Materials engineer and AE911truth member John Anderson, AKA bofors, makes his case.

Gravy

Downsitting Citizen
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
17,078
I have not even bothered to look at one page of the 10,000 page NIST report because I believe that it is a complete waste of time and does almost nothing to explain the events of 9/11.
...
I am here to explain to people what happend at the WTC buildings.

I started this thread so that bofors can present his coherent theory, backed with evidence. It's something we rarely (okay, never, not once) see from truthers, so I ask that we reserve comment until he's had his say.
 
Last edited:
And when he's done proving that 9/11 was an inside job, can pick up an easy million smackers demonstrating to Mr. Randi his psychic ability to "know" the contents of a 10,000 page report without even looking past the title page.
 
This guy John Anderson has a bachelors degree and yet cant spell Steel? Why its no wonder he refuses to read the NIST report.

However, they are good examples to convince people that the WTC buidlings did not fall because fire melted the steal and also to give people a rough idea about steal's inherent fire-resistant capability.
 
Last edited:
I have not even bothered to look at one page of the 10,000 page NIST report because I believe that it is a complete waste of time and does almost nothing to explain the events of 9/11.

Don't Troofers regularly decry people who haven't read the whole report?
 
...I started this thread so that bofors can present his coherent theory, backed with evidence. It's something we rarely (okay, never, not once) see from truthers, so I ask that we reserve comment until he's had his say.
I think he got lost. Or was that his evidence.
 
This guy John Anderson has a bachelors degree and yet cant spell Steel? Why its no wonder he refuses to read the NIST report.

And he's bring up the "fire didn't melt the steel" argument. There's no chance in hell this guy is an engineer.

Steve S.
 
Ok. This is the right thread, finally... Anyway, question for Bofors

Not trying to toot my own horn here, but I want to cross-post (in the correct thread!) just to make sure Bofors doesn't miss my questions:

Ok, now we are getting somewhere.

The answer is entropy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

The idea that the WTC buildings fell straight down from asymmetric airplane crashes and subsequent random fires blatantly violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

In short, it is not possible to get an ordered reaction (here: straight-down collapse) from a disordered stimulus (here: asymmetric airplane crashes and subsequent random fires).

In reference to the papers I linked in my own post above:

http://911myths.com/WTC2TIP.pdf
http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/p... did & Did Not Cause It - Revised 6-22-07.pdf

... how is it not possible? By invoking entropy, you suggest that there is not enough energy available in the towers to allow for such a collapse as what happened on 9/11. But the papers linked above suggest that there is.

Also, what is ordered about the collapse? Simple viewings of videos of the collapse suggest it was indeed a very chaotic event. Straight-down collapse in and of itself isn't indicative of an ordered event, especially considering that this is a gravity-driven collapse we're discussing here.
 
Alaska probably, is there anything else to do up there?

Pot --> Kettle

On a more germaine note, however, I'll be following any debate vis-a-vis the fire performance of structural steelwork with obviosu (and professional) interest. If Mark has no objection, I may lob in the odd post or two. Assuming that Bofors rises to the challenge, that is.
 
Last edited:
Please keep this thread civil,and make sure it does not become a series of personal attacks. You should discuss the arguments (when the poster makes them) rather than attacking the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
He lost me at...

"I have not even bothered to look at one page of the 10,000 page NIST report because I believe that it is a complete waste of time and does almost nothing to explain the events of 9/11."

I am fair near speechless...

TAM:)

Edit: I will comply with the moderators request, but as of now there is no "argument" to focus on, tha I can see.
 
The stupid, it burns!!!!

Seriously, is this guy for real?

From the posts I have read, he seems to present the same truther canards...bringing nothing new to the table at all.

TAM:)

Edit: Is it this guy,

http://forum.osxx86.info/showthread.php?t=547&page=2

My name is John Philip Anderson.

I live at 7715 Middlepointe St., Dearborn Michigan USA 48126.

I have advanced degrees in materials science from the University of Michigan, College of Engineering (Ann Arbor).

I have been involved in the OSx86 scene from the beginning.

publicly available info...

David C. Martin, Jaime R. Ojeda, J. Philip Anderson, and Gopal Pingali, “Atomic Force Microscopy of Polymer Droplets”, in Atomic Force Microscopy / Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, Plenum Press, New York, S. H. Cohen, M. T. Bray, and M. L. Lightboy, editors, 217-227, (1994).

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache...+on+Silicon+Devices"&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca


David C. Martin is a Material Engineering Graduate from U of M...

I think bofors credentials in Material Engineering seem legit.

TAM:)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom