Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[The Platypus]

It seems to me, that once again it boils down to credibility. Who should i believe.

John L Gross, respected and successful qualified engineering expert and the fact that noone ever found this molten steel, re-solidified.

or

Some anonymous guy on the internet that is desperate to recruit me into a lunatic fringe cult with crap that comes from CT websites and youtube videos...


Hmmm... that's a tough one...

 

[Craig4]

Yea, but that's no nearly cool or edgy enough for bill. Nanothermite is MUCH more exciting. And, the fact that only he and a few other intrepid internet warriors know The Truth^tm makes it just that much cooler.

That's fine. His kind aren't really important.

 

[Sabretooth]

bill, your "melt the basement" theory is wrong...way wrong...as the physical characteristics of the collapse show.

I'll try to simplify it for you and tmd. Here's some awesome MSPaint drawings for you to follow along:

1st, here's a basic outline of the structure inside the WTC towers. I almost got it to scale...maybe it's a little off:

Red is the outer skeleton, Green are the floors, Blue is the core.



See how pretty it looks. You can almost smell the Hudson. Then some asshat extremist comes along and blows a hole in the damn thing with an airplane, documented in purple:



That sucks, big time. Over time, the fires weaken the floors at the wall connection. Then **** really happens as they start to fail:



Now it's just a matter of time as the building was not designed to handle that kind of stress. Floors start to push out the floors below:



The core cannot support that giant ball of mass on hung out on top like a bobble head. That starts to come down, adding to the massive gravitational downward force:


Now it's just a cascading domino effect. More crap piles on the already strained structures. Critical failure of the building is guaranteed and materials are ejected everywhere. The core holds out as long as it can, but failure is imminent:



This type of collapse is impossible to reconstruct using your "thermite in the cellar" nonsense. Go find something better to do.

 

[WildCat]

The first is the evil money grubbing Richard Gage

Since you're such a fan of Gage and AE911truth, perhaps you can link to some of the scholarly work Gage and his groups of experts have published in respected engineering journals? They must have quite a body of work after all these years of truthing!

 

[Oystein]

Very helpful Oystein. Pretty clear too. The fast reaction time fits nicely in with my hypothesis. The temperatures reached are way more than enough too.

I didn't talk about temperatures. Nano-thermite releases less heat than regular thermite. Faster reaction doesn't help you to melt more steel; n-t melts LESS steel. Because its energy is LESS concentrated.

You seem to not understand what you are talking about even when you feel that explanations are clear and helpful.

ETA:

Thanks Hans. I'll save that. The nanothermite sounds like a operfect candidate.

No, it does not. Regular thermite would be a lot better for the bulk melting that you want to do. For the reasons stated: Nano-thermite has even less energy per pound or gallon than regular thermite.

 

[Carll68]

This is boring. Can't we simply go back to debating what MIHOP means when discussing 9/11 conspiracies?

How about Into Vs Onto?

Bueller? Bueller?

 

[BStrong]

Let me try and summarize what you said...tell me if I'm wrong. Basically John Gross somehow is still not lying...though he clearly is. You're evidence is basically that he would just laugh at the matter...because it is so stupid. That's some evidence. Then you go to talk about, your qualifications and how this whole issue is basically laughed at...by real engineers. Again, this evidence is astounding, I might actually have to re-think this whole thing.

Next you go into what should or should not have been found in the debris. Take a look at these two videos...then talk about that. The first is the evil money grubbing Richard Gage, again showing Gross lying, and does it probably best of all. Also in regards to your question, what what molten steel turn into..take a look at the part of the Video with Bart Voorsanger...think that looks a little like it? But it couldn't be could it? The second is Jon doing an experiment, showing normal office supplies, and some jet aluminum couldn't produce the sulfur that was found. Don't like his results? Do just what he says prove him wrong by experiment...I mean for an engineer who laughs at other engineers, it should be no problem for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs_ogSbQFbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YuDKUCALtU

Let me address your first point. My age and for that matter my background is not important. I am an adult..a person...whose opinions and thoughts should be treated with respect, the same as every one else. I would have no problem calling Gross a liar right to his face, in fact I would love to get the chance. But I would do in a respectful manner, I do everything with respect, like if he was giving a talk, and during the Q&A I would be like "Why did you feel the need to lie about eye witness reports of Molten steel at the University of Texas" and then watch him squirm, and avoid the topic. Also you're right I'm sure Gross wouldn't have the 10 seconds it would take to find these videos, but my hope is that he wouldn't need to do such a thing, you know because he (or someone from NIST) should probably be talking the the eye witnesses directly.

One last point, if you look at the Gage video I posted, it also has a quote attributed to Leslie Robertson, fully sourced. But he is same quack as well I'm sure.

Aside from the current discussion, respect must be earned, and background and knowledge are essential to a valid POV - if an individual has never been to the middle-east, and couldn't identify Iraq on an unmarked map, their opinion of the situation wrt to the war is of no interest to me.

The same thing holds true of 9/11 for me - folks who have never in their lives handled, used or even seen explosives of any type other than Independence Day fireworks now discuss explosives as if they handle 'em for a living - that's a no go for me there too.

 

[bill smith]

I didn't talk about temperatures. Nano-thermite releases less heat than regular thermite. Faster reaction doesn't help you to melt more steel; n-t melts LESS steel. Because its energy is LESS concentrated.

You seem to not understand what you are talking about even when you feel that explanations are clear and helpful.

ETA:

No, it does not. Regular thermite would be a lot better for the bulk melting that you want to do. For the reasons stated: Nano-thermite has even less energy per pound or gallon than regular thermite.

Well I'll go with Han's faster areaction and higher energy output in a given (read short) time. That was how I understood it anyway. It makes nanothermite the perfect candidate for my hypothesis. Given that unreacted nanothermite has been found in the WTC dust and confirmed by an 8-man team of Ph.d's in a two year study resulting in an uncontested peer reviewed paper I think I'm home and dry on this aspect.

Mr.Hans
' The larger surface contact between the ingredients makes for a faster reaction and hence higher energy output in a given time, not much else. '

'

 

[beachnut]

Well I'll go with Han's faster areaction and higher energy output in a given (read short) time. That was how I understood it anyway. It makes nanothermite the perfect candidate for my hypothesis. Given that unreacted thermite has been found and confirmed by an 8-man team of Ph.d's in an two year study in an uncontested peer reviewed paper I think I'm home and dry on this aspect.

Mr.Hans
' The larger surface contact between the ingredients makes for a faster reaction and hence higher energy output in a given time, not much else. '

'

Paint all the steel with thermite, light it, and the steel gets 8 degrees hotter. Wow, you failed to do much more than make a flash, and make the steel slightly hotter. Now what?

Bringing thermite to a fire is like brining a knife to a gun fight. The office contents burning is more heat energy per pound than thermite. Burning Jet fuel has ten times the heat energy of thermite. Burning Plastic, 14 times the heat energy of thermite. Burning paper, burning wood, both more heat energy than thermite.

A main problem the 911 truth followers (not activists, not intellectuals, just followers, they don't like the "man" so they follow the "911 truth man") may have is lacking the ability to understand fire can destroy buildings made of steel, without melting the steel. A lack of experience and knowledge, are traits a 911 truth follower have to have.

You failed this time, you must be getting good at this. When you fail, you don't use science, you make it up, a self made expert at failing to make a valid point on 911 for nearly 10 years. You are one of the few fringe 911 truth supporters tenacious enough to remain in complete ignore on 911. 911 truth is your destiny.

How much thermite is needed? What will you do since your movement is in perpetual failure mode since 911?

 

[bill smith]

Paint all the steel with thermite, light it, and the steel gets 8 degrees hotter. Wow, you failed to do much more than make a flash, and make the steel slightly hotter. Now what?

Bringing thermite to a fire is like brining a knife to a gun fight. The office contents burning is more heat energy per pound than thermite. Burning Jet fuel has ten times the heat energy of thermite. Burning Plastic, 14 times the heat energy of thermite. Burning paper, burning wood, both more heat energy than thermite.

A main problem the 911 truth followers (not activists, not intellectuals, just followers, they don't like the "man" so they follow the "911 truth man") may have is lacking the ability to understand fire can destroy buildings made of steel, without melting the steel. A lack of experience and knowledge, are traits a 911 truth follower have to have.

You failed this time, you must be getting good at this. When you fail, you don't use science, you make it up, a self made expert at failing to make a valid point on 911 for nearly 10 years. You are one of the few fringe 911 truth supporters tenacious enough to remain in complete ignore on 911. 911 truth is your destiny.

How much thermite is needed? What will you do since your movement is in perpetual failure mode since 911?

I laid out most of my hypothesis on 9/11 starting from the attached post if you are interested.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7415905&postcount=179 Hyperlink.

 

[tmd2_1]

Gross wasnt lying nor negligent. Deal with it.

Since you brought him up, what does Leslie Robertson think of Gage and the nuttery that the towers were CD'ed?

Leslie Robertson does not support Gage or CD, that is true. But I listened to to the debate with him Robertson and Steven Jones. Two things stand out in my mind. The first is..when Jones mentions building 7 Robertson responds as quick as humanly possible..that he had nothing to do WTC 7 and can't talk about it. Strange I would think someone with his credentials could at least talk about it even if he has only seen the video. Also most of Robertson's point was that putting explosives into the building would be impossible, without people noticing, and not so much the physics of it. In particular he states he did not study the time needed for collapse. What does it all mean...I don't know...interesting though.

LOL..oh the Irony. Nuttin' but respect there.

I really respect people who type using "I would be like..."

It's amazing how these twoofers have no clue on physics or engineering, but somehow magicaly have the abiltiy to know that the NIST report is wrong. Can't solve an 8th grade physics problem, but argue with the college professor...classic.

Respect me or don't respect me that is your choice. You're making an awfully big assumption about solving 8th grade physics, and that no "truther" could do that. Gross lied you know he lied, I can't add anymore then that.

LOL..so now they are manipulating photos........

This comes right from Jason Ingersoll official military photographer's collection. Nothing was manipulated.

 

[Sabretooth]

I laid out most of my hypothesis on 9/11 starting from the attached post if you are interested.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7415905&postcount=179 Hyperlink.

That's not a hypothesis, it's a story. Fiction. Hypothesis require facts, of which you don't have and/or don't understand.

 

[tmd2_1]

One last point I want to make about the pentagon. Take a look at this video. It is some doofus on the local Washington D.C fox the afternoon of 9/11. This guy somehow has a piece of the plane. He says it crashed and flew all the way into his car. He then just waltzes into a news station with a piece of evidence from the biggest crime scene in U.S history..like he's walking in the park. Give me a break. It's a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKgK5enk7hE

To add to this, take a look at this link. Now I know this is pilots for 9/11 truth but it is apart of Jason Ingersoll's collection. The picture was take 3-5 minutes after the plane hit and you see that same doofus in the navy annex. No girlfriend (that he mentions in the video) and just to far away from the pentagon. Strangely the DOD left this photo off of their official release. Seriously there's not much else to say.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t8818.html

 

[DGM]

Leslie Robertson does not support Gage or CD, that is true. But I listened to to the debate with him Robertson and Steven Jones. Two things stand out in my mind. The first is..when Jones mentions building 7 Robertson responds as quick as humanly possible..that he had nothing to do WTC 7 and can't talk about it. Strange I would think someone with his credentials could at least talk about it even if he has only seen the video. Also most of Robertson's point was that putting explosives into the building would be impossible, without people noticing, and not so much the physics of it. In particular he states he did not study the time needed for collapse. What does it all mean...I don't know...interesting though.

The possibility you over-look is, he's not interested in wasting his time talking about something he knows is ridicules.

I also would like to know why you think Mr Gross would "squirm"? Sounds like you have a tendency for pre-determination.

 

[DGM]

I didn't think this deserved it's own thread:

So I made the decision not to jump up immediately and leave the classroom. I didn't want to rattle the kids. I wanted to project a sense of calm," he said of his decision to remain seated and silent.

http://news.yahoo.com/bush-explains-slow-reaction-september-11-attacks-230850794.html

I'm sure this will end the debate once and for all.

 

[Sunstealer]

You seem to not understand what you are talking about even when you feel that explanations are clear and helpful.

It makes me laugh so much. He says something, then when several people explain it to him he goes, "Oh yeah, that was helpful and fits everything better", when actually it doesn't. It shows his complete inability to learn or comprehend.

I'm going to start making things up to see if he picks up on it.

Anecdote:

I once had a boss at a company I worked for who had no relevant materials qualifications even though he was the mat lab manager. He used to love getting involved because he thought he knew as much as we did. One of the engineers got really pissed off with him and his attempt to steal the glory so one day he fed him a load of BS.

A week later my boss and this engineer had a meeting with some clients over the issue that my boss had stuck his nose in. One of the attendees was the chief metallurgist for this company. When they asked what the problem was, my boss, instead of leaving it to the qualified engineer to answer, launched into a monologue of BS that had been fed to him including made up words for titanium micro-structures and meaningless sciency rubbish.

The chief metallurgist made him look very, very foolish.

It's the same for truthers - they have no reference or experience in the subjects required - they read and hear stuff but they are in no position to judge whether any of it is correct or not. This is why they are so easily fooled and taken advantage of. They are childlike.

 

[TJM]

No I don't "believe" he lied. I know he lied. Read through the thread I showed a video of him lying, not because he said there was no molten steel, but because he said he knows of no witness reports who said they saw molten steel.

As others have said, there's no possible way you could know what Mr. Gross knows, so I'll leave it at that. There was a second part to my question however. You seemed to have missed it so I'll ask it again:

<snip>and how do you feel about the outright lies the men "just asking questions" tried to get Mr. Gross to buy? "pools of molten steel", "there's videos of it", WTC 7 "fell in 6.6 seconds" - you know; those lies.

Well?

Those statements are false. Why did they lie?

 

[Sunstealer]

One last point I want to make about the pentagon. Take a look at this video. It is some doofus on the local Washington D.C fox the afternoon of 9/11. This guy somehow has a piece of the plane. He says it crashed and flew all the way into his car. He then just waltzes into a news station with a piece of evidence from the biggest crime scene in U.S history..like he's walking in the park. Give me a break. It's a joke.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKgK5enk7hE

Oh yeah, I totally agree mate, just totally. I mean crime scenes are sealed off the very second that a crime occurs. I've seen it on TV. You know CSI and that. Everyone knows that as soon as a crime is committed a special SWAT like team armed with yellow "crime scene" tape, "halo in" from a super sekrit blimp hovering over every city at 60,000 ft. They then secure the entire area no matter how big and detain everyone within a 5 mile radius. They search everyone and confiscate everything. They are in total control within seconds - there's no panic or confusion, no no.

How on earth can a random punter who's a good way from the explosion just get out of his car, pick up a piece of debris that hit his car, put it in the boot and drive off. I mean it would take him at least 30 seconds to do all that. How could that happen?

I mean it's totally impossible dude.

 

[tmd2_1]

As others have said, there's no possible way you could know what Mr. Gross knows, so I'll leave it at that. There was a second part to my question however. You seemed to have missed it so I'll ask it again:



Well?

Those statements are false. Why did they lie?

He lied you know he lied...anyone who see's that video knows he lied. As far as the second part....give me a break, while I won't speak for them I'm pretty sure they were referring to videos of witnesses seeing Molten Steel, you know videos of the witnesses saying they saw it. As for 6.6 seconds..pretty sure that's not a lie. The 13 seconds that is often quoted is from the start of the pent house, not the start of the main collapse. The main collapse took just under 7 seconds. Want proof Gross had a chance to correct him..and didn't but I'm sure he had better things to do.

Oh yeah, I totally agree mate, just totally. I mean crime scenes are sealed off the very second that a crime occurs. I've seen it on TV. You know CSI and that. Everyone knows that as soon as a crime is committed a special SWAT like team armed with yellow "crime scene" tape, "halo in" from a super sekrit blimp hovering over every city at 60,000 ft. They then secure the entire area no matter how big and detain everyone within a 5 mile radius. They search everyone and confiscate everything. They are in total control within seconds - there's no panic or confusion, no no.

How on earth can a random punter who's a good way from the explosion just get out of his car, pick up a piece of debris that hit his car, put it in the boot and drive off. I mean it would take him at least 30 seconds to do all that. How could that happen?

I mean it's totally impossible dude.

Yeah..you conveniently don't mention the second part of what I said. But it doesn't matter, you know that's total crap. Removing evidence from a crime scene is in fact a crime, and he goes on TV with it. The FBI should have been there within minutes. Don't say they were busy doing other things that day. I'm sure they could have sent one guy. This guy was never heard from again, nothing...but you believe what you want to believe, opening yourself up to the possibilty you've been lied to is difficult...I know...it was hard for me.

 

[WildCat]

He lied you know he lied...anyone who see's that video knows he lied.

So you can't let go of the "lie" (in scare quotes because it's nothing of the sort) by Gross yet Richard Gage can tell lie after lie - real ones - throughout his slide show and it doesn't bother you one bit?

BTW, can you link to the all the papers Gage et al have published in engineering and architecture journals? Surely a group of 1,500 engineers and architects for Truth^TM must have quite a large body of work, yes?

I mean, I'm sure Gage didn't just parrot a theologian like David Ray Griffin, did he? He wouldn't do that, would he?

So please, link to some of Gage's work!