[Split]Debris piles at GZ- split from: UL Moves For Sanctions Against Morgan Reynold

[Dog Town]

When do we get to the Keebler Elves part?

 

[uk_dave]

You're still missing the thrust of my objection.

Careful with that, you'll have someones eye out!

Are you telling me that the engineers in Iran, China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and so forth are under the same spell? What could possibly be holding them back? They're not all incompetent, are they. So something must be persuading them to just not look at the evidence - if such evidence exists.

They're all afraid of being zapped by DEW. Whereas Dr Judy is a brave soul who knows no fear, even though as we speak (type) the evil doers are zooming their DEW onto her location.

Or maybe all those engineers around the world are afraid of being harassed by Troy. You never know.

 

[adoucette]

Your analysis is, in my view, misleading (I did not say "slightly" or "highly"). The construction photo does not allow you to make an assumption that the height is 150 feet; and, the plain content of the photos themselves puts paid to any notion that they are more than one storey. In fact, they are 1 storey or less. The proper frame of reference is the photo itself. Look at the lobby windows of WTC 1. The debris does not extend up to them in either of the photos shown, just as is the case with those posted earlier. Look at WTC 5, to the left. It was 9 stories and you can count at least 5 of them in the photo meaning the debris is not high enough to obscure them.

The photo is taken so as to suggest height, perhaps, but there is none there, as I see it.

Nope.

My analysis is easily verified based on the Tower plans.

See NIST NCSTAR 1-2a Fig 1-2 and you can see that the heights I referenced are correct.

The elevation for floor 7 is 396', this is where the bowties split.

The top of that debris pile is approx at the 6th floor level (elevation ~383') which is ~four floors above the Plaza level (elevation 327') and ~10 floors above the ground level (elevation 242').

So no matter how you try to wiggle out of it, its clear from that photo that the rubble pile is nearly 60 feet above the plaza level and nearly 150 ft above ground level.

 

[LashL]

I prefer to be referred to as jammonius.

That's fine, I'll call you jammonius if you prefer not to be addressed as "janedoe", "Dr. Wood" or "Judy Wood" these days, (why the change?) but you are Judy Wood, right?

It is not incumbent upon me to needlessly banter about height interpretation from photos.

Of course it is not incumbent upon you. Who said it was? You are the one who raised the subject and chose to banter about it in a series of posts in which you attempted to convince people of your ridiculous, obviously misguided and non-existent "reality".

I have indicated that the photos confirm GZ was flat, as I see it.

You "see" something that doesn't exist. Any unbiased and rational view of the myriad photographs available shows that you are not only wrong, but that you are quite delusional if you can look at them and purport that the debris pile was only one storey (let's call it 12 feet) high. Completely, utterly delusional.

Choosing a select few of the hundreds of available photos and using those few to pretend that your claims are sustainable is ridiculous, but if you actually believe what you are saying and if you blithely dismiss the multitude of photos that clearly show that you are wrong, well, that is where you cross the line from ridiculous to willfully dishonest to utterly delusional.

You can claim that the photos show something else as can all other posters.

Yes, I do indeed claim that reality is reality.

You did not persuade that the photo in question shows a debris pile of more than 1 storey. It doesn't.

Only the delusional ignore reality when it is staring them in the face.

You said the photographer used special equipment, I suggested ongoing and further contact and you nixed the idea.

No, the photographer did not use any special equipment to take the photographs. He used specialized knowledge and expertise to measure the depths and heights of the debris pile in hundreds of locations in order to map out the area so that those working on the pile could do so more safely (e.g. by identifying and measuring the depths of voids, among other things). I think this was rather clear in my prior post. If you require further clarification, please advise.

And I said that I will not direct him to your website because your site, your theories, and your lawsuit are absolutely batcrap crazy. If that's what you want to characterize as me somehow "nixing the idea" of "further contact" between you and a third party, knock yourself out. It's not true and not accurate, but neither truth or accuracy seem to be important to you. As for me, I prefer truth, accuracy and reality, and the reality is that I do not wish to subject a professional whose expertise I admire to a nutcase whose expertise is non-existent and whose theories are unfounded, unsupported, and delusional. You call yourself a researcher, don't you? You could easily seek him out yourself and ask him directly whether he wants to engage in discussions with you. But I am certainly not going to be a party to subjecting him to your ilk.

Other posters can then determine for themselves whether you're legitimately interested in pursuing this matter in a way that might advance the state of knowledge or whether you're just declaring yourself to be right and not permitting further collaborative research.

Oh, please. There is not a rational person on earth whose knowledge of anything relevant to the events of 9/11 could possibly be advanced by going to your website and reading the tripe posted there, Judy - except to the extent that doing so will convince them that your claims are ludicrous, unfounded, and utterly delusional, that is - and there is not a chance in hell that anyone with two or more arcing brain cells would wish to embark upon "collaborative research" with you.

Further, I am no position whatsoever to block or "not permit" anyone from "further collaborative research" with you if anyone is inclined to do so. Do you honestly think that I have some kind of veto power that prevents you from collaborating with others? Here's a hint: No, I do not.

But I could never, in good conscience, recommend your site to anyone, let alone recommend it to a professional, except for purposes of giving them a head's up about what your bizarre and unfounded theories are, and demonstrating the complete lack of supporting evidence that you offer for them.

 

[jammonius]

You're still missing the thrust of my objection.

Are you telling me that the engineers in Iran, China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and so forth are under the same spell? What could possibly be holding them back? They're not all incompetent, are they. So something must be persuading them to just not look at the evidence - if such evidence exists.

Oh, I see, you're wanting a response based on the perspective of the adversaries of the US and of its policies. I think that might be a little too far afield for this thread; and, in any event, I don't know what other countries are doing to expose the 'false flag' elements of 9/11 in any great detail. Some have alluded to this; Ahmadinejad of Iran -- one of the countries in your list -- has done this recently if memory serves me correctly.

If you want to open a new thread on this, I'd be willing to engage further.

 

[uk_dave]

..... people with expertise in environmental cleanup, firefighting and, of course, DEW cleanup just might be thinking about the fact that GZ is not remediated as yet, despite the length and the intensity of the project to do so.

Know any?

Of course, that SAIC controls access to GZ to this day. The site remains highly veiled and shielded from easy public view. To get an impression of what is actually going on, you have to work pretty hard at it as SAIC is doing as much as it possibly can to prevent the public from knowing what's going on.

Proof?

I gather that, for some, everything is just so ducky that the site wouldn't even need to be veiled and closed off.

Ever heard of Health and Safety (or whatever the US equivalent is)? Construction sites are by their very nature hazardous areas which need to be protected from unauthorised entry and need precautions against the spread of dust and debris from the construction process. You need to provide some original source material to back up your assertions AND you need to get yourself educated about how the reconstruction of the wtc site is being carried out with little regard for the fantasies or demands of the 'truth' movement. It's the real world, welcome to it.

 

[Dog Town]

The site remains highly veiled and shielded from easy public view.

I was wondering why all those highrises had all their windows boarded up!

 

[jammonius]

LashL

If your photographer can prove that GZ was more than 1 storey in height then fine, post up that proof. You have alluded to this, but you have not demonstrated it.

Hear this:

I don't think your photographer can do this; and certainly not as at 9/11/01.

Hear this:

I think you're engaging in deception and the height issues you're referring to involve conditions after a lot of digging and moving and relocating occurred.

Did you see the word "deception"? It refers to what I think you may be engaging in. However, the one being deluded is, unfortunately, you.

 

[adoucette]

I haven't, but these poor birds have. As you can see, however, even birds can do signficant damage to thin, hollow, built to be as lightweight as possible, aircraft:

[qimg]http://nomoregames.net/911/exploding_the_airliner_crash_myth/bird-wing.jpg[/qimg]

Ah, those are not the wing leading edges (or the much heavier spars) thats the MUCH lighter leading edge of the horizontal stabilzer of a MUCH smaller aircraft than the Boeing 767.

 

[LashL]

As it's your birthday, I guess, it's ok for you to be silly.

So, what's your excuse?

 

[LashL]

LashL

If your photographer can prove that GZ was more than 1 storey in height then fine, post up that proof. You have alluded to this, but you have not demonstrated it.

Hear this:

I don't think your photographer can do this; and certainly not as at 9/11/01.

Hear this:

I think you're engaging in deception and the height issues you're referring to involve conditions after a lot of digging and moving and relocating occurred.

Did you see the word "deception"? It refers to what I think you may be engaging in. However, the one being deluded is, unfortunately, you.

I see that you are still entirely unable to respond meaningfully to my posts, Judy.
How utterly and completely unsurprising.

Care to try again?

ETA: Try reading for comprehension next time and try responding legitimately. I realize that this is difficult for you, but it is, frankly, important for you to make the attempt.

(And try to avoid mentioning pennies on window sills or Keebler elves if you can help it.)

 

[jammonius]

Nope.

My analysis is easily verified based on the Tower plans.

See NIST NCSTAR 1-2a Fig 1-2 and you can see that the heights I referenced are correct.

The elevation for floor 7 is 396', this is where the bowties split.

The top of that debris pile is approx at the 6th floor level (elevation ~383') which is ~four floors above the Plaza level (elevation 327') and ~10 floors above the ground level (elevation 242').

So no matter how you try to wiggle out of it, its clear from that photo that the rubble pile is nearly 60 feet above the plaza level and nearly 150 ft above ground level.

Misleading. You are not properly referencing what the photos show. Again, the proper frame of reference is the lobby windows of WTC 1. The debris does not come close to equally the height of them.

I think you're engaging in obfuscation.

 

[Confuseling]

Oh, I see, you're wanting a response based on the perspective of the adversaries of the US and of its policies. I think that might be a little too far afield for this thread; and, in any event, I don't know what other countries are doing to expose the 'false flag' elements of 9/11 in any great detail. Some have alluded to this; Ahmadinejad of Iran -- one of the countries in your list -- has done this recently if memory serves me correctly.

If you want to open a new thread on this, I'd be willing to engage further.

I think at this stage it's probably wise to leave the decision to split to powers higher than us - this thread is fairly far off the rails already

Ahmadinejad is doing precisely what one would expect him to be doing if he didn't believe it was true: he is making rhetorical speeches to his demographic base. What I am asking is why engineering, physics, aviation, media analysis and so forth professionals in the above named countries (among others) aren't responding in their professional capacities (I'm fully aware that he's an engineer by training).

Let's assume Ahmadinejad does believe it. He's looking at a potential invasion anyway, so his best course of action is to try to instigate an American revolution. He's obviously not afraid of 'goading the beast', as it were, because otherwise he'd be treading with quite a lot more subtlety - besides which, he can be fully confident, for a limited time only, that America is bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. But by my reckoning, he should be commissioning professionals in the appropriate fields to compile dossiers of evidence - really really solid, exhaustive, professionally laid out evidence, and singing it from the rooftops.

Take it to the UN. Take it to the rest of NATO (who would surely be interested in a putsch amongst their ranks). Go under the governments concerned and straight to the people - broadcast it over the radio, or flood the internet (this could even be achieved anonymously with a little thought, if you were afraid of retribution).

Ok, you might just about be able to make the case that Iran doesn't want America to fall - they're playing some esoteric geostrategic game beyond our comprehension. But what you're faced with is every single government, intelligence agency, professional body, academic institution, and large scale media organisation the entire world over having apparently failed to act for approaching eight years.

And that, I'm afraid to say, is a closed case. There is no evidence for a conspiracy in the public sphere.

 

[jammonius]

Here is the proper frame of reference for assessing the height.

 

[jammonius]

I gotta sign off for awhile,

 

[Confuseling]

Well, it has been interesting chatting. I hope we can continue this conversation at a later date.

 

[Arus808]

Yeah, these are just "ground" level piles:

 

[DGM]

I wonder how she will explain that people survived in the stairway on level three if the piles were only one level high. Remember also that rescue workers had to dig down to get to them.

 

[Confuseling]

Relativity?

 

[DGM]

More on the "stairwell B" survivors.

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11/2003/n_9189/