Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

[GodisEnergy]

Except for that pesky issue of materiality, strength scaling, and the square cube law... slightly problematic if you're making that case....


It most certainly does, however their authority alone is does not constitute that the contentions they set forth are correct. This a blatant appeal to authority; I'm more interested in their demonstration of their expertise than their status as professionals.


A degree is one of several necessities to certify someone as a professional. However, studying the subject in enough detail can offer laymen sufficient information to understand concepts relating to the field. Once again, I'm interested in the information they present being correct and can be verified through the subjects they cover. Whether the individual is a poet, an astronomer, or a custodian on the flea market has no bearing on a person's knowledge of a subject so long as they learned the material at some point and have retained it and understood it.

The volume has nothing to do with Conservation of Momentum
Cardboard also cannot fall through another peice of cardboard at free fall acceleration.Without additional force applied from above like rockets attached.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

So in essense it doesnt matter as long as it supports your theories.

Yes or no if not then take back what you all said about David ray Griffin.

I stated that their authority in the profession alone does not automatically qualify their claims as correct, and I would assess my position based on their demonstration of expertise, which is thus far insufficient given what was observed. Forgive if it's difficult to take a professional seriously when he doesn't understand that strength does not change proportionally with volume or for that matter materials. Where you derived that delusional position of yours from my last post completely baffles me.

The volume has nothing to do with Conservation of Momentum
Cardboard also cannot fall through another peice of cardboard at free fall acceleration.Without additional force applied from above like rockets attached.

Cardboard has both different strength properties, and different material properties than the towers themselves had. Forget the other issues I've already explained to you in scaling strength. It's puzzling you continue to stand by such a misconception.

 

[A W Smith]

Again, I before E except after lies

This coming from a bus tour driver ,wheres your structural engineering degree.

ad hom, this shows your argument weak, you have failed to point out one single point of research Gravy got wrong. start by addressing Gravy's points. Do it now or concede defeat.

And someone who "beleives"[sic] the Paint company supplied the Red chips ( paint which explodes )

No one here said the any paint company supplied "chips". What we are saying is what Jones "tested" were paint chips from the steel. Keep posting, keep twisting words. you are losing it and exposing yourself as the lying coward you are.

 

[GodisEnergy]

I stated that their authority in the profession alone does not automatically qualify their claims as correct, and I would assess my position based on their demonstration of expertise, which is thus far insufficient given what was observed. Forgive if it's difficult to take a professional seriously when he doesn't understand that strength does not change proportionally with volume or for that matter materials. Where you derived that delusional position of yours from my last post completely baffles me.


Cardboard has both different strength properties, and different material properties than the towers themselves had. Forget the other issues I've already explained to you in scaling strength. It's puzzling you continue to stand by such a misconception.

It doesnt matter what material you make it from water, even air will provide resistance

 

[dtugg]

It doesnt matter what material you make it from water, even air will provide resistance

The school system failed you miserable in writing, science, logic, and probably many other things. You might want to look into suing them.

 

[GodisEnergy]

ad hom, this shows your argument weak, you have failed to point out one single point of research Gravy got wrong. start by addressing Gravy's points. Do it now or concede defeat.

No one here said the any paint company supplied "chips". What we are saying is what Jones "tested" were paint chips from the steel. Keep posting, keep twisting words. you are losing it and exposing yourself as the lying coward you are.

1.I am

2.gravy/mark robert said in the hardfire show , that the chips were paint and the paint was supplied by the paint factory.Too bad this paint is bi layered ,explosive and doesnt have the chemical signature for paint

 

[A W Smith]

1.I am

2.gravy/mark robert said in the hardfire show , that the chips were paint and the paint was supplied by the paint factory.Too bad this paint is bi layered ,explosive and doesnt have the chemical signature for paint

They did not supply paint chips, they supplied the paint for the WTC steel. and YOU have no idea what the chemical signature of the paint was to begin with, It is not unusual for paint to be bi layered, in fact once applied. it is more common than not.

http://www.le.ac.uk/eg/svh2/paint.htm

 

[GodisEnergy]

So what is the chemical composition of the wtc paint?

 

[dtugg]

So what is the chemical composition of the wtc paint?

Who knows? It's not our job to do the research concerning your fantasy for you.

 

[beachnut]

...
I mean the evidence is there...

You are not serious; are you?

Gage is the most delusional 911Truth dolt on earth. If he has fooled you, you need a lot of help.

Gage has zero evidence, one of the required traits to be in 911Truth.

 

[beachnut]

The volume has nothing to do with Conservation of Momentum
Cardboard also cannot fall through another peice of cardboard at free fall acceleration.Without additional force applied from above like rockets attached.

Not sure what you are trying to prove, but you did it.

 

[RedIbis]

Ahem.

Here's what Gage's "expert" structural engineers say:

–Charles Pegelow thinks nuclear weapons destroyed the towers. No, I'm not kidding.

–Robert T. Mote thinks the tower collapses started from the bottom: "I could never understand the 'convenient' vertical collapse at the BASE due to an extreme event at height."

–Structural engineer Dennis Kollar says, “For me the most convincing aspect that the 911 collapse was a controlled demolition is the recorded explosions on the 9/11 Eyewitness DVD.” The "recorded explosions" he's referring to are wind noise captured by the camera in Hoboken, a few miles away from the WTC. That should be staggeringly obvious to anyone who has seen footage from close to the WTC, where what would be absolutely enormous "explosions" are not captured by any microphones.

–Structural engineer Michael Donley says, "I have read the FEMA report and conclude that it is incomplete at best and a cover-up at worst.” The FEMA report? Welcome to 2002, Mr. Donley. You might try reading the 10,000 page NIST report. Can't blame you, though. Richard has led by example and not bothered to read the NIST report either. (Yes, I can prove that.)

–Engineer Edward Knesl says, “We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.” Faster than freefall! He' hasn't even bothered to review videos of the collapses. Can these people possibly be any less competent?

Actually, yes. Here's what AE 911 Truth engineer Donald Messerlian believes:

–“Seismographic evidence proved pre-planted explosives destroyed WTC 1, 2 and building 7 before the planes struck buildings 1 & 2.”

Right. The three WTC buildings were destroyed before the planes hit. In the same vein of disturbed fantasy, Richard's aerospace engineer is a "no-planer":

–"After performing some in-depth research on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that no commercial airplanes impacted the two WTC Towers. No commercial plane impacted the Pentagon. No commercial aircraft buried itself in Pennsylvania terra firma."

This is plain mental illness, and it's promoted by Gage on his website. How reprehensible, and how sad.

I suggest you spend a few days with the facts I linked above. I'll be glad to answer any questions you have after you've read and watched all the material. Fair enough?

Just out of curiosity, is this thread an example of what would be included in your best threads project?

 

[Corsair 115]

This coming from a bus tour driver ,wheres your structural engineering degree.

Then why don't you send a PM to forum member Architect, who, as his board name implies, is an actual architect who designs tall buildings for a living. He has posted in numerous threads challenging 9/11 conspiracy believers to post the relevant structural formulas and math which prove their assertion that the WTC towers couldn't collapse from the damage and fire alone. To date none have been able to, while Architect most certainly can produce the relevant formulas and math. It's quite entertaining to watch when Architect challenges conspiracy theorists to produce the relevant math, because then they run away from the thread as fast as they can.

 

[Gravy]

This coming from a bus tour driver ,wheres your structural engineering degree.

My, how quickly you turned. What happened to your civility?

1) I have never driven a tour bus.

2) I have demonstrated, with evidence, that claims made by Richard Gage and his "experts" are false. Please demonstrate, with evidence, that my claims are false.

3) On my website there is a section on critical thinking and logical fallacies. You are commiting the fallacy of "argument to authority." Please learn what it is and do not repeat it.

And someone who beleives the Paint company supplied the Red chips ( paint which explodes )

1) Please show Steven Jones' analysis of WTC non-exploding paint next to his analysis of the "exploding" paint.

What? He didn't analyze other samples, or even any other standard alkyd-based, red oxide steel primer paint?

Why do you think that is, GodisEnergy? Isn't such a comparison the FIRST thing any so-called scientist should do?

2) Please provide the footage of the tests showing this material "exploding," compared with normal paint subjected to the same conditions.

What? No such testing was done?

3) Please provide the analysis of the gray side of the chips.

What? No such analysis was done or revealed?

4) Please explain what you think this "exploding paint" was intended to accomplish, and how. Approximately how much force was this alleged film of explosive able to apply to a structural steel column, compared to conventional explosives? Remember, you're not talking about a cutter charge here, but a millimeter-thick film spread over a wide area. What damage can it do?

5) Jones and Gage claim these red chips contain "nanoparticles." What are the actual dimensions of these particles, compared to the dimensions of particles in, you know, paint?

 

[GodisEnergy]

Who knows? It's not our job to do the research concerning your fantasy for you.

Double standards once again, If you claim the red chips are then prove it is paint.

 

[Gravy]

So what is the chemical composition of the wtc paint?

As I said in the Hardfire show, the formulas for the tower primer paint are right there in the NIST report. I gave the percentage of iron oxide. Gage didn't know that because he hasn't read the report. Don't take my word for it: find it yourself.

 

[dtugg]

I didn't claim anything. If you claim it's not paint chips you can prove it. However, it is very clear to anybody that hasn't been brainwashed by Jones that paint chips is infinitely more likely than spray on nano thermite or whatever it is that your fantasy requires.

As I said in the Hardfire show, the formulas for the tower primer paint are right there in the NIST report. I gave the percentage of iron oxide. Gage didn't know that because he hasn't read the report. Don't take my word for it: find it yourself.

Awesome. And another twoofer gets his ass handed to him by Gravy.

 

[Gravy]

The volume has nothing to do with Conservation of Momentum
Cardboard also cannot fall through another peice of cardboard at free fall acceleration.Without additional force applied from above like rockets attached.

Start with a false premise and you're unlikely to arrive at the correct answer. The towers did not collapse at freefall speed. Don't take my word for it: time them, using videos that clearly show the beginnings of the collapses. Use several videos to arrive at an average.

What are your results? How many seconds over "freefall time" did the collapses take? Now, how much TNT-equivalent energy was necessary to overcome the resistance met by the falling portion of the towers?

 

[T.A.M.]

What I don't understand is why conspirators would go through so much trouble trying to prove the towers were done by explosives if they were completely wrong? What are they getting out of it? I mean it seems like they are only seeking the truth like anyone else...

Likely motivations (based on my observations of the truth movement over a 2 year period), not in any order:

1. Monetary(count the books DRG has written, count the DVDs Alex Jones sells)
2. Fame (Big fish in a small pond is better than nothing)
3. Anger with the previous USG administration
4. Sense of superiority through secret knowledge
5. Paranoia

One question for you, what about the invasion of Iraq based on the idea of nuclear weapons, when there were none found... I mean we invaded multiple countries and I'm sure we got oil out of it... do you know anything about that matter?

Completely different topic. It was a fortunate circumstance for the Neocons that 9/11 caused great fear and anger for that part of the world in America, but if you recall it was suggestions of WMDs that won the approval of congress and what not, that lead to the invasion. Was oil a factor, yes, sure, but it was not the only one, and the connection to 9/11 is remote.

Ask yourself this question.

If the Bush Administration helped to orchestrate 9/11, which would involve planting of incredible amounts of evidence, and keeping hundreds of people silent, how is it that they could not plant, in the entire country of Iraq, a few WMDs and the laboratory equipment to make them? Seems to me if the USG wanted to get the people behind them, to keep the war going, the easiest thing for them to do would be to plant such things...but they did not.
Why, I wonder?

TAM

 

[GodisEnergy]

As I said in the Hardfire show, the formulas for the tower primer paint are right there in the NIST report. I gave the percentage of iron oxide. Gage didn't know that because he hasn't read the report. Don't take my word for it: find it yourself.

a link would be much appreciated