Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
That in "brief moment" WTC 7 fell ~100 feet. Ergo, 7 to 8 floors of supporting structure was removed.
I brought up WTC 7 to make the point about FFA. Shyam Sunder, stated the obvious: "a free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it"
Your theory has the top section falling at FFA for 12.5 feet and getting up to 19mph, but that is impossible as it requires instantaneous free fall acceleration of the upper section.
There were ~120 exterior columns and 38 interior columns remaining. A collapse would not be instantaneous. The columns would buckle or bend for part of that distance.
When are you going to prove that any type of CD can do what you are claiming? How can thermite be timed so perfectly? How about explosives? Remember, you are claiming that all the columns were taken out simultaneously.
It appears that rather than admitting your error you have chosen to feign irritation as a reason not to answer. You and Ryan Mackey must be using the same notes as he won't answer when proven wrong either.
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
"In no way a strawman"? Then I'm sure you can find the analysis where I am "taking the kinetic energy difference between freefall acceleration and 2/3rds g" to calculate the velocity losses of WTC1 during its fall.
Until you can cite this specific passage from my writings, with proof and verification, I will continue to consider your blatantly false representation of my approach to be a straw man.
Since this passage does not exist - the 2/3g is a result of my analysis (for the 1st 4 seconds of WTC1 collapse - at the end, the average acceleration is 1/3 g), and not an input to my model - it's obvious you will never be able to find the needed citation to make your point. Thus, I continue to say "We're done. Maybe Chandler can do better."
Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!
No matter what you try to say, the problem for those who want to say WTC 7 took 16 seconds to collapse is that by all indications the collapse of the east penthouse was a separate and distinct failure and was not part of the mechanism which brought down the entire building moments later.
There are a lot of things that Tony has said that are simple & simply wrong.
The statement above is a perfect encapsulation of the level of self-delusion required to maintain & defend engineering lunacy.
Every single competent structural engineer, mechanical engineer or fire fighter in the world, shown the above statement, would simply shake their heads & chuckle.
Since a trivial observation of events shows the building standing for 20+ years, standing after being hit by an enormous amount of falling debris, standing for about 7 hours after catching fire, and for both collapses to occur within 6 seconds of each other ...
... the same is true about every thinking person over the age of 15. That is, the subset of people who do not believe in absurd levels of coincidence.
As a man living in the America of today Tri you know very well that Richard Gage has risked evrything to do what he's done. You or I would probably not have the guts.
If he gets through this enormous ordeal intact he should be venerated as a Hero of the American way.
Oh please, he risked his career for a lie unnecessarily. He is NOT a hero in any sense of the word.
Hero would be like the firefighters whom saved lives, but gave their own. Heroes would be the people who helped others escape the Towers. Heroes would be the people who gave their lives that day.
So how is he paying his bills? How is he feeding himself. How is he paying his rent/mortgage? Horse****. He is profiting from his lies, and you know it.
Look at their computer model. The interior had collapsed over a period of about 8 seconds and then the exterior columns buckled but "there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous."
Back to the misquoting again. Your denial of what Sunder is talking about is apparent. You refuse to acknowledge that Sunder was talking about the entire collapse as they knew it before they confirmed the 8 floors of FFA. Further proof that you have no interest in the truth.
ETA:: The supporting structure under the top section must be removed on 7 to 8 floors in order for the top part to fall at FFA..
Where have you been for 8 years? Your tacit support for 911 truth is based on what? I forgot Tony had harassed Gravy; but Tony has 911 conspiracy theories so deep rooted he fails to see his real CD deal is based on zero evidence. He hates Bush; when will he figure out we have a new president; is that Gage's problem too?
Got anything you can use to save Gage's lies from the pit of ignorance?
No matter what you try to say, the problem for those who want to say WTC 7 took 16 seconds to collapse is that by all indications the collapse of the east penthouse was a separate and distinct failure and was not part of the mechanism which brought down the entire building moments later.
Where is your model? Would it help if you knew Bush is not in office? Why not tell Obama you have the secrets which will blow 911 wide open!?
Tony, the fact is your CD deal is evidence free. Gage is making money selling lies, why are you pushing lies?
You are saying the penthouse falling into the interior of WTC7 has nothing to do with WTC7 overall collapse and you base this on your paranoid conspiracy theory because you have no real work to back up this idiotic claim. How do you come up with your ideas? It is not engineering.
Where is your model? Would it help if you knew Bush is not in office? Why not tell Obama you have the secrets which will blow 911 wide open!?
Tony, the fact is your CD deal is evidence free. Gage is making money selling lies, why are you pushing lies?
You are saying the penthouse falling into the interior of WTC7 has nothing to do with WTC7 overall collapse and you base this on your paranoid conspiracy theory because you have no real work to back up this idiotic claim. How do you come up with your ideas? It is not engineering.
If what Tony says abput the Penthouse collapses having nothing to do with the further collapse of the building is true, then The Penthouses must have been deliberately dropped into the building first in order to hide whatever was inside them.
Count me among those who think that Richard Gage is a charlatan - I don't believe for a minute that he sincerely wants a new, 'fair and impartial' (or whatever the term was) investigation.
He is (IMO) using the idea of an investigation as a lure to recruit gullible truthers and in general Illuminati/NWO conspiricists. The main reasons I think this is because
a) He and his ilk would immediately reject any fair inquiry which did not agree with their preconceived conspiracy ideas - especially the controlled demolition canard
b) The 'evidence' truthers are claiming is so useless and vague that it could never have a hope of providing the basis for some kind of legal case. There is not, and never has been, a single shred of evidence that incendiary compounds or explosives of any kind were installed anywhere at the WTC.
Surely at some level he must be aware of this, unless he is seriously self-deluded...
Anyway his claims and his evidence are almost completely fake. That's the definition of a charlatan to a tee.
Count me among those who think that Richard Gage is a charlatan - I don't believe for a minute that he sincerely wants a new, 'fair and impartial' (or whatever the term was) investigation.
He is (IMO) using the idea of an investigation as a lure to recruit gullible truthers and in general Illuminati/NWO conspiricists. The main reasons I think this is because
a) He and his ilk would immediately reject any fair inquiry which did not agree with their preconceived conspiracy ideas - especially the controlled demolition canard
b) The 'evidence' truthers are claiming is so useless and vague that it could never have a hope of providing the basis for some kind of legal case. There is not, and never has been, a single shred of evidence that incendiary compounds or explosives of any kind were installed anywhere at the WTC.
Surely at some level he must be aware of this, unless he is seriously self-deluded...
Anyway his claims and his evidence are almost completely fake. That's the definition of a charlatan to a tee.
Well its true to say that a new investigation of 9/11 would have to be completely different to any procedure we have seen before. We would have to break the mould for this one.
Well its true to say that a new investigation of 9/11 would have to be completely different to any procedure we have seen before. We would have to break the mould for this one.
Count me among those who think that Richard Gage is a charlatan - I don't believe for a minute that he sincerely wants a new, 'fair and impartial' (or whatever the term was) investigation.
He is (IMO) using the idea of an investigation as a lure to recruit gullible truthers and in general Illuminati/NWO conspiricists. The main reasons I think this is because
a) He and his ilk would immediately reject any fair inquiry which did not agree with their preconceived conspiracy ideas - especially the controlled demolition canard
b) The 'evidence' truthers are claiming is so useless and vague that it could never have a hope of providing the basis for some kind of legal case. There is not, and never has been, a single shred of evidence that incendiary compounds or explosives of any kind were installed anywhere at the WTC.
Surely at some level he must be aware of this, unless he is seriously self-deluded...
Anyway his claims and his evidence are almost completely fake. That's the definition of a charlatan to a tee.
I say he's a carnie, from his attempt at a slick presentation to his cadence. He should be giving out stuffed animals at the "squirt the clown in the mouth race" game. He obviously sees the 911 truth movement as his personal cash cow. They've sent him on all expense paid trips all over the world to exotic places like.... New Zealand. He just seems like a huge phony to me.
What evidence is there of failures occurring a dozen floors below the east penthouse? In the videos I only see light through windows one floor below the roofline of the main building.
The following is taken from The National Institute of Standards and Technology's youtube channel.
WTC7, just prior to the start of the 16 second collapse sequence. NIST is one of the few youtube vids that show the early part of the collapse sequence. East Mechanical Penhouse is marked.
Roofline of the EMP has buckled, the collapse is now underway, and probably has been for a few seconds prior to this. Some damage (circled in blue) has appeared on a window pane several floors directly underneath the collapsing penthouse.
Failure of the EMP continues, the majority of the structure remains on top of the building at this point, however the damage several floors below has gotten worse. three windows appear to be broken. Separated from eachother by intact windows. We know that this is not due to a blast event, because an explosive shockwave powerful enough to rend structural steel would have taken out every window on that floor, possibly others above and below. Explosive shockwaves don't pick and choose what they destroy in this manner.
The EMP is almost completely gone by this point. The damage several floors down is worse again. Having eliminated blast events as the cause, and since it started simultaneously with the beginning of the EMPs collapse, a more likely explanation is weakening and failure of nearby structural supports, twisting and distortion of the buildings frame has affected the windows closest to the initial failure. It is obviously this failure deep inside the main body of WTC7 which caused the collapse of the East Mechanical Penthouse and is directly related to the collapse of the building as whole.
Tony "You Must Be a Jew" Szamboti will be unable to provide a satisfactory explanation of these observations that fits a blast scenario (Mr. Randi, I'll take my million in Canadian funds).
Wow, thanks for posting this. Despite his delusions over 9/11 I thought that I was dealing with a rational human being. That was very creepy. Thanks again.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
He just seems like a huge phony to me.
