• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

10 story hole in WTC 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is too long. Can someone tell me if this is just another truther demanding 100% accuracy of a report, interview or study the first time it was done ? Then ignoring the correction ?
 
GStan said:
I've only been back on this thread for a few weeks, so apologies if I've simply missed this, but is there other evidence aside from the photo that you are basing this on? Are you saying that a single photo, a snapshot of one point in time during the day, was enough to discount the working hypothesis?
Click to expand...
Add to the photo the fact that there was no fire reported on floor 5 at any time and no reason to think there was a fire in the NE generator room.

The photo on pg 22 of the FEMA report establishes that there was no smoke coming from the NE generator room at 2:10 p.m.

If there was a fire in the NE generator room and the louvers were open, smoke would be pouring out.

If the louvers were closed, any fire would quickly run out of air and burn out.

Therefore, even if there was an unseen fire in the NE generator room, it would not have been a factor in the collapse.

Shyam Sunder had this information and knew these facts when NIST released it's preliminary report in 2004.
 
Last edited:
"Add to the photo the fact that there was no fire reported on floor 5 at any time and no reason to think there was a fire in the NE generator room."

You keep repeating this. For one, just because there was no fire reported does NOT mean there was no fire. And no reason to think there was a fire according to who?
 
Christopher, Is this not like saying Darwin was lying when he put forth the hypothesis that evolution was a steady "generation to generation" type thing? And that he knew puntuated equilibrium was a better explanation?

What Christopher is doing is the same lame tactic creationist use to try and force god into the FACT of evolution. only his god is a 9/11 conspiracy theory. he can't propose a logical, workable hypothesis involving a controlled demolition but his FAITH won't let him let go of his religious fantasy.
 
Christopher7 said:
If there was a fire in the NE generator room and the louvers were open, smoke would be pouring out.

If the louvers were closed, any fire would quickly run out of air and burn out.
Click to expand...

IF air was being drawn in through the louvers to feed the fire smoke would not come out. It is not like there was a lack of smoke coming from building 7. And if the louvers were closed there are plenty of places for air to get to the fires, remember... this building was just smashed by the collapse of WTC 1 opening a giant hole in the side.
 
Christopher7 said:
Add to the photo the fact that there was no fire reported on floor 5 at any time and no reason to think there was a fire in the NE generator room.
Click to expand...

Do you agree or not agree that absence of evidence is not evidence? If you do not agree, can I use that in my argument too? Or does it only apply to your theory?

C7 said:
The photo on pg 22 of the FEMA report establishes that there was no smoke coming from the NE generator room at 2:10 p.m.

If there was a fire in the NE generator room at 2:10 p.m. and the louvers were open, smoke would be pouring out at 2:10 p.m.. If there was a fire after 2:10 p.m., smoke would also be pouring out, but we do not have a photo of that.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you

If the louvers were closed, any fire would quickly run out of air and burn out.

Therefore, even if there was an unseen fire in the NE generator room, it would not have been a factor in the collapse.

Shyam Sunder had this information and knew these facts when NIST released it's preliminary report in 2004.
Click to expand...

You make a pretty thin case for lying. Have you contacted NIST yet to find out why they used the diesel fuel hypothesis when it was so obviously flawed based on the evidence at the time? Or are you going to continue to waste your life avoiding asking the questions that can lead you to a truth that matches reality, simply because it might disrupt your fantasy?

What are you afraid of? If this lie is as obvious as you claim it to be, how can they possibly defend it? Won't you be closer to the truth when they defend it with another obvious lie?
 
Last edited:
notheist said:
IF air was being drawn in through the louvers to feed the fire smoke would not come out. It is not like there was a lack of smoke coming from building 7. And if the louvers were closed there are plenty of places for air to get to the fires, remember... this building was just smashed by the collapse of WTC 1 opening a giant hole in the side.
Click to expand...
The damage was to the other end of the building.
 
notheist said:
What Christopher is doing is the same lame tactic creationist use to try and force god into the FACT of evolution. only his god is a 9/11 conspiracy theory. he can't propose a logical, workable hypothesis involving a controlled demolition but his FAITH won't let him let go of his religious fantasy.
Click to expand...
It is your blind faith in the Cheney/Bush conspiracy theory that won't let you admit that there is no basis for the diesel fuel hypothesis or anything else that goes against your religious fantasy.
 
GStan said:
Do you agree or not agree that absence of evidence is not evidence?
Click to expand...
The absence of evidence for a hypothesis means the hypothesis is baseless.

There was no evidence of a fire in the NE generator room and no reason to think there was a fire there.

You make a pretty thin case for lying. Have you contacted NIST yet to find out why they used the diesel fuel hypothesis when it was so obviously flawed based on the evidence at the time?
Click to expand...
Get serious. Why ask a liar to explain why he lied?
 
Christopher7 said:
The absence of evidence for a hypothesis means the hypothesis is baseless.

There was no evidence of a fire in the NE generator room and no reason to think there was a fire there.
Click to expand...

There was a large quantity of diesel fuel unaccounted for. It was a prudent hypothesis at the time. A single photo of what was happening at 210pm was not enough to discount it. Multiple reports of 'no fires on the 5th floor' could have been enough to do so, but you of course don't have those. An absence of reports suggesting or confirming a 5th floor fire (reality) is not the same as reports that there was not a fire (fantasy). Can you see the difference?

Get serious. Why ask a liar to explain why he lied?
Click to expand...

You shouldn't. You should just keep falsely repeating that he lied on an internet forum. You'll feel better about yourself. Fortunately for the rest of the world, you'll be at home at the computer where there is less of a danger of having your ignorance exposed to a mass audience. You can maintain a pristine fantasy and never get any closer to finding the truth. You can declare victory now. Prison would be awful for Shyam Sunder and his co-conspirators, but nothing compared to having his name soiled in front of the thousands of JREFers....er, OK....5 JREFers who still read this thread. Keep up the great work. Another couple of pages in this thread from you and Shyam Sunder will probably hang himself in shame.

You say 'why ask?' Very telling. Very cowardly. Very pathetic.
 
It is amazing how well the government has done at keeping the tens of thousands of people who were in on it quiet. Not ONE person has come forward with a conscience in 7 years. They must pay well.
 
Crazytimes said:
It is amazing how well the government has done at keeping the tens of thousands of people who were in on it quiet. Not ONE person has come forward with a conscience in 7 years. They must pay well.
Click to expand...

Its true. They hooked me up with free porn on my cable TV.
 
Crazytimes said:
Hell, I would kill 3000 people for free porn. I wish I were in on it.
Click to expand...

Whoa, don't lump me in with those guys. I didn't have to kill anyone. The free porn is payment for me to come here and make Christopher's arguments look foolish. I sometimes feel a little guilty getting paid though, as you can probably see that Christopher pretty much takes care of that on his own.:p

/derail
 
C7

What would the covers on the louvers do to the visibility of whether the louvers were open or not? especially from photos?
 
funk de fino said:
C7

What would the covers on the louvers do to the visibility of whether the louvers were open or not? especially from photos?
Click to expand...
Your question is stupid. If you don't know the answer to that, you are dumber than a brick.
 
Last edited:
GStan said:
There was a large quantity of diesel fuel unaccounted for. It was a prudent hypothesis at the time.
Click to expand...
There's nothing prudent about investigating something when the evidence clearly shows that it was NOT a factor in the collapse. The diesel fuel fire hypothesis was about a possible fire in the NE generator room. There was NO evidence of a fire there and no reason to think there was a fire there. As long as you keep ignoring the fact that there was NO BASIS for the diesel fuel fire in the NE generator room i will keep reminding you of the facts.

A single photo of what was happening at 210pm was not enough to discount it.
Click to expand...
The photo clearly showed that even if there was a fire it would not be a factor in the collapse.
 
Crazytimes said:
It is amazing how well the government has done at keeping the tens of thousands of people who were in on it quiet. Not ONE person has come forward with a conscience in 7 years. They must pay well.
Click to expand...
That's one of the dumbest denier statements. People don't just come forward and confess to murder.

This is just another denial tactic to change the subject.

Can you deny these fasts?

1) There were NO reports of fire in the NE generator room at any time.

2) The photo taken at 2:10 p.m. proves that either there was no fire or any possible fire would not have enough oxygen to burn very long.

3) There was NO reason to think a diesel fuel fire would start there after this time.
 
One of the dumbest statements is implying that people in the government are capable of covering anything up. Stupid would be stating that they simply say nothing because they don't confess. People sell others out, things get leaked. This would be the first time in history something didn't get leaked. And that may be because there is no evidence that such a thing ever even happened outside of Christopher's imagination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom