10 story hole in WTC 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
twinstead said:
Oh, I forgot. Part of your particular fantasy is to suggest that the only reasons why the majority of CD experts on Earth hasn't come out and questioned the official story is because they are afraid of losing their jobs.
Click to expand...
No, the majority of experts on Earth have not stated any opinion one way or the other.

Most are not aware of the controversy about WTC 7.

How many experts have said that WTC 7 was not a CD?

No one will loose their job for supporting the 'official' hypothesis.

You find nothing wrong with the crickets chirping in the world of CD experts concerning the WTC because you have built into your (and by YOUR I mean the minority view that you hold concerning CD) little theory a nice little out to explain it.
Click to expand...
You don't know what the experts think because the only CD expert to say one way or the other is Jowenko.

If you know of any CD experts who have stated that WTC 7 was not a CD, please list them.
 
The world body of experts have all seen the collapse of WTC and have read about it. If they felt there was error in the conclusion, you can be sure that they would say something. And yes there have been many who have directly stated that it does not appear to be a CD.

Please prove to us that the entire world body of experts are all being quit because the entire world body of experts will all lose their jobs if they say anything other than what they have already been saying. You keep making the claim, now prove you aren't just making it up because your claims hold no water. Anyone can sit here and say "Oh well they don't speak out because they would lsoe their jobs". Forget about it being an absolutely unfounded and absurd claim, back it up.

No one will lose thier job for saying it was a CD. You accuse someone of not knowing what the experts think, while you go about claiming exactly what they think. Talk about a ******** artist. Companies like Implosion world and others have gone on the record stating it was not a CD.

Wow, you got one guy who knows veery little about the circumstances and you use that one person to dismiss everyone else. Once again, referring to your cherry picking information to support your pre-determined conclusions.

Tell us, did Jowenko lose his job? Oops, that's right, you just disproved your own claims.
 
Video of workers leaving wtc7 before blows up

I happened upon this interesting video. There is an explosion and one of the guys looks back. Another voice says "what was that"? Listen to the audio carefully as one of the workers or the cop is saying the building is going to blow up. The audio seems like someone monkey'd with it though. I can't tell if they are just repeating what one of the guys said or if it's a voice over or combined audio.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4
 
Jonnyclueless said:
The world body of experts have all seen the collapse of WTC and have read about it. If they felt there was error in the conclusion, you can be sure that they would say something.
Click to expand...
WTC ? .... you left off the '7'

There is no way you could know if the world body of experts has seen the videos of WTC 7.

And yes there have been many who have directly stated that it does not appear to be a CD.
Click to expand...
You keep saying that, but you have yet to post the statements of any CD experts who say WTC 7 was not a CD.

The editors of Implosions World are very knowledgeable but they are not CD experts and they did not address the videos of the WTC 7 implosion.
 
GregoryUrich said:
I happened upon this interesting video. There is an explosion and one of the guys looks back. Another voice says "what was that"? Listen to the audio carefully as one of the workers or the cop is saying the building is going to blow up. The audio seems like someone monkey'd with it though. I can't tell if they are just repeating what one of the guys said or if it's a voice over or combined audio.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4
Click to expand...

This a subject for the C7 --- C4 thread
my reply is here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2784615#post2784615
 
Christopher7 said:
You are assuming that there are 10,000 experts who say WTC 7 was not a CD.

Please list some of these experts or stop making that claim.
Click to expand...

Do I ? No, no. I think I'll stick with the experts who actually make the report. Let's see, shall we ?

Most are not aware of the controversy about WTC 7.
Click to expand...

Argument from ignorance, then.

Why do you think that only twoofers are aware of 7 WTC ?
 
Belz... said:
Do I ? No, no. I think I'll stick with the experts who actually make the report. Let's see, shall we ?
Click to expand...
What experts?

Who is it that you are sticking with?

Just because people contributed to the NIST report does not mean they personally believe that WTC 7 was not a CD.

The Final report of 4-5-05 contains he statement "NIST has seen no evidence of CD".

There are no names of experts listed in this report.

As of right now, there are NO experts who have publicly stated that WTC 7 was not a CD.

Ronald Hamburger, chief structural engineer for ABS Consulting and one of the contributers to the NIST report, said:
"It appeared to me that charges had been places in the building"
 
Christopher7 said:
WTC ? .... you left off the '7'

There is no way you could know if the world body of experts has seen the videos of WTC 7.

You keep saying that, but you have yet to post the statements of any CD experts who say WTC 7 was not a CD.

The editors of Implosions World are very knowledgeable but they are not CD experts and they did not address the videos of the WTC 7 implosion.
Click to expand...


Yes I can absolutely say that. And it's pretty well established. Are you going to sit here and claim that the majority of the world knows nothing of the collapse of WTC 7 including those people who study these very things? Quite a claim there.

This forum has been full of statements made by structural engineers and demolition experts saying so. Unfortunately for you these petty circular argument are not worth my time to go dig them up. If you actually had any interest in them, I might go to the effort, but we both know that's not the case. how about you go find a 2nd expert? LOL!!!

You know, because you have found the only person in the world who knows about WTC 7. So since everyone else is unaware of it....

Just like now you are claiming that it's very likely that engineers working on the NIST project may very well blieve it was a CD, yet they specifically state that they can find nothing what so ever to indicate it was one. If one of the engineers thought it was, they would think so because they would find evidence to make them think so. Yet none of them state any such evidence and they go out of their way to claim they have found none.

I apologize for not falling for your cute little tricks. I know the majority of people on the forum don't even respond to you because all you offer are little tricks of wording but actually are completely unable to provide anything substantial while you attack a report that has not even been published yet. But I have a hard time sitting around watching you play games.

I haven't seen a single scientists on records specifically claiming the moon isn't made of cheese. So I guess I win that argument since you cannot refute that the moon is made of cheese.
 
Chris conveniently leaves out the part where the guy also states that he concluded there were no explosives used. When asked what resolved his doubts, he said his work on the project.

But this is a good example of deception.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
This forum has been full of statements made by structural engineers and demolition experts saying so.
Click to expand...
No one has posted the name of a CD company or demolitions expert on this thread that says WTC 7 was not a CD.


Just like now you are claiming that it's very likely that engineers working on the NIST project may very well blieve it was a CD,
Click to expand...
No

yet they specifically state that they can find nothing what so ever to indicate it was one. If one of the engineers thought it was, they would think so because they would find evidence to make them think so. Yet none of them state any such evidence and they go out of their way to claim they have found none.
Click to expand...
The engineers did not say there is no evidence for CD, NIST did.


The owner of a demolitions company says WTC 7 was a CD based on the video evidence.

The videos are, at very least, evidence of a controlled demolition.
 
Yes, demolition companies most certainly HAVE been named and in this very thread. Implosion World is one that I myself names, and in this thread.

Yes you were making that implication.

Oh NIST said there was no evidence. And is NIST a mythical creature? Or just a magical one?

And what do you have, an owner of a Demolition company who's only evidence was the video that was hand picked by CTers and nothing more. He doesn't have all the rest of the information needed to make a proper assessment.

Yet you think the video is all that is needed in order to determine a CD. Therefore proving that the tnrire rest of the world body of engineers, who you and I BOTH know have seen those videos are all just keeping quiet. And to explain that you say they are all afraid to lose their jobs. A claim that you CANNOT back up.

Again, nothing but a song and dance like Lyte. It's getting old and in the end you have absolutely nothing. This is why you and your little movement are not taken seriously, especially not by professionals. This is why when you guys talk about your movement the reaction is generally "9/11 What?".

Because making a legitimate case is about more than dancing around symatics and jumping from issue to issue, and using cheap tactics.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
Chris conveniently leaves out the part where the guy also states that he concluded there were no explosives used. When asked what resolved his doubts, he said his work on the project.

But this is a good example of deception.
Click to expand...
Point taken

It's also a bit off topic because he was talking about the towers.

He said that WTC 7 was the first major structure in the US to collapse because of fire.

He is the first structural engineer i have found that [effectively] says that WTC 7 was not a CD.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
Yes, demolition companies most certainly HAVE been named and in this very thread. Implosion World is one that I myself names, and in this thread.
Click to expand...
Implosion World is not a controlled demolition company.
They do blast analysis and video document CD's.

They did not address the videos of WTC 7.

Oh NIST said there was no evidence. And is NIST a mythical creature? Or just a magical one?
Click to expand...
NIST is headed by a Bush appointee and it is part of the Commerce Department which is headed by a Bush appointee.

The Bush administration systematically distorts scientific documents.

Do you really think that they would not distort this one?

And what do you have, an owner of a Demolition company who's only evidence was the video that was hand picked by CTers and nothing more. He doesn't have all the rest of the information needed to make a proper assessment.
Click to expand...
He was certain after seeing one video. He was then shown another [CBS] several times, and he did not waver in his assessment.

He knows better than you what he needs to say it was a CD.


There is also:

Hugo Bachmann and Jorg Schneider

"In my opinion WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts" says Hugo Bachmann, Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH*. And also Jörg Schneider, another Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH, interprets the small number of existing videos as indices that "WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by explosives".
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/663864.html


William Rice, Civil engineer

http://www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032007/TwinTowers.shtml

Richard Gage, Architect

http://www.911blogger.com/node/8079


Yet you think the video is all that is needed in order to determine a CD.
Click to expand...
So does the owner of a demolitions company and a few million other people.

A poll taken in 2006 said 16% of Americans believe that the collapse of the twin towers were CD's. That's 44 million people. Even allowing for a large margin of error, it's tens of millions.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll
 
Unfit4Command said:
This video has a few quotes from someone who looked at the steel from WTC 7 shortly after the attacks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXKVVI7ZBOY

"It's all complete nonsense. I didn't see any explosives...just evidence of an intense fire."
Click to expand...
Ok, so now we have a structural engineer and a professor of engineering who say WTC 7 was not a CD.

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2001/december5/wtc-125.html

Hamburger:

"We have reason to believe that, without the fire, the buildings could have stood indefinitely "

"Hamburger noted that the fuel in both jetliners burned off rapidly "


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec01/structure_9-11.html

Ron Hamburger:
[FONT=&quot]What they just were not able to survive was the incredibly intense fires that ensued from all of that burning jet fuel.

 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Hassan Astaneh:
We are not sure, of course, what was in those planes but the amount of fuel that came and was delivered to this building was enough, in my opinion, ........... [/FONT][FONT=&quot]What happened here was the initial impact did not cause much damage; it just ignited the fire.

This is what they said in 2001, before they 'did the math'


BTW, they don't mention WTC 7 except to say it collapsed because of fire.

Hamburger did not say how he came to this conclusion in three months.

FEMA and NIST had two years and could only say it "appears possible" in a preliminary report.
 [/FONT]
 
Gravy said:
Chris, can you define "a smoking gun?" We seem to have different ideas about that. Please fill me in, m'kay?
Click to expand...
This is the smoking gun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixwx19t2IMQ



These people agree:

Danny Jowenko, owner of a CD company
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I

Hugo Bachmann and Jörg Schneider, Professors emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH*.
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/663864.html

William Rice, Civil engineer
http://www.vermontguardian.com/comme...inTowers.shtml

Richard Gage, Architect
http://www.911blogger.com/node/8079


Do you know of any qualified people who have viewed the videos of the implosion of WTC 7 and said that it was not a CD?
 
But Chris. What if somebody where to actually risk embarrassing ones self and go around to every CD company and expert on Earth and ask if they thought the WTC was brought down by CD, and say 90% of them said no. Say 80% said no. Say 70% said no

You know what? That would be meaningless to you because no matter WHAT, no matter how much evidence that contradicts you theory is presented, you will never even come close to admit that there may be a chance you are wrong.

Hell, most of us would change our minds in a heartbeat of compelling evidence was presented. The problem is you, the CT, and we, the skeptics disagree fundamentally on what evidence is, and what constitutes a 'smoking gun'.

We disagree on a level so fundamental that we will never come eye-to-eye no matter what.

You can't argue with an ideologue. Now, who exactly is the ideologue here, Chris?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom