Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[Christopher7]

So, to correct GlennB, what Christopher7 implicitly claims is that the coverup depended on whether there was a camera recording at the precise moment the building fell. Because what these takes show is mostly the dust from the collapse.

Hello?
Smoke is covering 25 floors at the NE corner in the camera 4 still. [before the west penthouse collapsed] and cameras 8 and 9 show the smoke was coming from near the west end.

I provided evidence to show that the bottom floors of WTC 7 were obscured by smoke that would have covered flashes from thermite devices.

The bit about "the coverup depended on whether there was a camera recording at the precise moment the building fell." came out of your head.

 

[grandmastershek]

It should be noted that the defenders of the official collapse theory are also using an "appeal to authority" when they quote the NIST report as proof of collapse due to normal building fires.

ESO is a rebuttal by experts in all related fields with decades of experience.

The personal attacks on these professionals says more about the attackers than the people being attacked.

One of the many differences being that AE 9/11 Truth simply put its up on the internet with 0 formal scrutiny in the academic world, while NIST is peer reviewed by the National Science Foundation.

Yes I can and just did. Jon Cole demonstrated that thermitic devices can cut steel beams.

John Cole demonstrated that a conspicuous device could cut steel nowhere on the order of the WTC.

The military or clandestine CIA operations, with their virtually unlimited budgets, could develop devices and methods to get the job done without the flashes of light being detected, your denial notwithstanding.

AKA- The Lord works in mysterious ways.

 

[GlennB]

The wind was steady all day, but you knew that.

Fairly steady, but how would the perps know this in advance in order to plan their cover-up car burning? How would they even know what the wind direction would be?

The only videos of WTC 7 collapsing that showed the bottom floors were from 8 and 9 blocks away. [about 2,000 and 2,500 feet]
Cameras 4, 8 and 9

As it happens. So what? Was there some law passed to prevent other views? What if Aman Zafar had stayed in and kept shooting towards the SW corner or trained a video camera on the scene instead of going down to the park?

These are question the perps would need to consider in advance of the event, and they would find no answer.

Your proposal is beyond absurd.

 

[femr2]

It is scientifically sound for very rough qualitative approximations such as that made by NIST, but a more accurate trace with subpixel accuracy and a better sampling rate (such as that made by NIST in Appendix C of NCSTAR-1.9 using moiré analysis) can serve for precise estimations, not just rough ones. [ETA:] In Appendix C they did the analysis frame by frame: Figures C-8 and C-9 show the results of performing this analysis on each video frame, over the final 22 s before collapse and over the entire duration of the video, respectively. If they had done the analysis every 5th or 6th frame, they would have lost lots of details, but since they had subpixel precision, they could use a bigger sampling rate to obtain better data. They couldn't use their moiré analysis for the vertical direction, which is why they just did a rough estimation for lack of better data such as that captured by femr2.

 

[Clayton Moore]

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/9-11_wtc_videos.html

NIST took 8 years to fabricate their report. That in itself puts the Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr on the opposite side of reality.

 

[Christopher7]

One of the many differences being that AE 9/11 Truth simply put its up on the internet with 0 formal scrutiny in the academic world, while NIST is peer reviewed by the National Science Foundation.

A rebuttal has been sent to the journal.

John Cole demonstrated that a conspicuous device could cut steel nowhere on the order of the WTC.

No kidding? How profoundly perceptive. Don't you think the military could develop devices to do the job, given their propensity for blowing things up and their virtually unlimited budget?

 

[grandmastershek]

A rebuttal has been sent to the journal.

What journal? When is it being published?

No kidding? How profoundly perceptive. Don't you think the military could develop devices to do the job, given their propensity for blowing things up and their virtually unlimited budget?

Yes Chris, the Lord works in mysterious ways.

I agree with C7 though, but he is going about the wrong way. The fact is that the flashes were not thermite, which now apparently needed to be covered up by smoke in 1 part of the building. The unseen flashes there were the result of transporter technology. The fact is that people have started using teleporter technology. ANd as C7 has informed us the evil gubmint has unlimited resources so they obviously have a more advanced version. Based on this either:

a. agents were teleported in and planted the devices, which hey, may not be thermite or explosives since they can create anything they want, unlimited budget and all.

or

b. these unknown devices were directly teleported in.

For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

 

[grandmastershek]

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/9-11_wtc_videos.html

NIST took 8 years to fabricate their report. That in itself puts the Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr on the opposite side of reality.

They started investigating WTC 7 in 2000? That is suspicious.

 

[000063]

This answer is 100% wishful thinking. You can't just say there could be a device, or the light would be covered. You have to SHOW how the device would work, and you have to do the math on the light being obscured. There are actual formulas Astrophysicists use for light transmission through dust / particulate matter. Note that the light has a spectrum, so you have to take into account the material makeup of the smoke and debris and it's absorption and scatter charateristics. As far as I have seen, brilliant bright light will transmit through smoke (with varying degrees of absorption en route) and reflect off surfaces.

Yep. The smoke would actually make it the light more visible. Image from this page.

 

[000063]

Fairly steady, but how would the perps know this in advance in order to plan their cover-up car burning? How would they even know what the wind direction would be?
....

The same way they knew exactly where WTC 1's debris would hit WTC 7.

Maaagic.

 

[grandmastershek]

The same way they knew exactly where WTC 1's debris would hit WTC 7.

Maaagic.

Duh...they used the HAARP array to control the wind.

 

[Christopher7]

The wind was steady all day, but you knew that.

Fairly steady, but how would the perps know this in advance in order to plan their cover-up car burning? How would they even know what the wind direction would be?

I just pointed out that the lower floors were covered by smoke.

You're the one with a conspiracy theory about the fire being set intentionally.

Although I must admit it's a bit odd that a car would catch on fire at that time so I can see why you might think it was set intentionally.

The only videos of WTC 7 collapsing that showed the bottom floors were from 8 and 9 blocks away. [about 2,000 and 2,500 feet]
Cameras 4, 8 and 9

As it happens. So what? Was there some law passed to prevent other views? What if Aman Zafar had stayed in and kept shooting towards the SW corner or trained a video camera on the scene instead of going down to the park?
These are question the perps would need to consider in advance of the event, and they would find no answer.

Your theory, your problem.

Your proposal is beyond absurd.

Hello? That's your proposal.

 

[Christopher7]

What journal?

The journal where NIST published their final report on WTC 7.

When is it being published?

I don't know.

Yes Chris, the Lord works in mysterious ways.

So does the CIA.

 

[grandmastershek]

The journal where NIST published their final report on WTC 7.

So your journal is non existent, but the NSF's reports are not.

So does the CIA.

Sadly your beliefs don't constitute fact. Anybody can plug a hole in evidence with "magic man dunnit".

 

[000063]

I just pointed out that the lower floors were covered by smoke.

You're the one with a conspiracy theory about the fire being set intentionally.

Although I must admit it's a bit odd that a car would catch on fire at that time so I can see why you might think it was set intentionally.


Your theory, your problem.

Hello? That's your proposal.

I note how carefully you're avoiding saying whether or not the fires were set on purpose. Of course, what you call GlennB's theory is merely a logical inference from yours. Either the bad guys knew the smoke would cover them, or they somehow failed to notice the massive amount of light thermite generates in their test runs and it was just lucky the smoke happened to cover it. The later is impossible. The former is only slightly less impossible.

And, of course, given the EMP collapse, there had to have been charges on high as well. We have video of the upper portions of the building during the EMP collapse and the rest of the collapse. There's a notable lack of 45-second flares of light.

The journal where NIST published their final report on WTC 7.

I don't know.

So does the CIA.

Actually, the CIA works in fairly standard and well-known ways, including the need for funding and accountability. There's no such thing as a blank check operation. Or do you think that an agency sworn to protect America would so willingly murder several thousand people, including people they knew personally in the Pentagon? Or that they would keep their mouths shut even after they get blamed for Iraq? I strongly doubt it.

It's nice to see that your veneer of reason is developing bigger and bigger cracks.

 

[Christopher7]

So your journal is non existent, but the NSF's reports are not.

Sadly your beliefs don't constitute fact. Anybody can plug a hole in evidence with "magic man dunnit".

People who say thermite could not be used to bring dawn the TT and WTC 7 have no idea how thermite could be used so they are lying.

 

[femr2]

Which video was this from?

Says in the graph title - Cam#3

1. you need to

Need ? Nah, but...

show the motion backwards in time for as long as you have it recorded

Did so earlier in this thread...

in order to be sure that the motion that you see here isn't "typical".
(Say of wind gusts.)

It's possibly wind influenced, but I doubt it's all typical motion. Magnitude increases.

You can't just show 1 or 2 time intervals of the gross motion.

Can simply show what is available.

2 The x & y motion are highly (inversely) correlated.

Inversely on the later graph, not inversely on the ealiest.

That implies that the motion might be either:

a. an artifact (i.e., not real) or
b. "tethered" motion. (i.e., pivoting in 2 dimensions about a point).

I'd suggest a twisting type motion, sure.

What is the physical magnitude of the motion?

Can't remember. Not much. A pixel is about a foot iirc. Horizontal scaling metric is different to vertical, as it needs to take account of video frame aspect ratio, building perspective, ...

 

[000063]

...People who say thermite could not be used to bring dawn the TT and WTC 7 have no idea how thermite could be used so they are lying.

Stundied.

 

[Animal]

People who say thermite could not be used to bring dawn the TT and WTC 7 have no idea how thermite could be used so they are lying.

Stundied.

People that claim that thermite COULD have been used to bring down the TT and WTC 7 have no idea of the workings of a modern office tower that is occupied 24/7 in a city that is active 24/7 so they are delusional.

 

[LSSBB]

A rebuttal has been sent to the journal.

No kidding? How profoundly perceptive. Don't you think the military could develop devices to do the job, given their propensity for blowing things up and their virtually unlimited budget?

You have not shown that they can, nor has anyone else, so you cannot validly assume that they can and base an accusation of murder on it.