Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[LSSBB]

C7, can you please acknowledge that "no fire visible from the outside" does not equal "no fire at all"?

Thanks.

No fire doesn't mean no heat, either.

 

[Christopher7]

C7, can you please acknowledge that "no fire visible from the outside" does not equal "no fire at all"?

Thanks.

No visible fire means that it has died down and no longer burning hot enough to heat the steel beams. Example from NIST test:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/PDF/f05018.pdf

 

[pgimeno]

No visible fire means that it has died down and no longer burning hot enough to heat the steel beams. Example from NIST test:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/PDF/f05018.pdf


[qimg]http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2723/firetempgraph.jpg[/qimg]

Let me ask this way. How many walls existed between the façade and the core, and what effect would they have on the visibility of the fire?

 

[Christopher7]

Let me ask this way. How many walls existed between the façade and the core, and what effect would they have on the visibility of the fire?

NIST said the walls extended a few inches above the dropped ceiling which was 8' 6". I'll kook for the quote for you tonight if you haven't/won't do the research yourself.

 

[triforcharity]

No visible fire means that it has died down and no longer burning hot enough to heat the steel beams. Example from NIST test:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/PDF/f05018.pdf


[qimg]http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2723/firetempgraph.jpg[/qimg]

Lol! Notice what happens when the window is opened Sarns?

Remember your claim that it would cool off the area?

 

[LSSBB]

Lol! Notice what happens when the window is opened Sarns?

Remember your claim that it would cool off the area?

Also, his graph is from an experiment on a single room with a window, not an interior office space a long way from a window.

 

[Animal]

Also, his graph is from an experiment on a single room with a window, not an interior office space a long way from a window.

Someone just keeps digging a deeper hole

 

[pgimeno]

NIST said the walls extended a few inches above the dropped ceiling which was 8' 6". I'll kook for the quote for you tonight if you haven't/won't do the research yourself.

Can you explain the significance of that with respect to the visibility of fire from the outside, and can you please show the photograph again that you're using to claim that the fires were burnt out, so we can see their angle?

Here's the reconstructed diagram of floor 12, if that helps.

 

[MIKILLINI]

No visible fire means that it has died down and no longer burning hot enough to heat the steel beams. Example from NIST test:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/PDF/f05018.pdf


[qimg]http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2723/firetempgraph.jpg[/qimg]

Isn't this just one perimeter office? What about the more interior offices?

 

[triforcharity]

Wanna see C7 slapped with facts and other cool ass ****?

Click on the little arrow link, and read. Enjoy!!!

Another thing. The Image that our carpenter keeps posting regarding the "fire" on the 12th floor at 4:00 pm.
The image is from page 384 of the NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2, Figure 9-11.
The image is titled....."Progression of Simulated Fire on Floor 12 of WTC 7"

what is omitted by our reside troofers is the second part of the title.....

Upper Layer Gas temperatures are shown,

That tidbit of missing information has much to do with the claims of fraud....just the fraud is not coming from the NIST

 

[chrismohr]

Pgimeno and all,

Adam Taylor has written up over 100 responses to my chrismohr911.com debating points (based on my YouTube videos), which will appear on the site by around Monday. They are being read by Richard Gage and the writing committee as we speak, and as always Rick will allow me to respond. These will be more carefully thought out and I think will merit a good look by all interested parties.

Richard Gage will be in Denver June 1 for his "Experts Speak Out" video tour. We may have a chance to meet, but I have tickets to see a Mahler Symphony with my wife that night and he's flying from city to city almost daily. You can find out when he's coming to your town here: http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-s...evidence-experts-speak-out-final-edition.html

 

[Christopher7]

Also, his graph is from an experiment on a single room with a window, not an interior office space a long way from a window.

If you know of a test simulating an interior office space with dropped ceilings, post it.

As for requests for me to re-post info. No - just go back and read/look at the photos.

 

[Christopher7]

Lol! Notice what happens when the window is opened Sarns?

Remember your claim that it would cool off the area?

Go back and read what I wrote again.

 

[LSSBB]

If you know of a test simulating an interior office space with dropped ceilings, post it.

As for requests for me to re-post info. No - just go back and read/look at the photos.

Ahhh, so you admit that graph is close to useless for this environment? Even the rooms next to the windows connected to rooms without, plus it was for naturally ventilated in a controlled environment, not the 12th floor of a skyscraper with a variety of office joining conditions, with some windows open and some not? The test room also had a well defined set of materials, wheras the materials and their combustible and heat retaining capabilities varied from office to office.

I still don't see any way you can create the model yourself with your superior fire god intellect.

 

[000063]

He doesn't need a model, remember? He can just look at some photos.

Let me ask this way. How many walls existed between the façade and the core, and what effect would they have on the visibility of the fire?

Come to think, didn't he previously assert that the top secret military charge on the column would be hidden from view? Yet fire would be visible?

 

[pgimeno]

In light of the information I've presented, I'll ask again (changing the wording a bit).

C7, can you please acknowledge that "no fire visible from the outside in floor 12" does not equal "fire burned out in floor 12"?

Also, in light of the information posted by Animal in another thread and reproduced by Tri here, can you please acknowledge that the NIST graph that you show represents temperature in the upper layer and not necessarily presence of fire?

Thanks.

Here's the graph and pic that you've refused to repost:

And here is, again, the diagram of the distribution of floor 12:

 

[Christopher7]

C7, can you please acknowledge that "no fire visible from the outside in floor 12" does not equal "fire burned out in floor 12"?

NIST said the fire on floor 12 had burned out because they knew it had started on the south side and burned around the core area to the NW corner, burning out all that area. We don't know from what angle the photo was taken so it's possible that the fire was still burning on the west side but that would have no effect on the beams that supposedly triggered the collapse.

Also, in light of the information posted by Animal in another thread and reproduced by Tri here, can you please acknowledge that the NIST graph that you show represents temperature in the upper layer and not necessarily presence of fire?

I have responded to this already. The hottest gases, 1800^oF indicated in red, are directly above the fire. The gasses cool as they spread out.

 

[Christopher7]

Ahhh, so you admit that graph is close to useless for this environment?

The test gives a reasonable idea of how long and how hot a fire will burn in a single room with ventilation. The floor 12 fire always had ventilation thru the debris damaged area and then more as windows broke.

Even the rooms next to the windows connected to rooms without, plus it was for naturally ventilated in a controlled environment, not the 12th floor of a skyscraper with a variety of office joining conditions with some windows open and some not?

There was no variety in the east end of the 12th floor. The east end of the 12th floor was offices with dropped ceilings except for the large [conference?] room around columns 73 to 78.

The test room also had a well defined set of materials wheras the materials and their combustible and heat retaining capabilities varied from office to office.

Offices with more fuel would burn longer but would spread to adjoining offices at about the same rate.

I still don't see any way you can create the model yourself

Simply by using the axiomatic fact that the fire ignited the offices next to it, anyone with the ability to add 2 and 2 can figure out that the fire burned the offices between the south side and the north side to get from the south side to the north side.

 

[carlitos]

3) Gage claimed nanos for the Twin Towers (explosive)

He's wrong, of course. Nanothermite is smaller pieces of thermite.

No fire present does not equal "environment cooled to room temperature"

No really, every time I grill over charcoal, unless there is visible fire, I can just put my bare hand down on the room-temperature white-hot coals.

No fire doesn't mean no heat, either.

As above. At this point, I assert that no one anywhere can be ignorant enough not to understand the silly BBQ analogy. Accordingly, Chris7 et al are liars, insane, etc. The "Breeze from the window makes the fire cool down" canard was quite possibly the stupidest thing I've read on this forum outside of the Stundie awards.

 

[triforcharity]

Simply by using the axiomatic fact that the fire ignited the offices next to it, anyone with the ability to add 2 and 2 can figure out that the fire burned the offices between the south side and the north side to get from the south side to the north side.

So, explain how the offices on the south side, towards the middle, avoided the fire completely.

Oh, and fire spread is NEVER axiomatic. Ever.