Coast to Coast AM Debate, August 21 2010

[carlitos]

Tony, are you a citizen of the United States only, or do you maintain dual citizenship with some other country? \

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Heat rises. Think about that.
ETA oh Tri beat me to it

Mental note next time... never mention fire and heat with him. Every time you do you will get the same answer; "no steel recovered reached the critical temperatures"
*sigh*
technical reports aren't suited for these people :\

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Mental note next time... never mention fire and heat with him. Every time you do you will get the same answer; "no steel recovered reached the critical temperatures"
*sigh*
technical reports aren't suited for these people :\

Technical reports on disasters usually have physical evidence to support what they are saying. We don't here and it is a serious criticism.

Your sighing and seeming exasperation has no basis here and is ridiculous.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Tony, are you a citizen of the United States only, or do you maintain dual citizenship with some other country? \

United States only.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Technical reports on disasters usually have physical evidence to support what they are saying. We don't here and it is a serious criticism.

You seem to forget that technical reports describe their criteria for things like sample identification. NIST is very clear about their use of identifying markers on the column samples to determine their as built locations and were very specific about finding structural members that were in the impact region. You apparently expect them to have determined this without such markers and I find that fragrantly ridiculous. This is exactly the point I've been making about your ability to read the reports... you either don't read them in their entirety, you ignore the material, or you don't understand it. :\

What do you expect the NIST to have done without the identifying marks? Play eeny meeny monty moe and arbitrarioly choose samples to be representative of those located within the impact regions on a spontaneous whim? I don't think soooo...

 

[carlitos]

United States only.

Great. This affects your interpretation of the events of 9/11/2001 how, exactly?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Great. This affects your interpretation of the events of 9/11/2001 how, exactly?

I don't think it affects my interpretation in any way. I am looking at it in a disinterested way as a technical person should.

Unfortunately, after looking into this mess for several years I have found that there is either a large cover-up or that the reports were done by exceedingly silly and stupid people since they do not explain what actually occurred.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

You seem to forget that technical reports describe their criteria for things like sample identification. NIST is very clear about their use of identifying markers on the column samples to determine their as built locations and were very specific about finding structural members that were in the impact region. You apparently expect them to have determined this without such markers and I find that fragrantly ridiculous. This is exactly the point I've been making about your ability to read the reports... you either don't read them in their entirety, you ignore the material, or you don't understand it. :\

What do you expect the NIST to have done without the identifying marks? Play eeny meeny monty moe and arbitrarioly choose samples to be representative of those located within the impact regions on a spontaneous whim? I don't think soooo...

It sounds like you don't understand that the fact that the steel wall thickness sizes changed with height precludes the need for specific marking for finding steel from a general floor area. The columns were three stories tall and the wall thickness changed every three stories.

On top of that, much of the steel had its markings stamped into it which fire would not affect.

The steel in the fire affected floors was easily identifiable and it is ridiculous that you would even try to argue otherwise. You are simply spouting a NIST fairytale here without thinking for yourself. There is no legitimate reason for the steel from the collapse initiation floors not to have been found and saved.

 

[carlitos]

I don't think it affects my interpretation in any way. I am looking at it in a disinterested way as a technical person should.

Unfortunately, after looking into this mess for several years I have found that there is either a large cover-up or that the reports were done by exceedingly silly and stupid people since they do not explain what actually occurred.

Cool. This would be a great time to post evidence of such a cover-up. If you are worried about being off topic, you could post the evidence in the "general discussion" topic.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Got something here for you to look at, Tony. You've dodged it three times now.

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).

 

[Grizzly Bear]

It sounds like you don't understand that the fact that the steel sizes changed with height precludes the need for specific marking for finding steel from a general floor area.

The size change with height gives you an approximation only, the markings on the steel itself gives you a precise location. Precisely how they were able to determine what samples were located such to be impacted directly by the planes.

For example, if a given piece is marked, "PONYA WTC 213.00 236B4-9 558 35 TONS."

It tranlates to:

• destined for the Port of New York Authority's World Trade Center as part of contract number 213.00.
• Actual piece number was 236B
• Was to be used between floors 4 and 9 in tower B (WTC 2)
• derrick division number was 558 determining which crane would lift it onto the building and the order in which it was to be erected.

Thickness of the columns and the types of connections will tell you if it originated from an upper floor or lower floor but that's about it...

On top of that, much of the steel had its markings stamped into it which fire would not affect.

NCSTAR 1-3B shows examples of these markings. As far as I cas see, the readability of these was contingient upon the condition of said markings at the time of recovery, not at the time they were initially subjected to fire following the plane impacts. You're ignoring any deterioration between the time of collapse, and the time of recovery. Not smart.

The steel in the fire affected floors was easily identifiable and it is ridiculous that you would even try to argue otherwise.

Some of it was, but where it was is again, contingent upon the condition of the steel member at the time of recovery, not pre-collapse. Not all of these markings could be identified.

You are simply spouting a NIST fairytale here without thinking for yourself.

I'm sorry if I offend you everytime I point out that you've failed to understand a particular part of the report but I generally make an effort to avoid cheap shots. I'd like to ask that you at least provide me with the same respect or I will not hesitate to refrain from taking you seriously. I have no interest in the whole dual citizenship claim tangent or whatever it is...

 

[GlennB]

There is no legitimate reason for the steel from the collapse initiation floors not to have been found and saved.

If you start from the Truther pov where you require proof that damage and fire caused the collapse, perhaps. In reality there were no such doubts.

In addition, I find it hard to picture the storage and sorting facility that would allow such a process to take place. Tell us, Tony, where this could have been achieved? The Houston Astrodome? Would that have been big enough? Should every steel member have been checked off against a master list - one by one - as they went through an inspection point? What would the time and effort have been? To prove what? That what people saw happening actually did happen? Nobody was doubting it.

You're projecting Truthy paranoia way back into the past and expecting them to have anticipated your current needs, rather like suggesting that every single dead person should be tested for signs of poisoning just in case somebody years down the line makes allegations of murder by arsenic.

 

[alienentity]

I don't think it affects my interpretation in any way. I am looking at it in a disinterested way as a technical person should.

/QUOTE]

You were way out of line going after Gravy's citizenship the way you did. I'm not even going to bother quoting you, since it's on Gravy's webpage

Typical that you would excuse yourself from the very issue you took him to task on.

Grizzly and Glenn, well said. Good posts.

 

[Christopher7]

Dave here's a write-up on the coast-to-coast debate.

http://stj911.org/blog/?p=774&preview=true

Kim Johnson makes an utterly false statement:

Kim Johnson felt one of his strongest points involved bomb-sniffing dogs. “I got Harrit on the dogs. Apparently Gage does not understand how these dogs are trained and cross-trained. Dogs sniff out the combination of the blend of aluminum and iron oxides which form the basis of the thermite incendiary,”

Capt. McGee said his dogs were trained to detect barium which is found in military grade thermite.

ETA: Then he has the gall to accuse Richard Gage of what he just did.
Johnson said. “Gage was making things up as he went along, or repeating earlier things that were made up or extreme speculation and treating them as fact, and this was one of his major errors.”

 

[Gamolon]

Using the scale on screen method I came up with ~20 feet at the north west corner. Your measurement is probably more accurate than mine so shall we settle on ~30 feet?

I edited the graphic to be more accurate and changed "1-2 sec" to "About 1 sec".
http://a.imageshack.us/img826/7267/nistwtc7modelvideo14s16.jpg

Q: Do you detect any movement from 14 to 15 sec? If not, I will change that too.

1. So does the 30 foot drop you admitted to in one second constitute free fall?
2. Why did you remove the caption "The NIST computer model is not falling at free fall" from the following image?

Here is the more recent image.

3. Can you please post the information you are using to make the claim the buckling columns provide support/resistance to loads above?

 

[BadBoy]

Got something here for you to look at, Tony. You've dodged it three times now.

wow, sword of truth cuts deep. Its so obvious from this.

Does anyone know if they remove windows when they do a CD. I was just wondering if explosives were responsible for taking out columns internally what sort of evidence you would see externally.

 

[beachnut]

Technical reports on disasters usually have physical evidence to support what they are saying. We don't here and it is a serious criticism.

Your sighing and seeming exasperation has no basis here and is ridiculous.

19 terrorists flew 4 planes and hit 74 percent of their goal.
911 truth, a few fringe paranoid conspiracy theorists with CD delusions hit 0 percent of their goals.

This is the executive summary of 911. The plot too complex for the few fringe CTers to grasp so they make up the real cd deal. It is called failure and fraud, as Gage make a living spreading moronic lies for a few fringe paranoid conspiracy theorists.

You were talking about WTC tower steel, not WTC 7 steel being marked; right? 8 years and you can't figure out fire can destroy buildings, and you are an engineer, I am too, but I learned this fact when I was 5. ouch
Why does Gage spread lies?

 

[R.Mackey]

wow, sword of truth cuts deep. Its so obvious from this.

Does anyone know if they remove windows when they do a CD. I was just wondering if explosives were responsible for taking out columns internally what sort of evidence you would see externally.

EVERY professional controlled demolition involves window removal. If you set off explosives in a structure that still has windows, you create a lethal hazard from shrapnel.

Funny that neither windows exploding, nor shrapnel injuries outside the ordinary collapse radius, were observed. These two items alone rule out explosive demolition, along with about a million other observations, yet the morons cling to it like a drowning man to a life preserver.

 

[beachnut]

... like a drowning man to a life preserver.

When he is safe surrounded by dry land, reality... all he has to do is step on to reality out of his baby pool.

 

[Sabretooth]

EVERY professional controlled demolition involves window removal. If you set off explosives in a structure that still has windows, you create a lethal hazard from shrapnel.

Funny that neither windows exploding, nor shrapnel injuries outside the ordinary collapse radius, were observed. These two items alone rule out explosive demolition, along with about a million other observations, yet the morons cling to it like a drowning man to a life preserver.

Seconded.

So, truthers are looking for an explosive that can cut through steel beams...quietly...doesn't give off light...doesn't produce a shockwave...doesn't break windows...can be set up in a matter of minutes...doesn't react to fire...and is undetectable. Oh, and it has never been used before, or since, 9/11.

Jeezus...this is starting to sound like an infomercial...

...CALL NOW...SUPPLIES ARE LIMITED...get your bucket of OXYCLEAN STEEL REMOVER today for only $19.99!!!1!!.... plus shipping and handling...