Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[DC]

Exactly, the penthouse is seen to fall.

Further parts of the roof start to fall then, almost immediately,

the remainder of the building falls downward as a single unit.

When I mean remainder, I am referring to the vast bulk of the building of course (including the penthouse structure since it's still inside).

so you not like you claimed before:

The building fell as a single block.

it didnt, indeed first the penthouse and the floors beneath it, only then the rest of the building.

 

[uke2se]

So, mrkinnies is now running from his claim that WTC fell to the ground as a single unit?

Where do these guys come from? It's like these people lived under a rock since 2006.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Final words of chapter 2

"The entire building above the buckled-column region then moved downward as a single unit, completing the global collapse sequence."

I agree its poor English, What they should have said was "the entire remaining building above".

Since they have already described part of the building collapsing prior to the "The entire building above" line, its clear what they meant. English majors and Lawyers have their uses and I concede that NIST should have also employed one or two of them as well to get the wording twoofer misinterpretation proof

To an engineer however the meaning is self evident so not only do we not have Check or Mate, we do not even have a game of Chess.

 

[uke2se]

I agree its poor English, What they should have said was "the entire remaining building above".

I disagree. It's perfectly adequate English. "The entire building above the buckled column" can only mean the parts of the building that were above the buckled column.

 

[NoahFence]

Yes

Now answer my question.

NIST didn't say the entire building moved as one unit. You're either blatantly quote-mining or misinterpreting.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're misinterpreting.

 

[DC]

I disagree. It's perfectly adequate English. "The entire building above the buckled column" can only mean the parts of the building that were above the buckled column.

yes but that part was already partially collapsed. which is totally clear in context.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

yes but that part was already partially collapsed. which is totally clear in context.

yeah but not "twoofer clear" and quote mining proof. In my business we try to design our products to be idiot proof, but they keep building better idiots!

 

[DC]

yeah but not "twoofer clear" and quote mining proof. In my business we try to design our products to be idiot proof, but they keep building better idiots!

yeah i once had to desing something for the US market. amazing what lengts i had to go to prevent idiots hurting themself.

 

[mrkinnies]

This is so pathetic.

I proved you all wrong and now all you have is an examination of the english language to fall back on. What a laugh.

NIST make it explicitly clear what they think happened based on the video evidence. It's as clear as day but you debunkers won't accept it because to do so would be to destroy your whole argument.

WTC7 clearly fell as a single unit. It's the word single which is important here because it means it didn't break apart into two or more units defined by clear breaks and separation in the walls prior to falling downward. Yes, the penthouse collapsed first but how far that went is anyone's guess because even by NIST's own admission, their collapse scenario is only a probable outcome. This means that when the last stage of collapse occurred and the building fell downward, it still contained all the same material within it, all nicely wrapped in intact walls, standing fully upright and almost as complete as it was a few seconds before except for broken windows and missing cladding panels externally. NIST is absolutely right, it fell as a single unit.

 

[DC]

This is so pathetic.

I proved you all wrong and now all you have is an examination of the english language to fall back on. What a laugh.

NIST make it explicitly clear what they think happened based on the video evidence. It's as clear as day but you debunkers won't accept it because to do so would be to destroy your whole argument.

WTC7 clearly fell as a single unit. It's the word single which is important here because it means it didn't break apart into two or more units defined by clear breaks and separation in the walls prior to falling downward. Yes, the penthouse collapsed first but how far that went is anyone's guess because even by NIST's own admission, their collapse scenario is only a probable outcome. This means that when the last stage of collapse occurred and the building fell downward, it still contained all the same material within it, all nicely wrapped in intact walls, standing fully upright and almost as complete as it was before a few windows shattered and cladding panels popped off. NIST is absolutely right, it fell as a single unit.

no you didn't

and when it didn't break apart, how can then the Penthouse fall true several floors below it?

 

[uke2se]

Why don't you stop twisting words and read what I said about defining 'breaking apart'?

Edited by Loss Leader: 

Personal attack in original deleted.

NIST very clearly says WTC 7 DIDN'T fall as a single unit. Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension?

 

[uke2se]

This is even funnier and proves that you guys can't even read a simple report or even quote another poster properly.

NIST don't say 'above the buckled column'. They say, 'above the buckled-column region'. They define that region as being all exterior columns between floors 7 and 14. That means 33 floors fell downward as a single unit.

And you have the cheek to talk about the use of english.

This is terrible.

How many floors did WTC 7 have again? Was it more than 33? Oh. Guess you were wrong to say that WTC 7 fell as a single unit then, weren't you?

 

[DGM]

Does the hilighted text impact on the NIST collapse model rendering it invalid ?

Could you please quote the statement and link?

 

[mrkinnies]

How many floors did WTC 7 have again? Was it more than 33? Oh. Guess you were wrong to say that WTC 7 fell as a single unit then, weren't you?

So how many floors did it have and why would I say 33?

Let me help you by expanding the quote a little.

"The shell of exterior columns buckled between the 7th and 14th floors, as loads were redistributed to these columns due to the downward movement of the building core and the floors. The entire building above the buckled-column region then moved downward as a single unit, completing the global collapse sequence."

 

[uke2se]

So how many floors did it have and why would I say 33?

Let me help you by expanding the quote a little.

"The shell of exterior columns buckled between the 7th and 14th floors, as loads were redistributed to these columns due to the downward movement of the building core and the floors. The entire building above the buckled-column region then moved downward as a single unit, completing the global collapse sequence."

That doesn't help you at all. You were still wrong to say that the entire building fell as a single unit. Do you wish to admit that you were wrong?

 

[mrkinnies]

That doesn't help you at all. You were still wrong to say that the entire building fell as a single unit. Do you wish to admit that you were wrong?

I'm not wrong.

Clearly you can't cope with the embarrassment of it all. I understand, it can be tough. I suggest you calm down and come back when you're feeling better.

 

[DGM]

What's baffling is these guys don't understand why the building world pays them no attention.l

"Penthouse is not part of the building".

 

[uke2se]

I'm not wrong.

Clearly you can't cope with the embarrassment of it all. I understand, it can be tough. I suggest you calm down and come back when you're feeling better.

I'm dead calm. You seem to be on a lying-trip, though. Your statement that WTC 7 fell down as a single unit was proven to be wrong, by among others, yourself. Self-debunking is a common trait with twoofers, and it's equally satisfying each time it happens.

 

[mrkinnies]

I'm dead calm. You seem to be on a lying-trip, though. Your statement that WTC 7 fell down as a single unit was proven to be wrong, by among others, yourself. Self-debunking is a common trait with twoofers, and it's equally satisfying each time it happens.

I didn't self-debunk, stop making this stuff up.

Than again, this silly war on words is all you have isn't it because you clearly haven't the first clue what NIST actually wrote.

 

[uke2se]

I didn't self-debunk, stop making this stuff up.

Denial at its finest.

Than again, this silly war on words is all you have isn't it because you clearly haven't the first clue what NIST actually wrote.

I know exactly what NIST wrote. They wrote that WTC 7 didn't fall down as a single unit, as you have already demonstrated.