peer review.

[twinstead]

No, if you were listening I said that there should have been no conflicts of interest. There were many conflicts of interest on the 911 Commission. I gave you one in Philip Zelikow. Another easily discernable one is Richard Ben-Veniste whose law firm was representing Unocal, who had a lot to gain from the removal of the Taliban with their intent to build an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan to the Caspian area, about which the Taliban was not cooperative and had given the contract to a Unocal competitior from Argentina named Bridas Corporation.

And of course that actually happened didn't it. Oh. Wait. No it didn't.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

That's a claim. It's speculation. I think the reason is that "Truth Movement" papers are wrong, and that it has nothing to do with politics. Like I said above, I can show that they are wrong, and I also can show that they fail the written requirements of any legitimate journal.

Now you are saying it right as "You think the reason is that the papers are wrong".

Yes, I do. That estimate was round and soft to begin with, and a comparison against the Sears Tower suggested that a figure of ~350,000 tons was more credible. We also have to define clearly what mass is included, since the basement and sublevels will be far more massive per floor than anything else in the structure.

Furthermore, comparison against the NIST models reveals that NIST also feels the mass was lower. NIST and Gregory Urich, after the latter revised his calculations, are within about 10% of each other. Not bad. See here for the latest. I still feel this is a bit low owing to difficulties in estimating live loads, but I think these results are well within experimental uncertainty.

Of course, since NIST's numbers agree, then Gregory has not refuted the NIST collapse model in any way -- if anything he's confirmed it.

Now, then, nobody's stopping the "Truth Movement" from publishing anything. Go to it. Tell us what happened. I'm all ears.

Understanding that the live loads are difficult to discern but if the towers had a lower mass close to what Gregory Urich is proposing, then the factors of safety against vertical collapse would have been pretty high like 2.5 or 3 to 1. So if the NIST models on damaged and destroyed core columns is right, that means all of the remaining columns needed to reach at least 600 degrees C in the central core for collapse to ensue. The problem is there is no physical evidence for that so how did the buildings collapse?

 

[T.A.M.]

No, if you were listening I said that there should have been no conflicts of interest. There were many conflicts of interest on the 911 Commission. I gave you one in Philip Zelikow. Another easily discernable one is Richard Ben-Veniste whose law firm was representing Unocal, who had a lot to gain from the removal of the Taliban with their intent to build an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan to the Caspian area, about which the Taliban was not cooperative and had given the contract to a Unocal competitior from Argentina named Bridas Corporation.

How was it a conflict of interest. Only in the minds of those SUSPECTING the USG OF ALLOWING OR CAUSING the 9/11 attacks, is there a conflict of interest. If BUSH was being INVESTIGATED, than I would say there is a possible conflict of interest with Philip Zelikow. Likewise, if The oil companies were the focus of the commission, than perhaps having Richard Ben-Veniste on the commission might have been a conflict.

See you have to look at it, outside the paranoid mindset. Look at it from the perspective of what we all saw, what we all knew, and WHO WAS THE PARTY BEING INVESTIGATED.

But I know why you see it the way you do...because you assume Bush and the others were involved, so to have people on the commission that they had links to is a conflict...I don't see it from that perspective, so to me the commission was fine...no conflicts.

TAM

 

[R.Mackey]

Understanding that the live loads are difficult to discern but if the towers had a lower mass close to what Gregory Urich is proposing, then the factors of safety against vertical collapse would have been pretty high like 2.5 or 3 to 1. So if the NIST models on damaged and destroyed core columns is right, that means all of the remaining columns needed to reach at least 600 degrees C in the central core for collapse to ensue.

Sigh. Your reading comprehension is breathtakingly bad.

Gregory Urich's weight calculation and NIST's model agree.

There is no new information provided, just a confirmation of something peripheral to the NIST report that they didn't explicitly state.

There is no change to the validity of NIST's result, nor to its conclusions regarding core column temperature.

 

[T.A.M.]

real:

perhaps you think their should have not been any Jews on the commission as well...I mean Israel definitely had motive to frame the Arabs for the crimes....right?

TAM

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Sigh. Your reading comprehension is breathtakingly bad.

Gregory Urich's weight calculation and NIST's model agree.

There is no new information provided, just a confirmation of something peripheral to the NIST report that they didn't explicitly state.

There is no change to the validity of NIST's result, nor to its conclusions regarding core column temperature.

Sigh, sigh. You are evading the issue I brought up. NIST didn't publish or even imply a mass of the buildings. So Gregory Urich's findings are important to determining the actual factor of safety against vertical collapse.

A mechanical engineer by the name of Tony Szamboti wrote a paper which says that even with the 500,000 ton mass the remaining factor of safety was sufficient to prevent collapse given the NIST damage analysis and physical evidence of steel temperatures. His paper is on, I can hear the sigh now, the Journal of 911 Studies.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

real:

perhaps you think their should have not been any Jews on the commission as well...I mean Israel definitely had motive to frame the Arabs for the crimes....right?

TAM

Why not if they as an individual had nothing to gain? I don't think one can lump all people of Jewish nationality into supporting a crime like 911 whether Israel benefited from it or not. There are a lot of Jewish people that have problems with the explanations we have been given. See http://www.mujca.net

 

[beachnut]

Listen real hard there Beach. It isn't my job or yours to take over for a poor investigation. We don't have the tools at our disposal and those who do didn't use them. That is the problem.

I did have a hard time not laughing at your contention that open and independent research has been done but that it won't be available until the next billion dollar building is built. Do you realize that you just stated an oxymoron?

I like JFK, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. So I can do my own research and find facts to make conclusion. Sad you are unable, go to school. My own number are collaborated with other people papers, when I confirmed the energy to destroy the WTC with gravity. All I needed way math and physics and research.

Not surprised that you failed to understand, typical of 9/11 truth members. When you build a big building, you will be buying some proprietary research, already done, to help building your building better, that was done on 9/11. There are companies who did research and they will use it to build buildings. This research may come out as the structural engineers write papers in the future. There is research you can buy on 9/11.

The independent research is already done. You can buy it when you build, or you can buy the engineering services. This is like extra credit stuff. You need to work on comprehension or ask a question before you go nuts and oxymoron my lack of expression.

Ask better questions, sorry you missed the point, but since you are having problems comprehending or asking questions, and you get upset about your pet theory, my estimate of your solving 9/11 has moved to 2197.

 

[T.A.M.]

you mean this Tony Szamboti?

http://www.geocities.com/whiskey99a/jeteffectrebut.html

Yes...here you go...SIGH SIGH SIGH!!!!

TAM

 

[Tony Szamboti]

How was it a conflict of interest. Only in the minds of those SUSPECTING the USG OF ALLOWING OR CAUSING the 9/11 attacks, is there a conflict of interest. If BUSH was being INVESTIGATED, than I would say there is a possible conflict of interest with Philip Zelikow. Likewise, if The oil companies were the focus of the commission, than perhaps having Richard Ben-Veniste on the commission might have been a conflict.

See you have to look at it, outside the paranoid mindset. Look at it from the perspective of what we all saw, what we all knew, and WHO WAS THE PARTY BEING INVESTIGATED.

But I know why you see it the way you do...because you assume Bush and the others were involved, so to have people on the commission that they had links to is a conflict...I don't see it from that perspective, so to me the commission was fine...no conflicts.

TAM

An investigation is not supposed to start out with a pre-determined conclusion on WHO WAS THE PARTY BEING INVESTIGATED. They are supposed to ask Cui Bono or who benefits and start from there to investigate anyone who could have benefitted. It is far from paranoid to say that the Bush administration and Big Oil companies had a lot to gain from what happened on 911, and they should have been suspected and any mid level to high officials connected to them should not have been involved in the investigation. Unfortunately, people who fit in these categories were involved in the investigations at high levels of control over them.

 

[T.A.M.]

Why not if they as an individual had nothing to gain? I don't think one can lump all people of Jewish nationality into supporting a crime like 911 whether Israel benefited from it or not. There are a lot of Jewish people that have problems with the explanations we have been given. See http://www.mujca.net

ok, so on realcddeal's list of people who would be ok, or not, for the commission, we have...

ok:
1. Jews

Not ok:
1. USG past or present admin
2. People with ties to Oil Companies.

Anyone else you would add to either list?

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

It is far from paranoid to say that the Bush administration and Big Oil companies had a lot to gain from what happened on 911.

So did alot of Jewish people, or more specifically, Israeli Patriots.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

So any congressmen or women who were supported by the Bush Admin, should they have been allowed on the commission?

What about those heavily supported by the Clintons?

What about congresspeople supported by Dick Cheney?

What about lawyers with any ties to the BUSH or CLINTON admins?

TAM

 

[Tony Szamboti]

I like JFK, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. So I can do my own research and find facts to make conclusion. Sad you are unable, go to school. My own number are collaborated with other people papers, when I confirmed the energy to destroy the WTC with gravity. All I needed way math and physics and research.

Not surprised that you failed to understand, typical of 9/11 truth members. When you build a big building, you will be buying some proprietary research, already done, to help building your building better, that was done on 9/11. There are companies who did research and they will use it to build buildings. This research may come out as the structural engineers write papers in the future. There is research you can buy on 9/11.

The independent research is already done. You can buy it when you build, or you can buy the engineering services. This is like extra credit stuff. You need to work on comprehension or ask a question before you go nuts and oxymoron my lack of expression.

Ask better questions, sorry you missed the point, but since you are having problems comprehending or asking questions, and you get upset about your pet theory, my estimate of your solving 9/11 has moved to 2197.

You said the independent research or studies were open and then say the information is only available to those who are going to build large buildings. That fits the classic definition of an oxymoron. Keep it up and I'll have to call you Oxy for short.

I would like to see your calculations for the energy needed to collapse the towers to the ground and showing it being possible with gravity alone.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So any congressmen or women who were supported by the Bush Admin, should they have been allowed on the commission?

What about those heavily supported by the Clintons?

What about congresspeople supported by Dick Cheney?

What about lawyers with any ties to the BUSH or CLINTON admins?

TAM

No.
No.
No.
No.

That still would probably leave 99% of the country eligible.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

you mean this Tony Szamboti?

http://www.geocities.com/whiskey99a/jeteffectrebut.html

Yes...here you go...SIGH SIGH SIGH!!!!

TAM

Did you read that paper or are you just sighing for effect?

 

[beachnut]

CD theories are oxymoronic without the oxy

You said the investigations or studies were open and then say the information is only available to those who are going to build large buildings. That fits the classic definition of an oxymoron. Keep it up and I'll have to call you Oxy for short.

Touting CD theories is oxymoronic without the oxy.

Oh no, I could be president, I said open, but you have to buy them. Yes that is an oxymoron. It could be a stundie, sort of.

 

[R.Mackey]

Sigh, sigh. You are evading the issue I brought up. NIST didn't publish or even imply a mass of the buildings. So Gregory Urich's findings are important to determining the actual factor of safety against vertical collapse.

Bolding mine.

This is a lie. NIST estimated the weight as part of its structural model. Did you even bother checking the other thread, that I linked for you?

You are a liar.

A mechanical engineer by the name of Tony Szamboti wrote a paper which says that even with the 500,000 ton mass the remaining factor of safety was sufficient to prevent collapse given the NIST damage analysis and physical evidence of steel temperatures. His paper is on, I can hear the sigh now, the Journal of 911 Studies.

Yeah, him and Gordon Ross. I'll tear him up too if I feel like it.

As for you, your three strikes are up. Welcome to Ignore.

 

[T.A.M.]

No.
No.
No.
No.

That still would probably leave 99% of the country eligible.

ok:
1. Jews

Not Ok:

1.Bush admin/Clinton admin
2.Congresspeople or Lawyers with ties to Bush admin or Clinton admin

So Like I asked before, who should have been on the Commission? Remember what sort of people have been on all other govt appointed commissions in the past (don't forget the USG was asked to form the commission).

Did you read that paper or are you just sighing for effect?

I am sighing because (A) you invited it, (B) because your little starlet there, was a CTist long before 9/11.

TAM

 

[nicepants]

Tell me what independent verification happens before publication?

That would be the process known as "peer review".