• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WTC7 and the girder walk-off between column 79 and 44

Status
Not open for further replies.
tmd2_1 said:
I'm not going around in circles with you.
Click to expand...


Of course you're not. You're not moving at all.

This engineer clearly made his determination on something. It couldn't have been historic prescience, as it never happened before and there was no reason to think it would happen this time. What led him to make that determination?
Click to expand...


What led him to that determination was extensive fire safety engineering knowledge applied to appreciation of the present circumstances, which included a large damaged steel skyscraper being on fire and the fire being un-fought from the start, which had never happened before that day, and had resulted in collapses both previous times it happened that day.

Being able to extrapolate unprecedented outcomes from unprecedented current conditions is admirable, but hardly superhuman. If Hoover Dam broke upstream of you, wouldn't you know enough to run away to higher ground, even though no dam of that type has ever broken before?

You'd think at the very least the public could know who he is, so he can be recognized for saving lives?
Click to expand...


Oh, yeah, of course that's why you want to know his name, so you can honor him for his excellent and life-saving engineering work. Not so you can publicly accuse him of being complicit in mass murder, or make sure his name perpetually comes up associated with lunatic conspiracy theories in Google searches or anything like that. :rolleyes:

Enough heroes died that day to make people who did their jobs well, and succeeded in preventing things from becoming even worse, reluctant to be regarded as heroes themselves. We can admire their competent actions without knowing their names, and the spiteful few with malevolent designs on them (however petty and feckless) can go to hell.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
Myriad said:
Being able to extrapolate unprecedented outcomes from unprecedented current conditions is admirable, but hardly superhuman. If Hoover Dam broke upstream of you, wouldn't you know enough to run away to higher ground, even though no dam of that type has ever broken before?
Click to expand...
Myriad's statement bears repeating. Specifically because truthers keep up with the First Time In History claims. If they're going to recycle the claim, they're going to get the same answers in return.

Man, that's aggravating. Even a dog learns after a few swats to the nose with a rolled up newspaper.

Myriad said:
Enough heroes died that day to make people who did their jobs well, and succeeded in preventing things from becoming even worse, reluctant to be regarded as heroes themselves. We can admire their competent actions without knowing their names, and the spiteful few with malevolent designs on them (however petty and feckless) can go to hell.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...

Bravo.
1238649dd416a53ec6.gif
 
deMartini wasn't one of the engineers who designed the towers, anyway.

He was only involved in construction, and he most certainly didn't participate or order the plane impact study. Leslie Robertson did that.

I looked into this subject in some detail long ago, and discovered that there was quite a lot of opposition to the building of the twin towers because it was feared they would be hit by an airplane, as the ESB had been.
Part of the PR campaign against this fear was some kind of press release by an office of the Port Authority, IIRC claiming that the towers could withstand the crash of a jet at 600mph.
That's where this false rumor seems to have originated. It certainly did not come from the WTC building engineers or the architects.

I've just looked it up and you can read more here.
A lot of the links are now dead.

I've relinked to some of them here:
http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Bri...ecurity/ReflectionsontheWorldTradeCenter.aspx

The Bridge
National Academy of Engineering
Vol 32, number 1, spring 2002
http://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=7345
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Myriad's statement bears repeating. Specifically because truthers keep up with the First Time In History claims. If they're going to recycle the claim, they're going to get the same answers in return.

Man, that's aggravating. Even a dog learns after a few swats to the nose with a rolled up newspaper.



Bravo.
Click to expand...


First Time In History

The South Tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m.



Second Time In History

10:28 a.m. the North Tower collapsed.



Third Time In History

7 World Trade Center collapsed at 5:21 p.m.


Incredible.

Swamp land in Florida comes to mind.
 
alienentity said:
tmd2_1 and TZ are engaging in a combination of Call To Perfection Fallacy, Equivocation Fallacy and Arguments from Incredulity.

When confronted with the fact that FDNY expected 7 to collapse, partly due to an unidentified engineer's assessment, they invoke the Call To Perfection fallacy, demanding that it would be impossible to make this prediction without understanding EXACTLY how it was going to collapse.

When confronted with an EXACT explanation of the collapse they immediately deflect it by claiming variously (insert your argument from incredulity here) that the freefall somehow invalidates the explanation - actually that is just a simple lie, but it's disguised as an incredulous statement. You see, the equivocation is that somehow Freefall = CD, but that is actually not a scientific fact; Truthers have simply come to believe this by conflating freefall with CD.

The gist of all this is that they handwave everything away, whether it's an off-the-cuff estimate on the day or a multiyear investigation. None of it, they claim, is valid - except of course their claims.

In my experience this form of argumentation is not different from that of no-planers or steel-to-foam/dust theorists. It relies heavily on refusing to accept any evidence or analysis which contradicts the conspiracists claim.
Click to expand...

+1

Clayton Moore said:
First Time In History

The South Tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m.



Second Time In History

10:28 a.m. the North Tower collapsed.



Third Time In History

7 World Trade Center collapsed at 5:21 p.m.


Incredible.

Swamp land in Florida comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right, Clay, buildings usually only collapse once. What's your point?
 
Clayton Moore said:
First Time In History

The South Tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m.



Second Time In History

10:28 a.m. the North Tower collapsed.



Third Time In History

7 World Trade Center collapsed at 5:21 p.m.


Incredible.

Swamp land in Florida comes to mind.
Click to expand...

What's your point?

What's wrong with swamp land in Florida? Can't build on it?

Might want to check that with Walt Disney.
 
Myriad said:
Of course you're not. You're not moving at all.




What led him to that determination was extensive fire safety engineering knowledge applied to appreciation of the present circumstances, which included a large damaged steel skyscraper being on fire and the fire being un-fought from the start, which had never happened before that day, and had resulted in collapses both previous times it happened that day.

Being able to extrapolate unprecedented outcomes from unprecedented current conditions is admirable, but hardly superhuman. If Hoover Dam broke upstream of you, wouldn't you know enough to run away to higher ground, even though no dam of that type has ever broken before?




Oh, yeah, of course that's why you want to know his name, so you can honor him for his excellent and life-saving engineering work. Not so you can publicly accuse him of being complicit in mass murder, or make sure his name perpetually comes up associated with lunatic conspiracy theories in Google searches or anything like that. :rolleyes:

Enough heroes died that day to make people who did their jobs well, and succeeded in preventing things from becoming even worse, reluctant to be regarded as heroes themselves. We can admire their competent actions without knowing their names, and the spiteful few with malevolent designs on them (however petty and feckless) can go to hell.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...

As I said I have no intention of going around in circles with you. If you want to believe someone predicting something that has never happened, go right ahead. Most people would think it absurd that a building the size of WTC7 would collapse with some fires. Really the next time you are near a building the size of 7 just picture some fires going on through the building, and imagine that causing a complete collapse? It's absurd to think that will happen. Yet this guy was able to predict it. But if you want to believe it that's your business.

As far as me wanting to know who he is, I'm really not sure what you're getting at. Yes I would want to know who he is, so he can be questioned, but I was figuring since he did such a great thing, and it's no big deal, why not come out? I mean no big deal right? But I know, us crazy "twoofers" might do something to him. Because all the other people suspected of being involved by "twoofers" have been hurt in some way?
 
tmd2_1 said:
As I said I have no intention of going around in circles with you. If you want to believe someone predicting something that has never happened, go right ahead. Most people would think it absurd that a building the size of WTC7 would collapse with some fires. Really the next time you are near a building the size of 7 just picture some fires going on through the building, and imagine that causing a complete collapse? It's absurd to think that will happen. Yet this guy was able to predict it. But if you want to believe it that's your business.
Click to expand...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
 
alienentity said:
tmd2_1 and TZ are engaging in a combination of Call To Perfection Fallacy, Equivocation Fallacy and Arguments from Incredulity.

When confronted with the fact that FDNY expected 7 to collapse, partly due to an unidentified engineer's assessment, they invoke the Call To Perfection fallacy, demanding that it would be impossible to make this prediction without understanding EXACTLY how it was going to collapse.

When confronted with an EXACT explanation of the collapse they immediately deflect it by claiming variously (insert your argument from incredulity here) that the freefall somehow invalidates the explanation - actually that is just a simple lie, but it's disguised as an incredulous statement. You see, the equivocation is that somehow Freefall = CD, but that is actually not a scientific fact; Truthers have simply come to believe this by conflating freefall with CD.

The gist of all this is that they handwave everything away, whether it's an off-the-cuff estimate on the day or a multiyear investigation. None of it, they claim, is valid - except of course their claims.

In my experience this form of argumentation is not different from that of no-planers or steel-to-foam/dust theorists. It relies heavily on refusing to accept any evidence or analysis which contradicts the conspiracists claim.
Click to expand...

No we're engaging in common sense. When someone predicts something that has never happened before or since, really has no basis to predict, then it takes 7 years to get a report full of impossibilities, it should leave most people asking questions. But not here, it's all perfectly normal.
 
tmd2_1 said:
As I said I have no intention of going around in circles with you. If you want to believe someone predicting something that has never happened, go right ahead. Most people would think it absurd that a building the size of WTC7 would collapse with some fires. Really the next time you are near a building the size of 7 just picture some fires going on through the building, and imagine that causing a complete collapse? It's absurd to think that will happen. Yet this guy was able to predict it. But if you want to believe it that's your business.
Click to expand...
Most people have absolutely no experience evaluating the integrity of a 47 story skyscraper on fire. Their judgements would be about as valid as your average Joe would be for open-heart surgery. There is a reason there is an extensive field of study about the nature and effects of fire and building collapses.

For someone who says they won't (i.e.: can't) argue about it, you sure seem determined to get the last word. I assume that's why your only counter to Myriad's point about precedent is bald incredulity and repeating the same claim, and why you're not really responding to my posts at all.

As far as me wanting to know who he is, I'm really not sure what you're getting at. Yes I would want to know who he is, so he can be questioned, but I was figuring since he did such a great thing, and it's no big deal, why not come out? I mean no big deal right? But I know, us crazy "twoofers" might do something to him. Because all the other people suspected of being involved by "twoofers" have been hurt in some way?
Click to expand...
I'd say having nutjobs attempting to contact him might be considered "harm", yes.

Why are you and Tony so reluctant to discuss the fact that you are accusing the FDNY of complicity in thousands of murders? How about a CD in a building on fire? Has that ever been done before?
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
As I said I have no intention of going around in circles with you. If you want to believe someone predicting something that has never happened, go right ahead. Most people would think it absurd that a building the size of WTC7 would collapse with some fires. Really the next time you are near a building the size of 7 just picture some fires going on through the building, and imagine that causing a complete collapse? It's absurd to think that will happen. Yet this guy was able to predict it. But if you want to believe it that's your business.
Click to expand...


And as I said, predicting that something will happen that is already in the process of happening is quite possible for a knowledgeable person, even if it hasn't happened before.

Predicting that the Titanic would sink, as she's leaving the docks in England, would require a prophet. Predicting she will sink, as she's at dead stop with her hull ripped open and water half filling the fore compartments, not so much. And yet, the details were not investigated or known until nearly a century later.

Waking up at dawn on 9/11 and predicting that WTC7 would collapse that day would require a prophet. But no one actually made such a prediction, not even the terrorists who were planning to attack the towers nearby. But once it was already on fire, already damaged, already leaning, and already clear that no suppression systems could be made operational and no firefighting effort would take place, predicting that it would collapse after a few hours was reasonable for someone with the relevant expertise. Despite no one knowing which girder would dislodge first (which is why NIST investigated that), the eventual failure was still predictably inevitable.

That ordinary people could not have made such a prediction using "common sense" is irrelevant. Common sense does not encompass the performance of steel structural systems and fire-resistant coatings in large-scale fires.

As far as me wanting to know who he is, I'm really not sure what you're getting at. Yes I would want to know who he is, so he can be questioned, but I was figuring since he did such a great thing, and it's no big deal, why not come out? I mean no big deal right? But I know, us crazy "twoofers" might do something to him. Because all the other people suspected of being involved by "twoofers" have been hurt in some way?
Click to expand...


"So he can be questioned." That's a bit more honest at least.

People "suspected" by Truthers have been harassed, libeled, and targeted with frivolous lawsuits. Those are all forms of harm. Are you promising that wouldn't happen again? If so, how do you intend this "questioning" of the FDNY engineer should take place? Do you mean a reporter goes to his house and interviews him over coffee, or did you have something more rigorous in mind? Or did you just mean the kind of "questioning" that involves declaring him a traitor behind his back on a thousand wacko Web sites, as it has for others?

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
... Most people would think it absurd that a building the size of WTC7 would collapse with some fires. Really the next time you are near a building the size of 7 just picture some fires going on through the building, and imagine that causing a complete collapse? It's absurd to think that will happen. ...
Click to expand...

What is easier to build and not have it collapse immediately:
A dog house
or
A skyscraper?

Can you build a dog house? Would you trust your dog to live in one that you built?
Can you build a skyscraper? Would you trust your dog to live in one that you built?

I think it is most obvious that it is harder to keep bigger buildings from collapsing, and easier to keep smaller buildings from collapsing. That's why ordinary people build sheds with confidence, ordinary architects and engineers build ordinary houses, and skyscrapers are only built by the best specialists.


Now you seem to imply that making building bigger protects them from collapse.


A truly stupid idea.
 
tmd2_1 said:
No we're engaging in common sense. When someone predicts something that has never happened before or since, really has no basis to predict, then it takes 7 years to get a report full of impossibilities, it should leave most people asking questions. But not here, it's all perfectly normal.
Click to expand...

When this unnamed engineer predicted that WTC7 would fall, how many skyscrapers had collapsed from fires by then?
  • 0
  • 1
  • >1
Only one answer is right.

You claim 0. I give you a hint: That answer is FALSE.

Do you understand why?
 
tmd2_1 said:
No we're engaging in common sense. When someone predicts something that has never happened before
Click to expand...

Every technological invention or scientific discovery that has been made was based on predictions of things that never happened before.

No prompt critical event had ever happened before July 16th, 1945, no heavier than air craft had ever flown prior to December 17th, 1903, no transistor based computer had ever functioned prior to November 1953, no binary signal had ever been sent over wires before 1832... etc...

By your reasoning, all of human history has been faked, we're all still living in caves and swinging from tress and we're not having this conversation.

or since,
Click to expand...

No 110 storey skyscraper has evern been toppled into a 47 storey skyscraper since 9/11.

I'm sure that the next time one does, you'll be here telling us how smart you are and how the events occurred exactly as you predicted thus proving 9/11 was an inside job.

Or you'll be telling us how smart you are and how the events did not go as you predicted, thus proving 9/11 was an inside job.


then it takes 7 years to get a report full of impossibilities,
Click to expand...

If there was anything impossible in the report, more than one in two thousand engineers would have said something.
 
tmd2_1 said:
When someone predicts something that has never happened before
Click to expand...

BTW, Aluminum oxide and iron had never been combined in an exothermic reaction until a german chemist just happened to mix some up in 1895 and PRESTO! First time ever, despite it never happening before.

This proves that not only was 9/11 faked, but the way in which is was faked was faked. it was a double faked false-flase flag psuedo terrorist attack carried out by agents of the thermite industry pretending to be government agents pretending to be terrorists in order to boost sales of thermite, which of course is all fake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom