Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[dafydd]

I love the way you COMPLETLY IGNORE the quote DIRECTLY ABOVE THAT.

Does that quote claim that access was NOT given? No, it does not. Delayed, yes. Denied? No. Not at all.

Here is a quote DIRECTLY from FEMA itself.


Yeah, here is all you need to say.

"Yes Tri and Edx were right. I was putting my trust in someone who obviously was not honest in his acessment. I will, in the future, try harder not to be duped by liars, and will do my OWN reasearch. "

It's really not hard to admit that you're wrong. It's ok. You're human.

Truthers never admit that they are wrong. If they could see their mistakes then they would not be truthers.

 

[tmd2_1]

I love the way you COMPLETLY IGNORE the quote DIRECTLY ABOVE THAT.

Does that quote claim that access was NOT given? No, it does not. Delayed, yes. Denied? No. Not at all.

Here is a quote DIRECTLY from FEMA itself.


Yeah, here is all you need to say.

"Yes Tri and Edx were right. I was putting my trust in someone who obviously was not honest in his acessment. I will, in the future, try harder not to be duped by liars, and will do my OWN reasearch. "

It's really not hard to admit that you're wrong. It's ok. You're human.

No my friend you are the one that is being lied to. Notice he says the BPAT team.

Right from the New York times.

"he lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

 

[TJM]

No my friend you are the one that is being lied to. Notice he says the BPAT team.

Right from the New York times.

"he lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

Your failure highlighted.

 

[dafydd]

No my friend you are the one that is being lied to. Notice he says the BPAT team.

Right from the New York times.

"he lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

Have you given up the crazy missile theory?

 

[triforcharity]

Do you not understand that the SEAoNY is PART of the FEMA team? Do you not understand that the engineers from ASCE were PART of the FEMA team?

So, is it written english wording that you are having the problem with, or is it simply reading for comprehension?

 

[tmd2_1]

Do you not understand that the SEAoNY is PART of the FEMA team? Do you not understand that the engineers from ASCE were PART of the FEMA team?

So, is it written english wording that you are having the problem with, or is it simply reading for comprehension?

I have to be quick, but I don't believe these teams were apart of the BPAT team.

 

[dafydd]

I have to be quick, but I don't believe these teams were apart of the BPAT team.

What you believe has no bearing on the matter. Proof,that is the watchword. When will you be posting some?

 

[000063]

I find it hard to believe at one point you were ever a "truther" Why do you work so hard to defend the official story? This post is a perfect example. You know everything is contained in those articles, that FEMA's investigation was greatly hampered. Yet you write things like this. There is more than enough information in this thread alone that anyone with an open mind would have questions about the official story. Not saying be a full fledged "truther" but have questions. Yet you who claims to at one point have been a truther, work so hard, jump through so many hoops to defend your dogma. I really don't understand it.

Truther is cornered on the facts, promptly resorts to personal attacks which don't actually address the debunker's arguments.

Film at 11.

No my friend you are the one that is being lied to. Notice he says the BPAT team.

Right from the New York times.

"he lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

I really don't know why you keep ignoring the rest of the sentence. Oh, wait, I do. Because you're a Truther.

 

[triforcharity]

I have to be quick, but I don't believe these teams were apart of the BPAT team.

Then you haven't read a damn thing I have posted. If you had, you would have seen this little doozie that you conveniently missed.

Here it is, AGAIN.

Based on this fact, the FEMA-ASCE team first visited the site on October 6, ...In additiondifficulty in finding material such as steel, the Structural Engineers Association of New York, in support of the City and as a formal member of the BPAT, located and identified specimens of steel for use in future studies. FEMA is coordinating with NIST to make sure that these specimens are properly stored and available for future testing. Also, it is important to note that there are, literally, thousands of plans, specifications and other documents for the World Trade Center. Although it took some weeks to obtain the plans, the owner’s were fully cooperative with our requests.
http://www.house.gov/science/full02/mar06/shea.htm

I've hilited the parts that are important. In fact, the destroy your complete ignorance to pieces. There is a link too. Perhaps you could go there, and educate yourself, instead of relying on you own personal IGNORANCE of the facts, and CONTINUED ignorance, even after being shown WITHOUT A DOUBT, that the information you're using is WRONG.

This is called being ignorant. Please, it is best for you to READ what is actually posted, and you will LEARN. This is the BEST and ONLY way to PREVENT you OWN IGNORANCE. Holy *********** christ on a pogo stick....

Here is a better link.
http://www.hsdl.org/?view&doc=5697&coll=limited

Page 8, VERY bottom of page 28, very top of page 29,

At the end, you can read some pretty impressive bios about some of the people that assisted SEAoNY, FEMA, and the ASCE.

Your own personal ignorance and pride is stopping you for becoming EDUCATED on a subject.

We're offering a solution to your own ignorance.

 

[jaydeehess]

I didn't mean the source code for the program... what they're asking for apparently is the source file that was saved with the full work, if that clarifies anything. I wasn't referring to the actual source code of the program, since the proprietary nature of it would prevent them from distributing it anyway.

Ok, well that's not what AE911T would be wanting then anyway. They would be wanting to DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH, and come up with input parameters of their own, using their own justifications for them and THEN see if they get something other than what NIST got.

Seems to me they are more interested in argueing about the way NIST did things than to actually do anything themselves.

 

[jaydeehess]

I don't know when or if Gage or AE for truth will release anything. We will have to have to wait and see.

Perhaps another 7 years then? My point sems to have been skated past by you. I said its rather odd that you claim others are hypocritical and then complain about NIST not finishing the WTC 7 report until 2008 when AE911T has now had 10 years post collapse to produce next to NOTHING!.

Why should it be accurate? I don't know I always thought accuracy was a good thing.

Yes and all that was of immediate concern was that the model show the same result up to the point where the while structure has become involved in collapse.
IT DOES!
After that point any FEA will break down and it would be serindipitous if it was completely accurate after that time.

But I know what you are asking I think the author of the video says it best "Based on the exterior appearance of the collapse we can immediately verify that the actual collapse of WTC 7 looks nothing like the exterior of the NIST model. Therefor the model is wrong. It does not accurately describe reality.

Because you and that author do not live in the same reality that most people do and certainly not in the same reality as those who work with such modelling.

In reality we see a crimp appear in the middle of the building and the rest of the building immediately lose all structural stability and begin to fall at the rate of gravity straight down as a single unit. This is controlled demolition"

No, in order to have gotten gravitational acelleration with explosive demolitions the entire lower 8 floors would have to be removed all at once. That's a hell of an explosive and a hell of great BOOM! Those explosives are not in evidence in any docuementary recording.
OTOH if the core columns have been destroyed by falling debris the other smaller columns between core and norh face will buckle and bend, the outermost columns will be pushed outward and quickly be so ditorted that they will offer no support whatsoever. All this with would occur with no explosive (120db at 1/4 mile) sounds.

But I'll rewrite it. Someone (I don't know who) on 9/11 made an appraisal that WTC 7 was in danger of collapsing. Hence the collapse zone..etc.

Ohhh that's what you meant. NMo I did not understand what the h you were getting at.

Yes, but the FDNY did not know what form the collapse would take, would a portion of it collapse, what portion, or would the whole thing come down. So its simply PRUDENT to create a zone in which there are no people that would take into account the worst case scenario. This they did.

NIST's investigation should have consisted of asking that person (or people) why did you make that appraisal?

They did apparently. Did you actually read the report?

Then the investigation should not have taken that long from that point. Because obviously that appraisal was correct and was made for some reason

.
WOW are you, dense!

Again because of how quick Groung zero was closed off, and because of evidence removal, I'm not sure what was found or not.

Again, there were hundreds of people in the rescue/recovery/clean up yet no one at all saw anything suspicious?

That comment speaks for itself.

Yes it does, glad you agree that there was no reason to look for explosives if no explosive sounds were heard.

You really are playing games. You know what numbers. You know the ones not released for "public safety"

Answered above.

Why doesn't AE911T want to do their own research and justify there own numbers and then run an FEA? Instead they seem more interested in perhaps saying to NIST the equivalent of "AH HA, you said that columnx would buckle withy force on it but that's at least 3% too small and we justify saying this because we said it!"
OR
Perhaps they are incapable of doing an FEA without crib notes.

 

[Miragememories]

Your Credibility is Lost

"Perhaps another 7 years then? My point sems to have been skated past by you. I said its rather odd that you claim others are hypocritical and then complain about NIST not finishing the WTC 7 report until 2008 when AE911T has now had 10 years post collapse to produce next to NOTHING!."

Quantifying the research produced by AE911truth as "next to NOTHING", is an abandonment of any interest in the truth.

But you knew that already.

The truthers can disappear but the consequences of ignoring the truth about 9/11 will not.

Time will tell.

It always does.

MM

 

[dafydd]

Quantifying the research produced by AE911truth as "next to NOTHING", is an abandonment of any interest in the truth.

But you knew that already.

The truthers can disappear but the consequences of ignoring the truth about 9/11 will not.

Time will tell.

It always does.

MM

Time has already told us the truth. Dream on.

 

[triforcharity]

Quantifying the research produced by AE911truth as "next to NOTHING", is an abandonment of any interest in the truth.

Maybe you can produce something that has appeared in any respectable journal, or any kind of complete analysis done by AE911T (FEA's, complete theory, legal cases) anything?

Time will tell.

It always does.

MM

Does 10 years sound like enough time to do something?

 

[jaydeehess]

Quantifying the research produced by AE911truth as "next to NOTHING", is an abandonment of any interest in the truth.

But you knew that already.

The truthers can disappear but the consequences of ignoring the truth about 9/11 will not.

Time will tell.

It always does.

MM

Coming from you that would be a compliment.

So feel free to list 3 papers that AE911T has published anywhere that meet the criteria of being at least as well researched and compiled as the NIST reports.
Thermite found- debunked long ago.
Stacks of cardboard boxes don't really count for much.
Videos that begin with spooky music don't count for much.
Feel free to list any papers published in true peer reviewed publications.

AE911T cannot even tell us a full theory on what occured other than to say 'well it did not happen the way NIST said it did' which seems to be based almost entirely on a notion that the gov't lies, the gov't lies all the time, and the gov't lies about everything.

"Truth" is that WTC 7 did not fall in 6.6 seconds as we are constantly told by supporters of AE911T. Why would that be? Does it bolster AE911T's credibility to have their supporters saying this as if it were true?
Perhaps it bolsters AE911T's credibility to say that there is positive evidence of the use of therm(x)te because they found sulfur compounds in the rubble of buildings which would have several sources of said compounds.

Above we see Hoffamn quoted. The same Hoffman who claimed to have proven that the dust cloud had to have been at several hundreds of degrees above zero(F), the so called "pyroclastic dust cloud". Yet he was so easily debunked simply by noting that people caught in that dust cloud were not baked to death in the streets, and street signs did not have they paint baked off of them.


,,,,and here we have AE911T complaining about the veracity of the WTC 7 NIST report (you know the subject of the recent exchange between tmd and I which was obviously what I was referring to, MM) yet they have absolutly no independant work of their own to dispute the report or more specifically, the FEA and resulting animation based on it. Their biggest complaint and the reason given as to why they haven't done an FEA? "NIST won't give us a cheat sheet - waaaaaaah".

 

[Miragememories]

"...I said its rather odd that you claim others are hypocritical and then complain about NIST not finishing the WTC 7 report until 2008 when AE911T has now had 10 years post collapse to produce next to NOTHING!."

The NIST, backed by full government funding and virtually unlimited resources, had 7 long years to make their case.

What they produced was a whitewash.

Given their very limited resources, AE911Truth has done an admirable job providing research that validates the argument that we have yet to see an honest investigation into 9/11.

You seem to confuse quantity with quality.

For example, your reference to "6.6 seconds" completely ignores what it means for a modern 47-story building covering a city block, to drop in freefall for 8 storys. As Bill Smith would suggest, somehow the WTC7 table had all 4 legs severed simultaneously. Column 79 was one leg and that's all the NIST chose to stand their argument on.

You know as well as I do that sulphur was a very small part of the evidence presented by AE911Truth in support of the existence of thermitic materials pervasive in the WTC dust. You might explain the source of heat required to create the iron micro-spheres for example. The NIST certainly didn't.

Distortion of the truth is the 'stock 'n trade' of the Official Conspiracy Theory supporters.

As soon as I see your words "yet they have absolutly no independant work of their own", I know two things. You don't check your spelling and you don't care about the lack of truthfulness in your argument.

MM

 

[dafydd]

The NIST, backed by full government funding and virtually unlimited resources, had 7 long years to make their case.

What they produced was a whitewash.

Given their very limited resources, AE911Truth has done an admirable job providing research that validates the argument that we have yet to see an honest investigation into 9/11.

You seem to confuse quantity with quality.

For example, your reference to "6.6 seconds" completely ignores what it means for a modern 47-story building covering a city block, to drop in freefall for 8 storys. As Bill Smith would suggest, somehow the WTC7 table had all 4 legs severed simultaneously. Column 79 was one leg and that's all the NIST chose to stand their argument on.

You know as well as I do that sulphur was a very small part of the evidence presented by AE911Truth in support of the existence of thermitic materials pervasive in the WTC dust. You might explain the source of heat required to create the iron micro-spheres for example. The NIST certainly didn't.

Distortion of the truth is the 'stock 'n trade' of the Official Conspiracy Theory supporters.

As soon as I see your words "yet they have absolutly no independant work of their own", I know two things. You don't check your spelling and you don't care about the lack of truthfulness in your argument.

MM

You're relying on bill smith and AE911Truth for support? That gives the phrase 'clutching at straws' a whole new meaning. Do you have any real evidence to present instead of nitpicking about spelling mistakes?

 

[dafydd]

Coming from you that would be a compliment.

So feel free to list 3 papers that AE911T has published anywhere that meet the criteria of being at least as well researched and compiled as the NIST reports.
Thermite found- debunked long ago.
Stacks of cardboard boxes don't really count for much.
Videos that begin with spooky music don't count for much.
Feel free to list any papers published in true peer reviewed publications.".

The floor is yours,miragememories.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

AE911's research quality is such that they would have looked more professional by doing nothing, rather than let their lack of competence show...

Stepping off the rant... let's get into some interesting statistics brought up by the Swiss federal Institute of technology in Zurich, which studied 800 cases of structural failure, in which 504 people were killed, 592 people injured, and millions of dollars of damage incurred. In cases where engineers were at fault:

• Insufficient knowledge ............................... 36%
• Underestimation of influence ......................... 16%
• Ignorence, carelessness, negligence .................. 14%
• Forgetfulness, error ................................. 13%
• Relying upon others without sufficient control ....... 9%
• Objectively unknown situation ........................ 7%
• Unprecise definition of responsibilities ............. 1%
• Choice of bad quality ................................ 1%
• Other ................................................ 3%

M. Matousek and Schneider, J., (1976) Untersuchungen Zur
Struktur des Zicherheitproblems bei Bauwerken, Institut
für Baustatik und Konstruktion der ETH Zürich,
Bericht No. 59, ETH.

Putting it into perspective, AE911truth believes engineering disasters don't exist. And Gage showed he was idiot when he claimed card board boxes could model full scale behavior...

 

[tmd2_1]

Then you haven't read a damn thing I have posted. If you had, you would have seen this little doozie that you conveniently missed.

Here it is, AGAIN.



I've hilited the parts that are important. In fact, the destroy your complete ignorance to pieces. There is a link too. Perhaps you could go there, and educate yourself, instead of relying on you own personal IGNORANCE of the facts, and CONTINUED ignorance, even after being shown WITHOUT A DOUBT, that the information you're using is WRONG.

This is called being ignorant. Please, it is best for you to READ what is actually posted, and you will LEARN. This is the BEST and ONLY way to PREVENT you OWN IGNORANCE. Holy *********** christ on a pogo stick....

Here is a better link.
http://www.hsdl.org/?view&doc=5697&coll=limited

Page 8, VERY bottom of page 28, very top of page 29,

At the end, you can read some pretty impressive bios about some of the people that assisted SEAoNY, FEMA, and the ASCE.

Your own personal ignorance and pride is stopping you for becoming EDUCATED on a subject.

We're offering a solution to your own ignorance.

Ok I think I understand what's going on here. I believe there has been some misunderstandings I apologize for any role I may have had in it. Several people ask me questions and I may have gotten confused.

So here is what I believe is going on.
This page here http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
strictly and only deals with steel removal. It says so right at the top of the page.

Hence why you have this quote. "FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study:"

He then backs it up by citing this reference from Appendix D.
"Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). "

If you to these pages he talks about access restrictions and the problems the BPAT team had.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/restrictions.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/players.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/official/fema.html

In these 3 areas he clearly does not state they were not given access to ground zero. He said they were denied evidence (which they were) but not access. Now I agree he probably can word all of this better, but he certainly is not lying.

Again I am sorry for any role I may have had in the confusion.