911 firefighters left out of Commision report

[Turbofan]

firefightersfor911truth.org

 

[johnny karate]

Turbofan, how many members of the FDNY have joined that organization?

 

[Turbofan]

I don't know? Why don't you join up and find out?

Sign the petition while you're at it.

 

[johnny karate]

Okay, how many firefighters in general have joined?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

firefightersfor911truth.org

If you’re still not convinced there’s more to it than we’re being told, then ask yourself: if Tower 7 did come down due to fire, why didn’t Tower 5? Tower 5 was much closer, had devastating structural damage from the Twin Tower collapses, and much more severe fires burning. But, it remained standing. So, did Tower 3,4, and 6. Look below. Do your own size-up. Our lives depend on the ability to guage when a building will collapse - test your skills.

Making the good old classic mistake of comparing buildings of completely different structural systems, height vs footprint size, and for some completely different sets of damage... Their last statement indicates that such considerations are important in gauging how a building will more or less perform, then why is it that they do not apply such considerations to the very buildings they comment on?

As far as I am able to tell firefighters are taught at least the basics of structural materials, particularly because knowing those properties while the structural members are exposed to fire or any other weakening stimulus means the difference between life and death on many occasions.

Given that, Turbo... I too would be interested in how many firefighters are part of the group... they do not seem to have the information available on their main page or any branch-off links.

 

[beachnut]

firefightersfor911truth.org

The web site has lies, fantasy, and false information. He cut and pasted other junk from 9/11 truth, a true individual thinker for a truther. Dumb as dirt.

Okay, how many firefighters in general have joined?

The web site has lies, fantasy, and false information. He cut and pasted other junk from 9/11 truth, a true individual thinker for a truther.

All the many, about 5 posters at p4tf for lies and stupid ideas, are going over to the fireman for dumb ideas on 9/11 and joining. An incestuous group of idiots, join other dumb groups to keep all the stupid in as many groups of dolts as you can. It amplifies their stupidity by being in as many dolt group as possible.

It means, if there are 10 firemen for truth, 5 of them are the idiot at p4t, and visa versa. This could mean the estimates of truthers is high due to their incestuous membership.

 

[Turbofan]

I don't know, and what does it matter? It's a new site and it's just
getting some exposure now. The member forum hasn't even been created yet.

Classic mistake: Believing NIST and SHAM. One column supports the entire
building.

#79 Baby!

Are you guys not embarrassed to support that stupid summary? A "new phenomenon"?

I though you were all going with the old excus...I mean theory about
Diesel fuel, or tower damage? LMAO

How many versions are you going to buy into? When are you guys going
to start thinking for yourselves?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

The web site has lies, fantasy, and false information. He cut and pasted other junk from 9/11 truth, a true individual thinker for a truther. Dumb as dirt.

And check out the new WAC argument they're now tossing around:

In its final report on the collapse of WTC 7 that news outlets are reporting “puts 9/11 conspiracy theories to bed,” NIST claims that the never before observed “new phenomenon” of “thermal expansion” was to blame for the destruction of the building, a completely ludicrous conclusion in a report that simply ignores eyewitness testimony and hard evidence that points to the deliberate demolition of the structure.

I thought it couldn't get any worse... then again I've only kept track of the CT's for the last few months....

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Are you guys not embarrassed to support that stupid summary? A "new phenomenon"?

So turbofan? What do you think? Do you think thermal expansion is something never before observed? Depending on your answer you may get a stundie nomination

Aren't you embarrassed enough with the fact that your mentors in the truth movement can't even consider architectural design factors that matter?

 

[Turbofan]

The first time ever that thermal expansion has taken down a building
in CD fashion.

Hey, just keep that hook in your mouth and keep believing the two, three
or four versions of lies that NIST and your government tell you.

Just be sure to jump on the next band wagon if they revise their statement LMAO

 

[Jonnyclueless]

The first time ever that thermal expansion has taken down a building
in CD fashion.

Hey, just keep that hook in your mouth and keep believing the two, three
or four versions of lies that NIST and your government tell you.

Just be sure to jump on the next band wagon if they revise their statement LMAO

Ah yes the old 'if something has never happened before then it's not possible' argument which negates all existence since everything happens for a first time. I wonder if after the first office fire there was some idiot shouting "That was the first fire in the history of man, you guys are suckers for falling for it".

But perhaps our little friend here can list some other examples o buildings of the same exact design as WTC 7, burned for 7 hours, and had no aid against the fire at all.

And I suppose asking our little friend here for a report that proves a controlled demolition would be pointless since even he knows the reason he attacks real professionals is because none of his cult members can actually perform the same task.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

The first time ever that thermal expansion has taken down a building

Why are considerations made in designs for expansion and contraction of structural members turbofan? Remember, architects and engineers are tasked to take into account such factors to design buildings that are safe for occupants. If there was never such concern for such possible outcomes then why are they considered in the first place? Your "1st time" canard holds very little weight in this discussion. You clearly do not know much about building design.

in CD fashion.

Rinse... lathe... and repeat. Not part of the discussion...

Hey, just keep that hook in your mouth and keep believing the two, three or four versions of lies that NIST and your government tell you.

Hmmm, seems that NIST as are others are capable of flexibility in the credibility of working hypothesis. Preliminary hypothesis are developed based on observations, modeling the event accordingly allows a more solidified conclusion to be made. Apparently the concept of working hypothesis is a foreign language to you

How are things going on your end? Has AE911truth decided yet the difference between implosion and debris field outside of the footprint? Have they differentiated yet between the design differences of WTC 3,4,5,6, et al. from that of WTC 7? Funny that they can't quite decide what fits there. I think you've been securely hooked, I hope you feel honored

Just be sure to jump on the next band wagon if they revise their statement LMAO

Loose Change leads the charge

 

[Grizzly Bear]

But perhaps our little friend here can list some other examples o buildings of the same exact design as WTC 7, burned for 7 hours, and had no aid against the fire at all.

Every time I ask this question to a truther they choose an arbitrary skyscraper that experienced a severe fire and post it as "precedent" without ever going out to find a case study to learn about any differences in design and circumstances that might void the comparison. Asking for an apples to apples comparison is always like pulling teeth.

 

[beachnut]

...
Classic mistake: Believing NIST and SHAM. One column supports the entire
building.

#79 Baby! ...

Are you guys not embarrassed to support that stupid summary? A "new phenomenon"?

I though you were all going with the old excus...I mean theory about
Diesel fuel, or tower damage? LMAO

How many versions are you going to buy into? When are you guys going
to start thinking for yourselves?

Your post, a short summary of over a thousand pages of NIST report on WTC7, and you have proven you are completely ignorant on the subject; complete lack of understanding.
Your post, is great; summarizes your ignorance on this topic succinctly.

 

[pomeroo]

I don't know, and what does it matter? It's a new site and it's just
getting some exposure now. The member forum hasn't even been created yet.

Classic mistake: Believing NIST and SHAM. One column supports the entire
building.

#79 Baby!

Are you guys not embarrassed to support that stupid summary? A "new phenomenon"?

I though you were all going with the old excus...I mean theory about
Diesel fuel, or tower damage? LMAO

How many versions are you going to buy into? When are you guys going
to start thinking for yourselves?

Why do you liars imagine that your uninformed agenda-driven fantasies are worth more than real science and old-fashioned hard work? You don't think for yourself--you don't think at all. You peddle thoroughly discredited rubbish because it makes you feel good.

 

[johnny karate]

I don't know, and what does it matter? It's a new site and it's just
getting some exposure now. The member forum hasn't even been created yet.

Oh... I see.

So when you posted this (bolding mine):

Firefightersfor911truth.org
Pilotsfor911truth.org
AE911truth.org

Real professionals. First responders. Real names.

... it was just a bunch of crap. You actually have no idea who has joined this organization, or if it's even legitimate.

 

[leftysergeant]

firefightersfor911truth.org

Smells like an Alan Miller production to me. They need about twenty-five verifiable names of trained and experienced fire fighters before i stop calling them names suggestive of a lack of neural tissue separating their ears and a lack of morals and properly annotated birth records.

 

[Turbofan]

Oh... I see.

So when you posted this (bolding mine):


... it was just a bunch of crap. You actually have no idea who has joined this organization, or if it's even legitimate.

No crap here. There are real names in the petition to satisfy your needs at
the moment.

I believe the site was started, or co-founded by Eric Lawyer. I don't know
who else is involved at this point.

Do some research of your own if you're so intrigued.

 

[johnny karate]

No crap here. There are real names in the petition to satisfy your needs at
the moment.

How do you know the names are "real"? You've already admitted your ignorance.

You are promoting a website that claims to be a firefighter's organization. I'd like to know who those firefighters are. I don't really care about random people that signed their petition.

I believe the site was started, or co-founded by Eric Lawyer. I don't know
who else is involved at this point.

And yet you have been promoting it in multiple threads in an attempt to get us to believe that your movement has the backing of firefighters. Now you admit you actually have no idea if that's true or not.

Do some research of your own if you're so intrigued.

The only thing I find intriguing is the level of dishonesty to which Truthers like yourself will stoop.

 

[Turbofan]

Typical reply "how do I know the names are real"

Let's just say us twoofers have this technology called phones, and we talk
amongst ourselves.

Whether the signature names are real, or not...well, who really knows?
At least they are names unlike the 'experts' here.

You'll just have to wait and see when the forum opens up, and the member
list appears huh?