Danny Jowenko - Manipulated by 9/11 Deniers

[BigAl]

Do I?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...93AA25751C0A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

MM

Your point?

 

[geggy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus

 

[bill smith]

According to miragememories, this photograph doesn't exist.

[qimg]http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/WTC7_Smoke.jpg[/qimg]

Completely fictional narrative, indeed.

There's something wrong with this picture. Is it that the deliniation between smoke and no-smoke is too sharp ? THere's something off anyway..

 

[uke2se]

There's something wrong with this picture. Is it that the deliniation between smoke and no-smoke is too sharp ? THere's something off anyway..

Yes, there's something off. Your need to insinuate that the photo was faked shows that your grasp on reality is what's off.

 

[triforcharity]

Extracts from the NIST Final Report on the Collapse of WTC7;

pg.xxxvi
" The fires were ignited on at least 10 floors;
however, only the fires on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 grew and lasted until the time of the building collapse."

pg.18
" Fires broke out on at least 10 floors of WTC 7, near the damaged southwest corner of the building (NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 5)."

pg.18
" The collapse of WTC 1 damaged seven exterior columns, between Floors 7 and 17 of the south and west faces of WTC 7. It also ignited fires on at least 10 floors between Floors 7 and 30, and the fires burned out of control on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13.

MM

I took the trouble of hiliting the words you aparently don't understand.

 

[triforcharity]

I see smoke from WTC7 and WTC6 combining;

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/715/wtc7wtc6smokin1rua0.png

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5430/wtc6smoke1mh8.png

Regardless of such quibbling, the NIST WTC7 investigation, which relied heavily on the same visual evidence you folks are citing, as well as firefighter interviews, determined that; "...fires burned out of control on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13.".

The NIST also determined, that after 1 p.m.,
"the only fires of significant duration and intensity were on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13."

That is the relevant finding.

MM

Even small fires that were not of "significant duration and intensity" still produce lots of smoke. LOTS.

You aparently are not understanding NIST at all. Maybe you need to take a reading comprehension course. I hear that TruthersLie's wife teaches a great one. You should PM him and see if she can get you it.

 

[triforcharity]

Right now the only smoke being blown is by you OCTers.

None of you appear brave enough to ponder why the NIST, with all their resources, 7 years of investigation, and after interviewing the firefighters, do not place any significant weight on the visual evidence displayed by the smoke rising up the south face of WTC7?

You have nothing that compares with what was available to the NIST investigation.

This is not like your Danny Jowenko claim of not being presented with all the available data.

The NIST determined, that after 1 p.m.,
"the only fires of significant duration and intensity were on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13."

That is the relevant finding.

MM

I hilited the relevent finding in this statement. Contact TL to get on the list for that class.

 

[triforcharity]

That would clear up nothing.

You told those lies and now you are dodging because you have no
proof to substantiate them.



If what you said was true, then it should be very easy to source my posts.

MM

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6284054&postcount=1138

Your post states "They were under severe pressure".

ETA: Here is the exact one that everyone is referring to.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6181901&postcount=501

Retraction is required please, liar.

 

[GlennB]

Yes, there's something off. Your need to insinuate that the photo was faked shows that your grasp on reality is what's off.

Yes.

For a reality check Steve Spak's videos (good resolution, can be slow to play) are at

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC7_Fire_Videos

Each clip is quite short. 2+5 are very revealing.

Anybody who suggests the photos are faked or that smoke was rising from WTC5+6 and being blown across WTC7 by the wind (like MM) hasn't looked very hard. Or has a deceitful agenda.

 

[GlennB]

Any time you wish to source NIST statements that cast doubt on
NIST WTC7 FINAL - 1A fire conclusions, Glenn, feel free;
pg.29
" The visual evidence indicated that the only fires of significant duration and intensity were on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13.
By 1:00 p.m., there was no visual evidence that the small, early fires on Floors 19, 22, 29, and 30 were still burning (NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 5). Therefore, these fires were not included in the four-step analysis sequence.

The sections you quote should explain it to you, but you just can't see it. Again. So allow me ....

NIST's definition of "visual" evidence eliminates anything that was reported but not recorded on camera. Thus eliminating any FDNY reports.
Given that GZ was to the immediate south of WTC7 and Vesey St. was a disaster area it's hardly surprising that cameras didn't get in there. Plus there was an exclusion zone later.

Steve Spak got as close as any, but even he was filming at a severe angle to the S facade of the building, with drifting smoke hiding most of the S facade.

"there was no visual evidence that the small, early fires on Floors 19, 22, 29, and 30 were still burning (NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 5). Therefore, these fires were not included ...."

Given NIST's stated methodology this cannot possibly be taken to mean that firefighters were plain wrong in their assessment.
p.s. and if you're going to trot out that insane bilge about much of the smoke actually coming up from WTC5+6 then you really should view Spak's videos (see post above). The smoke is gushing from WTC7.

 

[MikeW]

Yes.

For a reality check Speve Spak's videos (good resolution, can be slow to play) are at

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC7_Fire_Videos

Yes, I figured people wanted detail so I didn't shrink them down. You can download the files, though, just click the download button on the player - you'll get them at your own pace & can view them properly in a decent desktop player.

 

[TruthersLie]

You seem to be doing all the implying.

I'm just letting the facts speak for themselves.

You imply that the concrete in WTC7 played little part in the structural strength of the building.

I think you undervalue the structural strength gained from the reinforced concrete floors.

MM

ROFLMAO.

The lead architect goes ON AND ON about the steel in the towers... not one mention of the concrete floor decking.

Any legitimate (you know engineering and or architectural) source on the towers or wtc7 state they were STEEL FRAMED buildings.

They used a thin layer of light weight concrete for the floor decking.

Can you show me the concrete reinforcement in this picture?

Cuz I don't see any.
There is a VAST difference between a steel framed building with composite flooring and a steel and concrete building. As I have schooled you on.

I dont' IMPLY anything about the structural strength of the concrete in the FLOOR DECKING. There is negligable strength added by the concrete there.

So stop the LYING about it.

 

[bill smith]

Yes, I figured people wanted detail so I didn't shrink them down. You can download the files, though, just click the download button on the player - you'll get them at your own pace & can view them properly in a decent desktop player.

Hey Mike - where are those lines of burned out and broken windows in the attached photo below of the collapse of WTC7 ? (

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5MGdWNYLGc&feature=player_embedded#!

We can see by the windows that are breaking in the videos what broken windows should look like and burned out windows will look the same with some blackening.

In my videos I don't see the lines of burned, blackened and broken windows that you showed in your photo in post 1331. ?

This is the photo I meant

http://www.911myths.com/images/0/09/WTC_Fires_NBC_1_Still.jpg

 

[TruthersLie]

Do I?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...93AA25751C0A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

MM

did you even read your own citation there?

I don't think you did.

BEFORE it moves into a new office tower in downtown Manhattan, Salomon Brothers, the brokerage firm, intends to spend nearly two years and more than $200 million cutting out floors, adding elevators, reinforcing steel girders, upgrading power supplies and making other improvements in its million square feet of space.

The work, which began last month at Seven World Trade Center, reflects both the adaptability of steel-framed towers and the extraordinary importance of fail-safe computer and telephone systems for the brokerage industry.

and

MORE than 375 tons of steel - requiring 12 miles of welding - will be installed to reinforce floors for Salomon's extra equipment

In fact, there isn't a damn thing in this article except for a mention about breaking up concrete in the FLOORS to get to the steel trusses.

workers are removing most of three existing floors, using jackhammers to demolish concrete slabs and torches to remove steel decking and girders beneath the concrete.

Not concrete reinforcement... it is in the FLOOR decking. It is vastly different.

Try again. This time use something like a REAL source, or maybe one that backs up your claims.

Schools still in session.

 

[Oystein]

Among several other FALSE CLAIMS, MM still has to retract the following LIE: "complete freefall ... is a planned for characteristic in controlled demolitions"

 

[Miragememories]

"I see smoke from WTC7 and WTC6 combining;

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/715/wtc7wtc6smokin1rua0.png

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5430/wtc6smoke1mh8.png

Regardless of such quibbling, the NIST WTC7 investigation, which relied heavily on the same visual evidence you folks are citing, as well as firefighter interviews, determined that; "...fires burned out of control on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13.".

The NIST also determined, that after 1 p.m.,
"the only fires of significant duration and intensity were on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13."

That is the relevant finding."

"Even small fires that were not of "significant duration and intensity" still produce lots of smoke. LOTS.

Maybe you need to take a reading comprehension course."

Speculating on the existence of small fires producing additional smoke is irrelevant.

The NIST also determined, that after 1 p.m.,
"the only fires of significant duration and intensity were on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13."

As I said, that is the relevant finding.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6284054&postcount=1138

Your post states "They were under severe pressure".

ETA: Here is the exact one that everyone is referring to.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6181901&postcount=501

Retraction is required please, liar.

???

Time for you to sign up for reading comprehension classes.

You gave two links to posts where I make no mention of Blanchard whatsoever.

I fail to see how they justify alienentitity's lies?

post 1139
"You also falsely stated that Brent Blanchard is somehow not an expert in controlled demolition."

post 1143
".. your attempt to misrepresent the credentials of Blanchard is downright dishonest"

MM

 

[Disbelief]

How many posts are you going to make before you address your claim?

post 1119
And as noted in their final report, the NIST, finally conceded that WTC7 underwent a complete freefall for at least 8 storys.

That is something that has never occurred before in a concrete and steel building, yet is a planned for characteristic in controlled demolitions.

 

[triforcharity]

???

Time for you to sign up for reading comprehension classes.

You gave two links to posts where I make no mention of Blanchard whatsoever.

I fail to see how they justify alienentitity's lies?



MM

Who are you referring to in that pos there??

 

[Miragememories]

Anybody who suggests the photos are faked or that smoke was rising from WTC5+6 and being blown across WTC7 by the wind (like MM) hasn't looked very hard. Or has a deceitful agenda.

If you do not see smoke combining between WTC6 and WTC7, you have better eyes than anyone I know.

MM