Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[funk de fino]

Amazing. The whole unit fell as a complete unit after one column failed.

You do know this dont you? You do know what progressive collapse is? Seems not

 

[twinstead]

This is NISTS's own final words on WTC7.. Note that damage from the North Tower is not even mentioned and that they do not believe the diesel fuel played a role in the fires.

NIST This is the final report take away mesage on WTC7

1.The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery

2.WTC 7 collapsed because of fires, fueled by office furnishings

3.It did not collapse from explosives or from fuel oil fires"

End of message.........

And yet, your incredulity aside, the NIST report is regarded as the best explanation of the collapse, and not just by the "debunkers".

Why do you think that is?

 

[sylvan8798]

Thanks. Good post. I'll save it. Wouldnt the building slump on the failing side though ?

A steel framed building? Yes, it would tend to do so.

If you look at the pictures of where WTC 7 ended up, the east portion kind of went North-West over Barclay street onto Fitterman, and the North face ended up basically on top of the footprint (fell towards the south). So the building split into sections and fell in different orientations.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Hardly as symmetrical as mrkinnies would have us believe.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I thought my basic understanding was sound....a rotating object will continue to rotate until something stops it. That's what I said when discussing rotation before.

But thanks for adding the bit about that only being applicable to intact structures. I'm sure it'll help in the future.

You think the structure should stay intact as it crashes through the building below and after it impacts the ground below then?

 

[mrkinnies]

Mrkinnis, you've yet to speak out; what are your thoughts about why the rank-and-file of the world's engineers and their organizations not spoken out about what you obviously think is a complete sham by the NIST report?

Because they'd have to alter their whole belief system before they can even look at the evidence.

99.99% of the population (of the US, UK, global, whatever), had no need to question the claims of the US government on and after 9/11. Probably not far that percentage still do although opinion polls suggest otherwise. I didn't at first, until the evidence led me elsewhere and I was able to overcome my original assumption that our leaders are always correct and tell the truth.

Until that belief system can be changed, it will be hard for anyone to look into the other evidence with more than passing curiosity. But if you can change enough people's hearts and minds, it will be accepted; although at the end of the day, most people want a peaceful life without stress so accepting a story is far easier than challenging one if it causes a person to have to distance themselves from their peers or loved ones in the process.

People will take note when the 'tipping point' is reached as described by Malcolm Gladwell in his book of the same name. Until then, they'll follow each other like sheep because that's the human way. I do think more professionals and organisations have doubts than you might think but for harmonies sake they keep quiet.

 

[mrkinnies]

You think the structure should stay intact as it crashes through the building below and after it impacts the ground below then?

Nope.

 

[mrkinnies]

A steel framed building? Yes, it would tend to do so.

If you look at the pictures of where WTC 7 ended up, the east portion kind of went North-West over Barclay street onto Fitterman, and the North face ended up basically on top of the footprint (fell towards the south). So the building split into sections and fell in different orientations.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Hardly as symmetrical as mrkinnies would have us believe.

I never said the debris pile was symmetrical. There was a lot of chaos in the final moments.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Nope.

Then why did you state that the building will be at 90 degrees if the ground stopped it?

The angle of rotation in a natural high rise collapse depends on the point at which the rotation is stopped. If it is the ground that stops it then it will be 90 degrees.

 

[twinstead]

Because they'd have to alter their whole belief system before they can even look at the evidence.

99.99% of the population (of the US, UK, global, whatever), had no need to question the claims of the US government on and after 9/11. Probably not far that percentage still do although opinion polls suggest otherwise. I didn't at first, until the evidence led me elsewhere and I was able to overcome my original assumption that our leaders are always correct and tell the truth.

Until that belief system can be changed, it will be hard for anyone to look into the other evidence with more than passing curiosity. But if you can change enough people's hearts and minds, it will be accepted; although at the end of the day, most people want a peaceful life without stress so accepting a story is far easier than challenging one if it causes a person to have to distance themselves from their peers or loved ones in the process.

People will take note when the 'tipping point' is reached as described by Malcolm Gladwell in his book of the same name. Until then, they'll follow each other like sheep because that's the human way. I do think more professionals and organisations have doubts than you might think but for harmonies sake they keep quiet.

What a bunch of insulting word salad. You demean a huge group of people.

 

[mrkinnies]

Then why did you state that the building will be at 90 degrees if the ground stopped it?

Because towers which rotate from a point don't tend to break apart so are subject to the angular momentum you say is applicable to intact structures. If they do break apart then its not as quickly as they rotate and hit the ground.

I'm sure I can dig out plenty of examples of cooling towers toppling over where some break apart and some don't but end up at 90 degrees to the vertical. Have a look for yourself.

 

[mrkinnies]

What a bunch of insulting word salad. You demean a huge group of people.

Take it or leave. You asked my opinion and that's it.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Because they'd have to alter their whole belief system before they can even look at the evidence.

99.99% of the population (of the US, UK, global, whatever), had no need to question the claims of the US government on and after 9/11. Probably not far that percentage still do although opinion polls suggest otherwise. I didn't at first, until the evidence led me elsewhere and I was able to overcome my original assumption that our leaders are always correct and tell the truth.

That should probably give you cause to stop and think.

Until that belief system can be changed, it will be hard for anyone to look into the other evidence with more than passing curiosity. But if you can change enough people's hearts and minds, it will be accepted; although at the end of the day, most people want a peaceful life without stress so accepting a story is far easier than challenging one if it causes a person to have to distance themselves from their peers or loved ones in the process.

Heard all of that before. It bores me.

People will take note when the 'tipping point' is reached as described by Malcolm Gladwell in his book of the same name. Until then, they'll follow each other like sheep because that's the human way. I do think more professionals and organisations have doubts than you might think but for harmonies sake they keep quiet.

Evidence for the hilited parts, please.

I've worked with/for professionals and professional organizations for close to 40 years. Most of them would find a way to turn that information into a Pulitzer (or at least a NYTimes No. 1 bestseller).

 

[Newtons Bit]

Because towers which rotate from a point don't tend to break apart so are subject to the angular momentum you say is applicable to intact structures. If they do break apart then its not as quickly as they rotate and hit the ground.

So you're now deviating from this statement of yours:

You think the structure should stay intact as it crashes through the building below and after it impacts the ground below then?

Nope.

The problem we have with truthers like yourself, is that you're not consistent. Your story changes everytime you want to contradict something. It's annoying and it's childish.

Stop being a child.

I'm sure I can dig out plenty of examples of cooling towers toppling over where some break apart and some don't but end up at 90 degrees to the vertical. Have a look for yourself.

And I can easily explain how cooling towers are in no way similar to steel-framed high rises. Try comparing apples to apples. It's less dishonest.

 

[mrkinnies]

That should probably give you cause to stop and think.

I think about it all the time for I never understand why people can be fooled so often. Advertisers, marketeers, politicians...they do it over and over and we humans keep falling for it.

It's funny that twinstead should have asked me that considering the Zappa tag line she/he uses. Frank Zappa wrote a song called "When The Lies So Big"...read the lyrics sometime.

 

[mrkinnies]

So you're now deviating from this statement of yours:



The problem we have with truthers like yourself, is that you're not consistent. Your story changes everytime you want to contradict something. It's annoying and it's childish.

Stop being a child.



And I can easily explain how cooling towers are in no way similar to steel-framed high rises. Try comparing apples to apples. It's less dishonest.

Hang on, look at my statements, they are about two different things offered to answer two separate questions you asked about different issues.

Who's comparing apples with pears here?

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me about the cooling tower/ high rise differences.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Hang on, look at my statements, they are about two different things offered to answer two separate questions you asked about different issues.

No, it was the same topic and you gave contradictory answers. I asked if it should stay intact, you said both "nope". And then just moments later you said it should still be intact and rotate to the ground.

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me about the cooling tower/ high rise differences.

Once you've shown to be interested in an honest discussion, sure. But I don't like to waste my time on trolls and I'm not satisfied you're anything but at this point.

 

[dafydd]

I think about it all the time for I never understand why people can be fooled so often. Advertisers, marketeers, politicians...they do it over and over and we humans keep falling for it.

It's funny that twinstead should have asked me that considering the Zappa tag line she/he uses. Frank Zappa wrote a song called "When The Lies So Big"...read the lyrics sometime.

No. Zappa wrote a song called "When The Lie's So Big." Why do you think he made an album called "Apostrophe"?

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I think about it all the time for I never understand why people can be fooled so often. Advertisers, marketeers, politicians...they do it over and over and we humans keep falling for it.

Well, I agree that governments can fool people, advertisers/marketers can fool people, and politicians can fool people.

In my case, the truth movement has had nearly 10 years to present their case to me in a logical, consistent way with evidence to support it.

I'm an engineer that has worked with professionals in many disciplines and with many professional organizations. Among them are NASA, the FAA, the NFPA, and others. None of them seem like sheep-like mindless fools.

Please provide the evidence I asked for in my last post.

I'm sorry, but the truth movement fails to convince on every front.

It's funny that twinstead should have asked me that considering the Zappa tag line she/he uses. Frank Zappa wrote a song called "When The Lies So Big"...read the lyrics sometime.

Well, I never was a big Zappa fan, but I'm old enough to have been around when he was "new".

He wasn't talking about 9/11/2001.

 

[beachnut]

So was One Merian Plaza still standing after the fire and how long did it rage for?

In NCSTAR 1A, NIST confirmed that the fuel oil stored in WTC7 was not set on fire according to the evidence they have and that even had it ignited, it wouldn't have created temperatures capable of creating significant loss of strength or stiffness. They are explicit about this as far as I can see. I could be wrong.

What is Kerosine? Is it fuel oil or not? In which case, can you make the argument that the jet fuel would have created hot enough fires in WTC 1 & 2 also?

Yep, office fires are enough to bring down buildings, NIST was right, good job confirming NIST was right.
WTC 7 had no fire systems that worked, no fire fighters on the fire. If One Meridian Plaza was not fought the building would collapse. WTC 7 fire was not fought, the building was compromised to let in air and the fire had too much air and burned causing structural failure. One Meridian Plaza had no damage when the fires broke out, the fires had not broken windows to feed air to the fires to start with.

The jet fuel set the fires. The heat energy of the jet fuel in each tower was equal in energy to 315 tons of TNT, the big problem is the fuel, the office contents was even greater and cause the towers to collapse. Office contents caused the collapse because they were set on fire by 10,000 gallons of burning jet fuel injected on multiple floors in the WTC towers causing the collapse about 10 times faster than if simple office fires did it sequentially, instead the fires were set on many floor in an instant.

WTC 7 burned all day, took all day to fall, WTC 1 and 2 burned for short period with much bigger fires than ever in history of building fires.

Name a single building ever that had fires set with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel in one second on multiple floors? You can't figure out 911, you don't have a clue what fire can do.

 

[dafydd]

Name a single building ever that had fires set with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel in one second on multiple floors? You can't figure out 911, you don't have a clue what fire can do.

What are mrkinnies qualifications in these fields?