Adventures with AE911truth

[uk_dave]

So they are dead then?

OK that clears up that misunderstanding.

The erroneous reports of them being alive were just that then. Because, of course, they couldn't be known to be alive if they couldn't be shown to be alive because then they'd be dead, not alive. Or something.

C'mon doug, you're sounding like a teenager. Let's have some meat to your arguments. Impress us.

Here we are now
Entertain us

...and so forth.

 

[Mashuna]

I'm most impressed by the speeches he made after they killed him.

I think you're getting Kennedy confused with Tupac again.

 

[8den]

Its impossible for them to appear in public because what they would have to say would thoroughly discredit the USA and its president and likely cause something close to a revolution.
.

So the awesome power of this administration is such that

A) they can control the media into not investigating that these hijackers are alive.

B) Cow governments into suppressing the continuted existance of these men.

But also they cannot control the media to the extent that they cannot stop reports of these men being alive? Doug is a little consistency too much to ask for?

 

[e^n]

You guys seem to talk a lot but almost never say anything. Then you had pixels to the conversation as if to emphasise the previous point with a further waste of bandwidth.

Doug, you claim this but you have yet to respond to my very simple question. Why have you not even read NIST NCSTAR 1-1?

 

[pomeroo]

Its impossible for them to appear in public because what they would have to say would thoroughly discredit the USA and its president and likely cause something close to a revolution.

When that sort of thing happens people get killed off instead. Don't you know any history of your own country ? Every monetary reformer except Jackson was killed and Jackson got awfully lucky because two pistols did not go off.

You should listen to a few of Kennedys speeches before they killed him.

Obviously, you are far too dumb to figure out that if your imaginary conspiracy existed, it would surely kill anyone it identified as a hijacker.

Duh!

You should read a serious book on the JFK assassination. This idiocy gets tiresome.

 

[Doug Plumb]

Why have you not even read NIST NCSTAR 1-1?

I have read bits of it and specifically looked at the damaged floors and the associated support column damage. Its not difficult to see the the building should have remained standing from the damage. The core is built to a factor of being able to support 6 times their normal weight, the outside was built to 20 times its normal gravity load. Its not hard to figure out that the building should have remained standing.

The building designers confirm that the building was designed to stand.

The building remained standing and its natural frequency of vibration did not change therefore the building remained standing & solid.

Its obvious that 9/11 was an inside job. You can look at it any number of ways with mutually independent sets of facts and still conclude that it was an inside job.

The problem is that members of this "bowel movement" that supports the official version just do not understand the historical and sociologic meaning of 9/11. Many people think that this set of events set in motion will ultimately benefit them.

When they get the RFID chip inside you you are dead. You are directly property of this empire and they have absolute power over you and everyone else. A great big vice is going to slowly squeeze you just like its squeezing people now because people in control will just get greedier and greedier and more paranoid and squeeeze even the self proclaimed "elites" more and more.

 

[e^n]

I have read bits of it and specifically looked at the damaged floors and the associated support column damage. Its not difficult to see the the building should have remained standing from the damage. The core is built to a factor of being able to support 6 times their normal weight, the outside was built to 20 times its normal gravity load. Its not hard to figure out that the building should have remained standing.

You misunderstand dead and live loads. Still, considering you make the claim they misrepresented column size, why is it that you have read NCSTAR 1-1 and missed page 11?

The building designers confirm that the building was designed to stand.

Who? None of them agree with you.

The building remained standing and its natural frequency of vibration did not change therefore the building remained standing & solid.

Indeed it did, impressively so.

Its obvious that 9/11 was an inside job. You can look at it any number of ways with mutually independent sets of facts and still conclude that it was an inside job.

Then present them, I have listened to many many theories and not a single one has been based on facts.

 

[Totovader]

It appears as though Doug is unable to resolve the contradiction of believing the FDNY are "murderers"- and that this is backed up by easily accessible facts- anyone who doesn't believe it is obviously a fool, yet he is unable to confirm what the stance is on this for his organization.

That's the problem with these groups- they're so desperate for companionship and numbers that any theories are valid as long as it's not the theory supported by the science and the evidence. This means that all members usually contradict each other- and the group is just a superficial political organization with no direction.

Science doesn't work that way.

So, which is it, Doug- do the other members of the AE911Truth organization believe- as you do- that the FDNY was in on it, or are they disinfo agents or something?

If they're misguided, then I would love to see you debate them. You can all pretend to have evidence; it will be like make-believe time.

 

[JimBenArm]

I have read bits of it and specifically looked at the damaged floors and the associated support column damage. Its not difficult to see the the building should have remained standing from the damage. The core is built to a factor of being able to support 6 times their normal weight, the outside was built to 20 times its normal gravity load. Its not hard to figure out that the building should have remained standing.

The building designers confirm that the building was designed to stand.

Care to provide some proof of this?

The building remained standing and its natural frequency of vibration did not change therefore the building remained standing & solid.

??? What is this supposed to mean? I mean, really, do you just make up science-like terms and spout them like they actually are relevent?

Its obvious that 9/11 was an inside job. You can look at it any number of ways with mutually independent sets of facts and still conclude that it was an inside job.

So why do I remain so stubbornly unconvinced of this?

The problem is that members of this "bowel movement" that supports the official version just do not understand the historical and sociologic meaning of 9/11. Many people think that this set of events set in motion will ultimately benefit them.

Benefit me? Oh, yeah, I can see the big benefits now...

When they get the RFID chip inside you you are dead. You are directly property of this empire and they have absolute power over you and everyone else. A great big vice is going to slowly squeeze you just like its squeezing people now because people in control will just get greedier and greedier and more paranoid and squeeeze even the self proclaimed "elites" more and more.

Uhm. Yeah. Okay then. Now we're really out in looney-tunes land. No reply needed, this is just absurd on its face.

Have fun in Fantasy Land! I hear the Teacup ride is lots of fun!

 

[Totovader]

I have read bits of it and specifically looked at the damaged floors and the associated support column damage. Its not difficult to see the the building should have remained standing from the damage. The core is built to a factor of being able to support 6 times their normal weight, the outside was built to 20 times its normal gravity load. Its not hard to figure out that the building should have remained standing.

The building designers confirm that the building was designed to stand.

The building remained standing and its natural frequency of vibration did not change therefore the building remained standing & solid.

Its obvious that 9/11 was an inside job. You can look at it any number of ways with mutually independent sets of facts and still conclude that it was an inside job.

The problem is that members of this "bowel movement" that supports the official version just do not understand the historical and sociologic meaning of 9/11. Many people think that this set of events set in motion will ultimately benefit them.

When they get the RFID chip inside you you are dead. You are directly property of this empire and they have absolute power over you and everyone else. A great big vice is going to slowly squeeze you just like its squeezing people now because people in control will just get greedier and greedier and more paranoid and squeeeze even the self proclaimed "elites" more and more.

Perfect example of an argument from incredulity- tied together with a nice appeal to spite. You have no facts or figures to support your assertions, so you just have to make them personally believable and hope nobody questions you.

We will, though. Your personal incredulity means bupkis.

Please provide your calculations showing the towers would not have collapsed under the conditions outlined in the NIST investigation.

 

[Calcas]

So, which is it, Doug- do the other members of the AE911Truth organization believe- as you do- that the FDNY was in on it, or are they disinfo agents or something?

Lets ask them. Is anyone signed up over there? Or are they another Balsamo type group that bans anyone that doesn't drink their kool-aid?

 

[Civilized Worm]

Its impossible for them to appear in public because what they would have to say would thoroughly discredit the USA and its president and likely cause something close to a revolution.

So you concede that they have no in fact "shown up alive". At last we are getting somewhere.

When that sort of thing happens people get killed off instead. Don't you know any history of your own country ? Every monetary reformer except Jackson was killed and Jackson got awfully lucky because two pistols did not go off.

You should listen to a few of Kennedys speeches before they killed him.

What part of "Glasgow, Scotland" has you confused?

The problem is that members of this "bowel movement" that supports the official version just do not understand the historical and sociologic meaning of 9/11. Many people think that this set of events set in motion will ultimately benefit them.

I'm not really interested in the historical sociological meaning right now, I'm interested in the facts.


I'm still waiting to hear when it was admitted/proven to be true that AIDS was created by "higher powers". After all it's not like Alex Jones would just make something like that up, what with him not being a conspiracy theorist and everything.

 

[R.Mackey]

Care to provide some proof of this?

The "perimeter columns could handle 20 times their normal load" is a badly butchered quote-mine from comments that John Skilling made to the Engineering News Record in 1964. He is quoted as saying the live loads on the perimeter columns could be increased by 2000% before the perimeter columns would fail.

Assuming the quote is even accurate, this ignores, of course, the fact that the perimeter columns were sized for the overall load, e.g. the dead and superimposed dead loads, live loads, and also the wind loads. If you juggle the math such that every drop of margin gets treated as live load, i.e. on a windless day, you might get to a factor of 20. However, even that is suspect.

In other words, it's a lie. A stupid one.

So who vetted Mr. Plumb's credentials, I wonder? Who watches the watchers?

 

[Brainache]

So who vetted Mr. Plumb's credentials, I wonder? Who watches the watchers?

I'm not sure, but I think he might be a Professor. My friend Colonel Mustard told me.

 

[Furcifer]

[snip] The core is built to a factor of being able to support 6 times their normal weight [snip]

Isn't this wrong as well? I thought the core was 6 times as "strong" as the perimeter, and that's based on Greenings rough estimate using surface area.

 

[Dave Rogers]

So who vetted Mr. Plumb's credentials, I wonder? Who watches the watchers?

A good point - it's not necessarily reasonable to expect Mr. Average 15-year old twoofer to know the difference between live and dead loads (actually, 47 year old physicists have been known to need it clarifying ), but Doug Plumb is supposed to be a member of an architects' and engineers' group. One should be able to expect him to understand the basic concepts involved.

Dave

 

[R.Mackey]

You can't go by surface area alone... the perimeter columns used steel with up to 100 ksi strength, whereas the core used much more typical A36 and similar alloys.

The design for the WTC Towers had the perimeter and the core each carrying about half of the total gravity loads in normal service. We need to define "strong" more precisely before we go into further detail.

 

[Furcifer]

You can't go by surface area alone... the perimeter columns used steel with up to 100 ksi strength, whereas the core used much more typical A36 and similar alloys.

The design for the WTC Towers had the perimeter and the core each carrying about half of the total gravity loads in normal service. We need to define "strong" more precisely before we go into further detail.

Yah, this is how it gets people confused. To be honest even with a background in building I'm not exactly sure what loads were handled by the "core" and what were handled by the "exterior". And even then, those loads are heavily dependent on the truss connections. Long story short, you couldn't take the material from the two buildings and build one 834m tall mega building, which should kinda put it into perspective for the laymen.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The woo runs deep with this one.

[Darth Vader]The woo is strong with this one.[/Darth Vader]

 

[T.A.M.]

The mark is there, that is for sure...

TAM