redundancy design

That doesn't support the govt account, that is an example of rhetoric.

Fact:
The towers were constructed from many thousands of individual members, which were welded or bolted together to form a whole. As such, those connections often prove to be the weakest points of a structure and can be the first to fail if the structure is over stressed.

Your first part is a fact the second part is rhetoric. Where are the examples that show that steel connections are the "first to fail" in a fire.

Fact:
Photographic records show significant sagging of the floors in the affected area, causing inward bowing of the external columns and subsequent failure of those columns

Doesn't that contradict your last "fact". Why did all the welding and bolts fail everywhere except where the trusses connected to the outer column. Those bolts stayed so strong that they pulled in huge steel beams and also broke through the concrete slabs while all the other just failed completely.

Fact:
The towers were never designed to remain standing to their full height if the floor assemblies were removed

Building 7 was designed exactly like that. They were able to remove floor assemblies completely in order to accomodate tenants needs.

Fact:
The towers performed remarkably well given the amount of structural damage they experienced, but this damage coupled with the fires ultimately resulted in catastrophic failure.

Not a fact, rhetoric, opinion, but not fact.

 

[Without Rights]

In case you missed it in the other thread...

You mean NIST put out something that collaborates their story. Wow thats fascinating.

 

[Pardalis]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/local_links.php?catid=18

 

[WildCat]

You mean NIST put out something that collaborates their story. Wow thats fascinating.

So you're not going to address the corroborating evidence?

 

[WildCat]

You mean NIST put out something that collaborates their story. Wow thats fascinating.

I can't get over this post. Without Rights has actually dismissed evidence for the sole reason that it corroborates the NIST account.

 

[firecoins]

2 commercial airlines crashing into each WTC were videotaped and withnessed by tens od thousands of people live.

The bowing in each WTC tower that caused collpase was videotaped.

The damage to WTC 7 was videotaped
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=6186921835292416413

Pieces of the 2 jets were found on the on the streets of NY and videotaped.

14,000 people evacuated the WTC and not 1 saw a bomb. Hundred of firefighters and cops who are alive today, were in the WTC and they didn't see a bomb. I guess they all work for the Neocon conspiracy?

Clearly there were no space beams, nuclear bombs, planes with pods on them or buildings rigged for destruction.

 

[brodski]

5 key facts to support the evidence based theory against the paranoia based controlled demolition theories.

1) Thousands of people witnessed planes hitting the twin towers, and eth pentagon "live".
2) Hundreds of millions saw the planes hit the towers on video and/ or TV.
3) analysis of the collapse of eth twin towers by both US government agenesis and independent universities, structural engineers and architects around the globe have demonstrated that the planes crashing into eth towers could have caused the collapse in the manner which thousands witnessed live, and hundreds of millions witnessed on TV/ video.
4) No alternative theory of why the towers collapsed explains all of the observed data in as simple a manner (Occam's razor at work).
5) Engineers in nations who are neutral or hostile towards either the current US administration or eth USA in general have not been able to refute the findings of NIST.

And no this isn’t “all” we have, just a brief overview.

 

[Without Rights]

I can't get over this post. Without Rights has actually dismissed evidence for the sole reason that it corroborates the NIST account.

Evidence is not facts.

 

[Dave Rogers]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5405555553528290546

The perimeter columns can be seen bowing inwards prior to the collapse, and to fail by collapsing inwards at the point of collapse initiation.

I'd add some analysis as to why this is incompatible with CD, but you've made it clear you only want facts.

Dave

 

[WildCat]

Evidence is not facts.

Dammit WR, I already nominated you for the Stundie, and now I'm going to have to edit this into it...

 

[babazaroni]

Building 7 was designed exactly like that. They were able to remove floor assemblies completely in order to accomodate tenants needs.

It was designed with stronger floor trusses in order to allow some floor trusses to be removed. This is how Solomon Brothers were able to build there trading spaces.

This would not be possible with the towers.

WTC 7 collapsed in an entirely different manner then the towers.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Evidence is not facts.

Ah, I see. You're saying they're not facts because they corroborate the NIST account.

Dave

 

[chipmunk stew]

In case you missed it:

Fact: the 19 men implicated in the plot have all disappeared off the face of the earth
Fact: several of the 19 men were identified by people on the planes
Fact: records show that at least one of the 19 men on each plane had taken flight lessons at the same flight school
Fact: the 19 men had financial connections with a known terrorist group
Fact: records show that some of the 19 men lived in Germany and associated with convicted terrorists there
Fact: the 19 men appear on the four flight manifests
Fact: the flight 93 cockpit recorder captured the voices of men speaking Arabic taking over the plane
Fact: several of the 19 men appear on a martyrdom video talking about their upcoming mission
Fact: Khalid Sheik Mohammed confessed to his role in planning the attack
Fact: Osama Bin Laden appears on video confessing to foreknowledge of the plot and praising its success

 

[Without Rights]

5 key facts to support the evidence based theory against the paranoia based controlled demolition theories.

1) Thousands of people witnessed planes hitting the twin towers, and eth pentagon "live".

Agreed

2) Hundreds of millions saw the planes hit the towers on video and/ or TV.

Agreed

3) analysis of the collapse of eth twin towers by both US government agenesis and independent universities, structural engineers and architects around the globe have demonstrated that the planes crashing into eth towers could have caused the collapse in the manner which thousands witnessed live, and hundreds of millions witnessed on TV/ video.

"Could have", not absolutely did. So not a fact.

4) No alternative theory of why the towers collapsed explains all of the observed data in as simple a manner (Occam's razor at work).

More info is required to respond to this. The govt theory doesn't explain all observed data either.

5) Engineers in nations who are neutral or hostile towards either the current US administration or eth USA in general have not been able to refute the findings of NIST.

You are right. That doesn't make it fact. Also who would want to step up and get labelled insane or get fired like what has already taken place. But some engineers do have alternate theories that explain the total collapse. Something NIST doesn't even try to do. You say they have not been able to refute, but most have not tried to refute it.