There's this bit of nonsense from you:
You realise that you are automatically assuming that kerosene vapor will result in an instant explosion, right? Well, let's say you hav an ingition source, but is your oxygen percentage enough to cause a burn? You premise seems to be that the existance of white smoke, if it is not burnt Kerosene, must automatically explode. That's a false assumption.
White smoke according to Gravy was kerosene vapor. Vapor in order to form, has to have a surfact hot enough to place kerosene on it to form a white vapor. According to Ed, the explosion took place, a stairwell door blew open and out rolled white smoke with no further explosion from the theory that the smoke is kerosene vapor, as per Gravy's paper. Apparently you ignored both articles that mention nothing of white color in regards to jet fuel vapor. How does an explosion in a stairwell supposedly from kerosene vapor, create keroesene vapor???
Because we know that jets carry jet fuel.
Yes, and two miracles have to happen for that jet fuel to reach the basement to cause the damage witnessed and described. You believe in miracles in regards to this event, and I don't.
1) McCabe says he was in tower 1.
2) McCabe says he was about 30 feet from the door that blew.
3) McCabe says that just beyond that door was the field office.
4) McCabe says that the people in the field office were burned: "I can smell their burnt flesh."
5) McCabe says that smoke was being drawn up the elevator shaft: "the smoke was being sucked up the shaft now" I think you know that the elevators were in the center of the building, not outside it.
6) The field office was across from the freight elevator.
And you forgot those workers, secretaries to be exact, said a bomb went off in their office. Did you leave that portion out of his account by accident or on purpose? Perhaps you could provide a graphic of the sublevels and place on the plan where you think all of the witnesses were located.
I have repeatedly asked you to justify these statements, and have repeatedly called them straw man arguments. I'm asking you to think about what you write.
Here is how I justify the statement. You contend that people who saw a fire ball near the impact level prove a fireball traveled to the basement to cause the destruction there. You content that people who saw a fireball in the basement support that a fireball came from the impact zone. Correct me if I'm wrong so far. Therefore, I'm asking did anyone see the fireball from the impact zone that traveled to the sub-levels? To my knowledge, no. Your assumption, unless I'm mistaken, is that because people saw a fireball near the impact zone and people saw a fireball in the basement, that the fireball came from the same source. In order for that to happen, two miracles have to take place. Arturo Griffith lived and is not burnt by the fireball that traveled down Car 50 to the basement below sub-1. And his wife lived so that a fireball could do the damage in sub-1. Not only that, there is no calculation provided by NIST or any other expert agency that proves a fireball caused the damage. No ratio of air to fuel. No psi calculations, just assumptons. In fact, they made lots of assumptions to determine how much fire burned off and how much didn't in the original impact.
If you want to know if every truck that entered the WTC truck dock was inspected and sniffed by a dog, why don't you contact the Port Authority Police Department and ask them?
According to the story below, all documents and records were destroyed.
Gravy, I've repeatedly asked you to point out the errors that you stated I made in my analysis. Will you be doing that anytime soon?
In regards to your strawman:
Gravy since Gumbot got to the claimed straw before me:
Let me see if I understand your position:
So jetfuelA travels all the way the way to the basement in Car 50 shaft to at least sub-4 after impact and initial explosion. Jetfuel travels all the way down Car 6's shaft after the impact and initial explosion.
All of this occurs after the initial impact explosion and remains unignited?
The fuel remains in liquid form even after Mrs. Arturo's terrible burning experience in her elevator car 6 and travels down the shaft unignited. Somehow the shafts are already hot enough to produce kerosene vapor in the form of white smoke but still doesn't ignite. The kerosene vapor travels out of the shaft and into a stairwell to be witnessed by Ed after the door explodes open.
Somehow, it ignites more than once with enough energy to cause two partial collapses at B-4 and the PATH plaza, destroys a parking garage, destroys an office room, knocks people down, burns people, reminds people of the 1993 truck bombing or bombs, and apparently the cause for the FBI's initial working hypothesis that terrorists used a car or truck packed with explosives. That is your excuse for calling stawman? Can anyone say "Razor"?
See? Even a twoofer can spot the idiocy of basement bombs in a top-down collapse.
Strawman! Your including the event in the basement near impact time with the top down collapse. I've yet to state I think it caused the collapse initiaition which of course I don't content that. Some twoofers contend that a beam weapon brought down the towers to, that doesn't mean I agree with them.
In regard to the "Sakher 'Rocky' Hammad" story, there was no proof of any terrorist activity on his part. Do you think his presence in the building was suspcious just because he is Middle Eastern? He had a visitor's pass, thousands of people obtained them everyday. Where's the evidence of a connection between 9/11 and the fraudulent driver's license case?
Obtaining a driver's license is not a terrorist activity to my knowledge.
You need to read the multiple press reports on Rocky. A suitable question would be who signed his work pass that allowed him access to all sublevels. He was working for Magic Plumbing or at least that was what his business card had on it. He stated he was working on sprinkler systems on September 5th. However, PA states that they work on the sprinkler systems so he could have been working for a tenet. They have no record of Rocky's presence in the building do to the collapse. His ethnic profile fits that of the terrorists that attacked the building in 1993 and 2001. He also had a cousin with him during his arrest for the driver's license fraud. The woman accused of helping him had apparently help the men obtained man licenses for "cousins" of Rocky's. And she was murdered in a fiery crash before serving as a witness.
You do understand that the descripton of the press being destroyed could simply mean it was knocked over or buried by debris, right?
A press that is knocked over doesn't mean it is destroyed. Have you contacted him to determine what exactly he meant, instead of interpeting his statment?
Gravy in your paper you felt the need to interpet the statements regarding the press and insert them into the witness account. Is there any reason why you did that instead of letting the statement stand as is? Was it to try to lessen the extent of damage for the reader?
What was the point of this basement bomb?
Who planted it?
In theory alone as I'm not an expert I suggest to weaken the core, to reduce resistance of the sublevels, to try to kill as many people as possible, to hamper fire rescue operations, to split rescue response, to destroy evacuation routes.
Who planted it? So far the only possible suspect is Sakher 'Rocky' Hammadly that I've come across and perhaps his relatives.
