29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition

[Regnad Kcin]

The station checked out Gage's credentials before bringing him on the show. The person you spoke with is well aware that Gage is not a crank, even if not absolutely convinced he is 100% correct.

When some rambling crank calls in claiming to be an expert, they just roll their eyes. Local TV people can spot fraud.

Thank you for posting the phone number here, I hope all the nutjobs call in. the best way to learn the 9/11 Truth, is to hear from the idiots defending the official conspiracy theory.

Please grow up. Everyone will be happier, including you.

 

[The Platypus]

Considering there are hundreds of thousands of engineers in the USA, is some 911 cult's claim of 29 supporting them supposed to impress me?

Wow, big deal, out of hundreds of thousands, all they got is 29 and knowing their extensive track record of lying and people claiming expertise they don't have, even those are questionable.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

''A camel may go through the eye of a needle but an airliner may go through anything ''

good thing lead is so soft and bone is so hard, otherwise guns could really hurt somebody

 

[tsig]

The Heiwa Challenge easy to solve? Your house of cards didn't even pass THC rule #4. Blu-tak! What damping coefficient did it have? Have another try! It is fun!

I guess you have not heard of the TSIG Challenge.

 

[Christopher7]

you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place and everything was not instantaneous."

that sequence started right before the collapse of the east mechanical penthouse

The collapse of the east penthouse happened before the beginning of the free fall of the building. Furthermore, NIST believes that area fell at free fall too. The 105 foot free fall acceleration involved the entire building save what had already collapsed inside the east end. NIST acknowledges this. The screenwall and west penthouse started falling about 1 second before the north and west faces, pulling the exterior walls inward as is done in a controlled demolition. They disappeared inside the building and were therefore also falling at free fall acceleration.

The NIST computer model does NOT fall at free fall acceleration. It does not look like the videos and is it cut short just because the deformation was getting too obviously unlike the videos.

 

[Justin39640]

The collapse of the east penthouse happened before the beginning of the free fall of the building. Furthermore, NIST believes that area fell at free fall too. The 105 foot free fall acceleration involved the entire building save what had already collapsed inside the east end. NIST acknowledges this. The screenwall and west penthouse started falling about 1 second before the north and west faces, pulling the exterior walls inward as is done in a controlled demolition. They disappeared inside the building and were therefore also falling at free fall acceleration.

The NIST computer model does NOT fall at free fall acceleration. It does not look like the videos and is it cut short just because the deformation was getting too obviously unlike the videos.

where was the over pressures that would have blown windows and facade 2 blocks
where was the reports from those explosives?

there isnt any

the east penthouse fell in it kinda tumbled it didnt just disappear
i dont know what video youre watching

 

[FineWine]

lol. I must add those to my liist of 'debunker axioms'

''Everything is under everything else''

' 9/11 was an outside job ''

''A camel may go through the eye of a needle but an airliner may go through anything ''

'' Steel may fall and disappear, but then again, where do all the missing socks go ''

'' 'Could have been', might' and 'possibly' are high measures of statistical probability '

I nicked your one Heiwa.

The Gross axiom of freefall:
:'' Freefall may occur in three discrete steps. ' Drop like a stone', 'Plunge' and 'BANG' ''

Ryan Mackey explained in detail exactly how the planes penetrated the buildings. What errors have you found in his explanations?

No steel disappeared. All of it was recovered.

Your desperation grows daily.

 

[bill smith]

Ryan Mackey explained in detail exactly how the planes penetrated the buildings. What errors have you found in his explanations?

No steel disappeared. All of it was recovered.

Your desperation grows daily.

Your doubt grows daily. That's a good thing.

 

[Christopher7]

The collapse of the east penthouse happened before the beginning of the free fall of the building. Furthermore, NIST believes that area fell at free fall too. The 105 foot free fall acceleration involved the entire building save what had already collapsed inside the east end. NIST acknowledges this. The screenwall and west penthouse started falling about 1 second before the north and west faces, pulling the exterior walls inward as is done in a controlled demolition. They disappeared inside the building and were therefore also falling at free fall acceleration.

The NIST computer model does NOT fall at free fall acceleration. It does not look like the videos and is it cut short just because the deformation was getting too obviously unlike the videos.

where was the over pressures that would have blown windows and facade 2 blocks
where was the reports from those explosives?
there isnt any

Subject shift to denial tactic "It can't be because . . ."

WTC 7 fell at free fall acceleration for about 100 feet.

The NIST structural modeling does not!

Oops.

The NIST model does NOT result in the observed collapse.

NIST has not explained the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 or 7.
A new, independent investigation is required to determine the cause of the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 & 7.

 

[Bluesky]

Subject shift to denial tactic "It can't be because . . ."

WTC 7 fell at free fall acceleration for about 100 feet.

The NIST structural modeling does not!
Oops.
The NIST model does NOT result in the observed collapse.

NIST has not explained the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 or 7.
A new, independent investigation is required to determine the cause of the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 & 7.

I guess that you are part of the AE911truth movement and want a new investigation with your type of experts, but with subpoena powers. I am sure the results would be quite remarkable. This is the expertiese claimed by the experts that are leading your movement:

1. "I have used explosives on many road projects"
2 40 years of experience on ships "but the principles are the same for other structures eg Towers". Of course this is our good friend Heiwa!.
3.a "former" structural engineer
4 "my expertise is in structure construction of bridges"
5."Expertise in Low-Rise Building Design, Renovation,Assessment & Rehabilitation
6."I joined the Vermont Agency of Transportation in 1989 where I have worked in the Structures Section since 1995."
7. "I received my BS in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of Cincinnati in 2007. I am currently working on my MS in Structural Engineering at the University"
8. "Structural engineer since 1986. Involved in design of hundreds of steel structures though none have been involved in airplane collisions"
9. (none provided)
10. "With over a year's experience in the structural field, I am a new graduate of structural and geotechnical Civil Engineering"
11. "After working as a Junior Engineer, I returned to pursue a Master's degree (just short)."

tsk tsk

 

[beachnut]

29 people with failed ideas on 911

How do 29 people try to become complete idiots on 911 and come up with the same dirt dumb ideas? Pure anti-intellectual claptrap.

The OP calls 29 people experts; they are failed people with moronic failed ideas no one can support with facts or evidence and the few fringe truthers who are JREF fail to do more than talk and spew junk ideas and idiotic opinions.

 

[Christopher7]

How do 29 people try to become complete idiots on 911 and come up with the same dirt dumb ideas? Pure anti-intellectual claptrap.

The OP calls 29 people experts; they are failed people with moronic failed ideas no one can support with facts or evidence and the few fringe truthers who are JREF fail to do more than talk and spew junk ideas and idiotic opinions.

Rule 12. Attack the argument, not the arguer. - Darat

Can you deal with these facts?

WTC 7 fell at free fall acceleration for about 100 feet.

The NIST structural modeling does not!

The NIST model does NOT result in the observed collapse.

NIST has not explained the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 or 7.
A new, independent investigation is required to determine the cause of the total collapse of WTC 1, 2 & 7.

 

[beachnut]

29 people who can't figure out 911 so they make up lies and spread their own delusions based on their moronic opinions, hearsay, and stupidity.

I will try to give these "experts" another chance and read the handout from the OP. Oops...

William W. Acri - he used explosives on roads he has no clue about the failure mode of the WTC Towers and has not offered any calculations. I wonder if he read the thousands of pages of the NIST report. No truther can answer this question because they accept these lies from these people who have zero qualifications on studding a high-rise collapse.

Antonio Arthay - building design, zero capabilities in structural engineering since he supports the lies of controlled demolition without evidence.

Anders Björkman - works with ships - not qualified to make any statements on the WTC and he has proved it.

Jim Bomford - no information on what he did with his civil engineering degree. Maybe he changed light bulbs at the local high school, or calculated road grading. But zero experience in high rise buildings was offered.

[COLOR=black]Claude Robert Briscoe - he does roads. Why does a road civil engineer make up lies about the WTC?

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Ronald H. Brookman - no experience in high-rise building like the WTC. Why does he make up lies about 911?

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Frank J. Cullinan - he works on bridges and destroyed a bridge. Why does he fail to understand the gravity collapse and I bet he failed to read or comprehend the NIST report.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Erwin De Jong - wow! Off shore structures and aerospace junk. Zero expertise here for high-rise stuff. Why does he support lies on 911?

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Michael T. Donly - the low rise guy on the team. Does low rise mean old houses or something. No real expertise here for understanding the WTC towers.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Rick Fowlkes - nothing offered for his qualifications in working on structures like the WTC towers. Another unqualified person who supports lies about 911.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Bill Genitsaris - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]David G. Huebner - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Edward E. Knesl - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Dennis J. Kollar - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Thomas H. Lackey - zero expertise in high-rise buildings. [/COLOR]

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Nathan S. Lomba - zero expertise in high-rise buildings. [/COLOR]

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=black]Paul W. Mason - zero expertise in high-rise buildings. [/COLOR]

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]Travis McCoy - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

Dr. Robert T. Mote - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

Arthur Nelson - zero expertise in high-rise buildings hit by aircraft.

Kamal S. Obeid - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[COLOR=black]Howard Pasternack - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]Charles N. Pegelow - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]William Rice - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]Jérôme Royer - zero expertise in high-rise buildings. His degree in High energy physics did not help him understand 911. How sad.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]Alaa Rustom - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]David Scott - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.
Poor David invokes the moronic statement, "the laws of phyiscs were violated"; the sign of stupidity?

"Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . ."

What a moronic statement that means nothing.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]Clayton J. Simmons - his [FONT=TimesNewRoman][SIZE=2][FONT=TimesNewRoman][SIZE=2]analyzing and designing water-based infrastructure and residential structures did not help him understand 911. How truthy.[/SIZE][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[FONT=TimesNewRoman][SIZE=2][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]David Topete - zero expertise in high-rise buildings. He has high hopes but no clue on 911.

[COLOR=#000080][FONT=TimesNewRoman][COLOR=#000080][COLOR=black]Clark W. Townsend - zero expertise in high-rise buildings.

No one has experience designing high-rise buildings. Not real experts on 911 issues, just a few fringe people who make up moronic ideas and lies about 911.

No body here can support a single thing these guys say about 911. I tried but their ideas were dumber than dirt when it comes to 911. I was amazed how stupid their ideas were and wondered how they earned a degree in anything. These 29 people are proof you can earn a college degree and still make up lies and dirt dumb ideas on stuff you don't understand due to ignorance, bias, and a propensity to believe nut-case conspiracy theories.

The OP was correct; this seals the deal! If you need a nut case idea on 911, these are the experts who can deliver the dumbest and most moronic ideas you can find on 911. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT]

 

[Seymour Butz]

We Truthers consistently underestimate the importance of having the former chief of NIST's own Fire Science division calling for the same independent investigation of the collapses as we do.

We should start to make a much bigger deal out of this than we currently do.

It doesn't matter that he says he doesn't beelieve they were controlled Demolitions. All that matters is that he has called for an independent investigation like we have.

This may be a break through.

Troofers are now saying that they would have collapsed even without the removal of the fireproofing on the trusses.

Congrats troofers for injecting some reality into your lives.

 

[Galileo]

Not to be rude, but you're not an expert and your opinion means nothing.

I design these things for a living.

I will be certain to keep myself safe, and keep out anything you have been involved in building or designing.

 

[Shalamar]

I will be certain to keep myself safe, and keep out anything you have been involved in building or designing.

What a curious statement. (But not a surprising one.)

The list of engineers that you placed forward were shown to be lacking in tall-building architectural expertise. An actual Architect steps forward, and you dismiss him.

Why do you dismiss him? Is it because you feel his knowledge and education are false? Is it because he does not follow your beliefs?

What are your credentials in tall-building Architecture?

 

[Architect]

I will be certain to keep myself safe, and keep out anything you have been involved in building or designing.

I note a strange case of double standards in your appeal to authority. I am to believe your AE911 "experts" because they are qualified (ahem) however you seem rather reluctant to apply this in reverse with my qualifications.

Let's look at this again. Why should I, a trained professional specialising in this field and who has already demonstrated sufficient bona-fides to the Mods to prove same, believe you as a lay person?

 

[Architect]

What are your credentials in tall-building Architecture?

Will this do?


ETA: no jokes about the crease in the plan, missing bit of wall, etc. It wasn't my idea......

 

[Shalamar]

Will this do?


ETA: no jokes about the crease in the plan, missing bit of wall, etc. It wasn't my idea......

Well.. I don't need to ask your credentials. I know you've submitted them to the JREF before.

I was asking Galileo on his. I notice he is ignoring the thread.

 

[FineWine]

Your doubt grows daily. That's a good thing.

For reasons that escape most people on this forum, you seem to thrive on self-humiliation. I'm not a psychologist. I freely admit that I just don't get it. But let's acknowledge the obvious: you run away from inconvenient questions. This demonstration of a minimal contact with reality sets you apart from people like Ultima1 or Chistophera, the guy in the "realstice" thread who was called to my attention the other day (I'd like to smack the poster who got me to wade through a mountain of drivel until I was dizzy and couldn't see straight!). Imagine, hundreds of pages of nonsense about the towers' concrete cores, and the towers did not have concrete cores.

But, getting back to you, you seem to recognize when you wade into waters that are too deep. You've claimed that no Islamist terrorists attacked America on 9/11. You've simultaneously claimed that the Israelis, your personal devil-figures, knew about the nonexistent attacks in advance. The huge conceptual short-circuit hadn't occurred to you, but when it was pointed out, you were very embarrassed. You run from questions about the contradiction, but--here's the important point--you don't abandon the untenable position. It's so plainly ridiculous that you can't attempt to defend it, but you can't rethink it either.

You landed yourself in the same sort of mess trying to defend Heiwa's crackpot science. Asked repeatedly how only the bottom floor of a falling mass consisting of thirteen floors makes contact--gentle contact--with the next floor in line, you turn tail and run. Yes, the position is insane and indefensible, but you don't discard it! You acknowledge its absurdity by your flight, but you continue to cling to it.

Your problem is the one that destroys the pretensions of all "truthers": your conspiracy doesn't exist. The reason all the predictions made by your insane movement failed is that the premises underlying them are wrong. No matter how you try, you can't make your conspiracy theory work. It crashes into reality at every turn.

Now you've responded to more unanswerable questions by ignoring them and bleating that my doubt grows daily. But I have no doubt about the Islamist attacks of 9/11--certainly no doubts about the falsity of your insane movement's claims. In almost eight years, your side has produced absolutely nothing. This is not an ongoing process. You are dead in the water. Lately, you have been reduced to recycling Judy Wood's insane fiction about "missing" steel. You invoke James Quintiere, a man who has contempt for you "truthers."

It's over, man, it's over.