Ed Pentagon - TruthMakesPeace

[Travis]

CICorp's immensely stupid mistake is in presuming that the dust was primarily concrete. How many times do people have to remind conspiracy peddlers that the Twin Towers were primarily and predominantly office spaces, and that there was an enormous amount of things like drywall, ceiling tiles, insulative materials, cubicle dividers, etc. that all would've contribued to the dust cloud and covering across the immediate area?

The RJ Lee reports (yes, plural) tell us much about the dust post collapse: Much gypsum, much asbestos, much mineral wool, etc., all of those and all others I'm not mentioning being non-concrete components... but the only part truthers want to do is pay attention to is the part mentioning iron microspheres . But the story is right there. If only truthers would take time to actually study the information that's available...

There's also the fact that the concrete in a cinderblock will be different from the concrete used in the WTC.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

There's also the fact that the concrete in a cinderblock will be different from the concrete used in the WTC.

That's true... but at the same time, my point was that he shouldn't be characterizing the dust as only being concrete. A great deal of it - up to 2/3rds of it, if the USGS report is accurate (and why wouldn't it be?) is either gypsum or "MMVF" (Man Made Vitreous Fibers, i.e. mineral wool, predominantly asbestos).

-----

Note: I do need to clarify and somewhat correct myself. While the RJ Lee reports do indeed give us characterizations of the dust, you have to consider that, plus the EPA's Particle Atlas and the above linked USGS study to get a well-rounded picture of the dust. It's true that anywhere from 14 to 30-some percent of the dust was indeed concrete, but that still leaves from 70- to 86% of it being something else. That portion is split between being asbestos and gypsum and minor other compounds. Which leads back to my criticism of CiCorp's and other conspiracy peddler's claims: It's not only concrete. Pretending that it is just shows how little they all know. They're hammering on concrete because their narrative says it has to be concrete in order to allow for the "explosives" argument. And they're ignoring studies showing what the dust's composition actually was.

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

Does concrete really pulverize in to dust when it falls?

immensely stupid mistake is in presuming that the dust was primarily concrete.

The experiment was not described accurately to you. The topic of the experiment was not to explain what the dust consisted of. You would have been more of a Critical Thinker to ask to see the experiment, before judging it.

The topic of the experiment was to cover what happens to concrete specifically. No one denies that there were not other materials such as dry wall in the dust. There were plenty. The point is: where are the concrete chunks, as found after all other concrete building collapses?

Here's the experiment in question so you can see its purpose for yourself. To use Governor George Pataki's words "the concrete was just pulverized!" He is surprised because even a non-scientist knows this is not the normal behavior of falling concrete.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoLjNO-Kz6I

Can anyone show an experiment where falling concrete pulverizes in to dust?

 

[CompusMentus]

Update on the posting history at the CIT forum. 1 (one) post in the last week and that was a reply by Aldo.......

Time to move on I think.

Compus

 

[GlennB]

The point is: where are the concrete chunks, as found after all other concrete building collapses?

Can anyone show an experiment where falling concrete pulverizes in to dust?

A few points here :

The WTC concrete was lightweight and relatively easy to break.

Most (actually, all apart from WTC1+2) collapsed buildings containing concrete have not fallen ~100 storeys. 100 storeys of collapse creates a lot of KE to do the breaking.

There was an enormous (i.e. perfectly normal and to be expected) range of particle sizes in the concrete remains of WTC1. From lumps requiring jackhammers to break up, right down to sand-sized particles with the full range in between. Study the photos.

Your main failure here is in presuming (by believing some stuff you've read on CT websites) that the concrete was all reduced to 'dust' in the first place. It wasn't.

eta: just noticed this is miles o/t. Sorry, I was just responding to a quote from cicorp without paying attention.

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

You really need to list them because all of the evidence points to one thing. A 757, identified as American Airlines flight 77 took off from Dulles

No one disputes that. I am not a "no planer". There is zero evidence for a missile. Pentagon Police Officers Sgt. Brooks and Sgt. Lagasse, as credible as you can get, saw a plane fly on the North Side of the Citgo.

The plane was lost to air traffic controllers (transponder turned off) in the vicinity of the Ohio/KY/WV border.

Turning off the transponder off, so the aircraft could not be positively identified, presents an opportunity for a plane switch.

we have unbroken radar coverage of that plane from a number of Air Route Surveillance Radars (ARSR) along the way back to the Dulles area

Radar tells us something is out there, but not what. The transponder tells us what. A common activity during War Games is for 2 or more planes to fly close together, to fool the other side into thinking it is only 1 plane.

Dr. David Griscom (PhD Physics, Brown University, 193 papers published in peer reviewed journals, 30+ years at Naval Research Lab) hypothesizes that as Flight 11 descended, a drone took off from Griffiss AFB, appearing as 1 radar blip. This explains why Muhammed Atta went North West from Boston for about 20 minutes, instead of South West to NYC. He was not lost (the compass is front and center), or taking a detour (giving more chance to be shot down), but headed straight towards Griffiss in upstate New York, supposedly closed in 1994, but still active. Dr. Griscom has a similar hypothesis for Flight 77. http://DavidGriscom.com

two Arlington County Police Officers...watch the plane descend into the Pentagon area

I find them to be credible as well.

where it is picked up by approximately 100 documented eyewitnesses who saw the plane go into the Pentagon.

Over 100 eyewitnesses saw magicians Criss Angel, David Copperfield, and Doug Henning disappear. But it is really done through misdirection. The attention of people is drawn to bright flashes, such as the Pentagon explosion. Some people literally cannot see what happens in the periphery for seconds.

Even I, just a beginner magician, have fooled audiences at charity talent shows with a bright flash, making a girl "disappear" into a box, then reappear, as indicated by their applause.

I am skeptical of the Fly Over hypothesis, but cannot yet rule it out. I drive by the Pentagon on the way to my office, and know how important it is to keep my eyes on the road around 9:00 am rush hour, not over the Pentagon. There are often fences, bushes and trees blocking the view. It is not as clear as Google Earth (and Jim Hoffman) suggest.

Jim is from California and would not know that the north side Route 110 Bypass was not completed until 2004. On 9/11/2001, cars went under a tunnel on the north east side of the Pentagon, facing the Potomac River. I often drive Route 110 to my office.

We need a way to quantify the quality of views from various locations around the Pentagon. I am working on a way to do that, and will post the results when complete.

Planes are flying near the Pentagon to DC Airport every few minutes. It is nothing unusual.

If a loud noise occurs, such as a car backfiring, it is not clear from inside a car, where the sound came from.

Not one eyewitness ... indicate that the plane went past the Pentagon.

CIT claims to have Fly Over witnesses. I am skeptical about that. However we must keep in mind that the Arlington Police 911 Dispatch calls have not been released (as they were in NYC). So if anyone called 911 to report a plane flying over the Pentagon, we would not be informed about it. That's why we need a new investigation with subpoena power.

I am still reading as many witness accounts as possible, and have not yet made a decision on what happened after the plane passed on the North Side of the Citgo.

Yes, some amateur sleuths cherry-picked some eyewitnesses...from the north side of the path

You refer to CIT. Cherry picking is an accusation about them. From my personal experience, they investigate both North and South side witnesses. They live in California. While blogging, CIT found out I am in DC, interested in checking things out about 9/11, and asked if I would be willing to photograph some views of witnesses, all South Side so far. At no time did CIT ask me for "favorable" views or anything like that. (I wouldn't anyway.) CIT simply asked for accurate and complete 360 degree photos and videos.

Note: I am independent, doing my own thing, and may help various groups, such WeAreChangeDC, or Richard Gage's group, passing out brochures at the annual Architect's Convention in DC, but am not a member of AE911Truth nor CIT.

(witnesses) they all agree the plane impacted the Pentagon.

Ok. But we should keep in mind that it could be said that witnesses "all agree" that magician Criss Angel disappeared.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh36FUAjJEg

Location of body parts

No one denies an explosion occurred, killing Pentagon employees, especially Army Specialist April Gallop, who was right there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88JQL4esHFg

So if you have strong evidence for anything other than flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, I would sure like to hear it

That is an excellent attitude for anyone seeking the Truth on anything. If something is true, it will withstand Critical Thinking.

 

[beachnut]

...
Turning off the transponder off, so the aircraft could not be positively identified, presents an opportunity for a plane switch.


Radar tells us something is out there, but not what. The transponder tells us what. A common activity during War Games is for 2 or more planes to fly close together, to fool the other side into thinking it is only 1 plane.

...

Flight 77 was never lost to RADAR. Do you need some help with RADAR?

Help is here. Positive 77 identification.

The transponder is assigned, a code. Flight 77 was followed from takeoff to the Pentagon with multiple RADAR sites. No plane switch because the DNA from the people murdered on Flight 77 were found exactly where they would be in a kinetic energy impact of a 757 going 488 knots.

There is no North of Citgo path, it would be impossible due to physics, and 911 truth has no evidence to support the NoC delusion.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The topic of the experiment was to cover what happens to concrete specifically. No one denies that there were not other materials such as dry wall in the dust. There were plenty. The point is: where are the concrete chunks, as found after all other concrete building collapses?

Apparently, they're not all that hard to find. Even leading truthers have spotted a few.

As we examined the WTC-debris sample, we found large
chunks of concrete (irregular in shape and size, one was
approximately 5cm X 3 cm X 3cm) as well as medium-sized pieces
of wall-board (with the binding paper still attached). Thus, the
pulverization was in fact NOT to fine dust, and it is a false
premise to start with near-complete pulverization to fine powder
(as might be expected from a mini-nuke or a “star-wars” beam
destroying the Towers). Indeed, much of the mass of the
MacKinlay sample was clearly in substantial pieces of concrete
and wall-board rather than in fine-dust form.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/...re-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf

It's not always visible, though; when Jones wants the concrete to have been pulverised to fine dust, he finds fine dust, but when he wants it to be in larger chunks, surprise! He finds large chunks. Somehow, he's a good enough investigator to find exactly what he wants to, every time.

So, cicorp, even leading truthers know you're erecting a strawman by demanding all the concrete be pulverised.

Dave

 

[TruthMakesPeace]

Lack of thorough 9/11 investigation is an insult to victims and families

The very existence of truthers is an insult to the victims and their families.

Bob McIlvaine and others family members say it is insulting that the Government allocated about the same budget, $14 million to investigate Clinton & Monica, yet initially only $3 million then reluctantly $11 more, to investigating the murder of their loved ones and 3000 innocent people on 9/11. http://RememberBuilding7.org

$75 million in 1986 dollars was allocated to the Challenger disaster. We got NASA scientists and Nobel Prize Physicist Dr. Richard Feynman on the Investigation Committee. They investigated it scientifically, and produced a satisfying explanation. There are zero web sites or forums asking for a new Challenger Investigation. They did it right the first time. 9/11 has the most web pages calling for a new investigation than any crime in history. It has its own forum category on JREF.

For 9/11 there was not a single PhD in science or Civil Engineer, only Bush appointed politicians. As it was, one actually quit (Senator Max Cleland) saying it was "a farce". Keans and Hamilton admit the Commission was underfunded and incomplete in their book, Without Precedent. Is it too much to ask to have a Commission that the members don't criticize themselves?

 

[ozeco41]

Bob McIlvaine and others family members find it insulting the the Government allocated about the same budget, $14 million to investigate Clinton & Monica, yet initially $3 million then reluctantly $11 more, to investigating the murder of their loved ones.

Irrelevant and only "truther logic".

Why the US puts so much emphasis on the private sexual conduct of its leaders is something that bemuses most of us non-US folk and is something for the US folk to sort out.

The criticism is not about how much money the government put into investigations.

It is about the evilly immoral conduct of truthers trying to make milage by lying in public discussions on the internet.

Deal with the real issue cicorp. In one of your first posts you claimed to be interested in truth. Prove it and stop derailing/diversion tricks.

 

[triforcharity]

Yep. Imagine that. They still increased the funding, right? Right????

 

[Dave Rogers]

Bob McIlvaine and others family members say it is insulting that the Government allocated about the same budget, $14 million to investigate Clinton & Monica, yet initially only $3 million then reluctantly $11 more, to investigating the murder of their loved ones and 3000 innocent people on 9/11. http://RememberBuilding7.org

And, if this truther lie had any truth to it, it would be a scandal. However, the real investigation into 9/11, FBI operation PENTTBOM, is in fact the largest criminal enquiry in US history, and has involved 7,000 of the FBI's 11,000 special agents.

For 9/11 there was not a single PhD in science or Civil Engineer, only Bush appointed politicians.

Except for those participating into the NIST enquiry into the collapses of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7.

Cicorp, your implication - that the 9/11 Commission carried out the only investigation into 9/11 - is a lie, plain and simple. A flat out, barefaced lie. And you claim to be trying to find out the truth. How can you look yourself in the mirror?

Dave

 

[MikeW]

the real investigation into 9/11, FBI operation PENTTBOM, is in fact the largest criminal enquiry in US history, and has involved 7,000 of the FBI's 11,000 special agents.

And for another view of what that cost:

Source
(hotlinked from my own site)

That's only by mid-2002, so the total to date will be well above 4 million hours, which is going to be a huge cost for time alone.

 

[BCR]

You refer to CIT. Cherry picking is an accusation about them. From my personal experience, they investigate both North and South side witnesses. They live in California. While blogging, CIT found out I am in DC, interested in checking things out about 9/11, and asked if I would be willing to photograph some views of witnesses, all South Side so far. At no time did CIT ask me for "favorable" views or anything like that. (I wouldn't anyway.) CIT simply asked for accurate and complete 360 degree photos and videos.

Yes, they 'investigate' south side witnesses to 'discredit' them and refuse to use the same standard to eyewitnesses on the north side. Don't play this game with me. I've been there multiple times and talked to many of the same eyewitnesses and I'm not going to play the nitpick the eyewitness game.

If you don't understand human perception and eyewitness analysis, then you should not be playing either. Since you live in DC, then you know it is IMPOSSIBLE for the plane not to have hit the Pentagon without being noticed as it crossed the Reagan departure corridor. So if you are going to talk magician tricks, then you need to head over to CIT where the tooth fairy is still alive and well. If you are going to comment here, then stick within the realm of mathematics and physics, the world of the possible the rest of us live in.

 

[TruthersLie]

The experiment was not described accurately to you. The topic of the experiment was not to explain what the dust consisted of. You would have been more of a Critical Thinker to ask to see the experiment, before judging it.

The topic of the experiment was to cover what happens to concrete specifically. No one denies that there were not other materials such as dry wall in the dust. There were plenty. The point is: where are the concrete chunks, as found after all other concrete building collapses?

Here's the experiment in question so you can see its purpose for yourself. To use Governor George Pataki's words "the concrete was just pulverized!" He is surprised because even a non-scientist knows this is not the normal behavior of falling concrete.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoLjNO-Kz6I

Can anyone show an experiment where falling concrete pulverizes in to dust?

There are dozens of... if not hundreds of pictures showing "concrete chunks" all over the debris piles.

Triforcharity has posted at least 5 in his time at JREF.

and I didn't know governor pataki was a scientist... it is absolutely amazing that he would know soooo much about the collapse of the towers and the dust created. Hell they were office buildings with enclosed walls... a lot of that DUST was well.... 40 years worth of DUST

 

[Andy_Ross]

If the aircraft flew over the Pentagon where did it go?

Where is it now?

What happened to the passengers and crew?

How did their DNA get to be at the crash site?

(I wishe we had the BAUT 'rule 13' to make people answer direct questions and back up their claims)

 

[Dash80]

If the aircraft flew over the Pentagon where did it go?

Where is it now?

What happened to the passengers and crew?

How did their DNA get to be at the crash site?

(I wishe we had the BAUT 'rule 13' to make people answer direct questions and back up their claims)

They can't answer those questions, not logically anyway. I'm sure there's some batpoop crazy explainations they pull out though.

I certainly haven't heard or read of any witnesses seeing an aircraft matching AA77 fly over the Pentagon, those in a position to follow it's path seem to agree it HIT the side. Of course there is the twoofer argument that witnesses are faked/lying/government agents.

The twoofers certainly have no evidence the plane still existed after 9/11. Do they seem to think it's flying around somewhere? Would it have been destroyed later? That begs the question why it wouldn't be considered easier to just fly it in to the building in the first place?

They would claim the passengers and crew were not even real or that they were killed some other way. If it's the former theory does that mean the relatives are fake/lying/government agents? If it's the second theory, wouldn't it just be easier to fly a real plane with real passengers in to the building?

The usual illogical answers for the last question.. All evidence was planted blah blah. Even the FDR which they claim is wrong/fake. I don't know about anyone else but if such evidence was faked wouldn't it be made to agree with the other evidence? Wow seriously the government were "smart" enough to dream up and execute all this but not smart enough to make all the evidence fit? Oh wait I forgot, it's only twoofers who are clever enough to see through such sloppy deception!

This is one of my first posts here and I don't have the knowledge of most the people here but I do have common sense and an ability to think logically.. Atleast I find that helps.

Anneliese

 

[twinstead]

So according to cicorp it's possible they "switched the planes" between the time the transponder was turned off and radar took over. Interesting.

That's it folks. Case closed. Pack it up, let's all go home. Last one out don't forget to turn the lights out.

 

[NoahFence]

cicorp - help me out here.

I'm reading some of your posts, and it seems to me that you think an airplane hit the Pentagon AND one flew over?

 

[twinstead]

cicorp - help me out here.

I'm reading some of your posts, and it seems to me that you think an airplane hit the Pentagon AND one flew over?

Yes, I think we're putting the cart before the horse. Cicorp really needs to tell us exactly what he thinks happened at the Pentagon, and what evidence he has to support it. Simply trying chip holes in the commonly-held narrative isn't any different than what any conspiracy theorist, even the kookiest, does to the prevailing theory he's trying to claim didn't happen.