ae911truth and their research

[Scott Sommers]

For someone who claims to be intelligent, you seem to have not considered the possibility that Beachnut is basing his opinion on other, older posts of RP's, since they've both been here much longer than you.

I was going to link to the Rocket's original post, but the mods, those agents of New World Order censorship, beat me to it. Anyway, it you're concerned about the intelligence of Truther or debunkers, I suggest you take a look at this post
Conspiracy Theorists have low I.Q. scores.
Posts where I discuss the technical meaning of intelligence - and there is only a technical meaning - begin with post #38.

And before anyone goes off talking about cognitive dissonance, have a look at this post.
The Cognitive Mechanisms of 9/11 Conspiracy Beliefs

 

[swright777]

Stop being so naive.
...

Did you seriously post that?

 

[Mark F]

Stop being so naive. The number of coincidences required for your beloved OCT to work is through the roof. There have been actual estimates done on showing that this is so. You have married yourself to a narrative which makes less sense that a crappy hollywood action movie, and roll your eyes at anyone who dares point out the gaping plot holes in this fictious work. In fact, there was a humorous post by a guy making just this analogy, which I'm going to copy and shove down your throat:

"Directed by a beardy-guy (Tim Osman) from a cave in Afghanistan, nineteen hard-drinking, coke-snorting, devout Muslims enjoy lap dances before their mission to meet Allah…Using nothing more than craft knifes, they overpower cabin crew, passengers and pilots on four planes…And hangover or not, they manage to give the world’s most sophisticated air defense system the slip…Unphased by leaving their “How to Fly a Passenger Jet” guide in the car at the airport, they master the controls in no-time and score direct hits on two towers, causing THREE to collapse completely…Our masterminds even manage to overpower the odd law of physics or two… and the world watches in awe as steel-framed buildings fall symmetrically – through their own mass – at free-fall speed, for the first time in history. Despite all their dastardly cunning, they stupidly give their identity away by using explosion-proof passports, which survive the fireball undamaged and fall to the ground… only to be discovered by the incredible crime-fighting sleuths at the FBI Meanwhile down in Washington…Hani Hanjour, having previously flunked 2-man Cessna flying school, gets carried away with all the success of the day and suddenly finds incredible abilities behind the controls of a Boeing…Instead of flying straight down into the large roof area of the Pentagon, he decides to show off a little…Executing an incredible 270 degree downward spiral, he levels off to hit the low facade of the world’s most heavily defended building……all without a single shot being fired…. or ruining the nicely mowed lawn… and all at a speed just too fast to capture on video..."

"Later, in the skies above Pennsylvania…So desperate to talk to loved ones before their death, some passengers use sheer willpower to connect mobile calls that otherwise would not be possible until several years later…And following a heroic attempt by some to retake control of Flight 93, it crashes into a Shankesville field leaving no trace of engines, fuselage or occupants… except for the standard issue Muslim terrorists bandana... Further south in Florida…President Bush, our brave Commander-in-Chief continues to read “My Pet Goat” to a class full of primary school children… shrugging off the obvious possibility that his life could be in imminent danger…In New York…Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein blesses his own foresight in insuring the buildings against terrorist attack only six weeks previously…While back in Washington, Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz shake their heads in disbelief at their own luck in getting the ‘New Pearl Harbor’ catalyzing event they so desired to pursue their agenda of world domination…And finally, not to be disturbed too much by reports of their own deaths, at least seven of our nineteen suicide hijackers turn up alive and kicking in Lamestream media reports."

This is like a greatest hits collection of all the worst, dumbest, most long-ago discredited and wildly exaggerated claims in all of 9/11 Trutherdom.

I assume its a joke.

 

[DGM]

This is like a greatest hits collection of all the worst, dumbest, most long-ago discredited and wildly exaggerated claims in all of 9/11 Trutherdom.

I assume its a joke.

His definition of "coincidences" must be unique. I can't spot a single one.

 

[Mark F]

They are all about demolition and thermite. So they want a new "independent" (aka truther minded) investigation similar to what NIST did, but one which would reach a conclusion that they prefer.

The petition calls for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives.

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

AE911T's petition calling for a new investigation is not the same as "disagreement with NIST's collapse sequence". The petition merely speaks of "sufficient doubt" and does NOT CLAIM use of explosives in a CD. All these A&E's have signed is a request for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives, an inquiry which had not yet been completed when the petition was created in 2007 but has been done since (NCSTAR 1-9 "Hypothetical Blast Scenarios", Appendix D). Gage for some reason leaves that part out.

 

[LSSBB]

The petition calls for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives.

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

AE911T's petition calling for a new investigation is not the same as "disagreement with NIST's collapse sequence". The petition merely speaks of "sufficient doubt" and does NOT CLAIM use of explosives in a CD. All these A&E's have signed is a request for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives, an inquiry which had not yet been completed when the petition was created in 2007 but has been done since (NCSTAR 1-9 "Hypothetical Blast Scenarios", Appendix D). Gage for some reason leaves that part out.

"For locations where sound propagation was unobstructed, the sound level from all building perimeter openings at 1 km would have been approximately 130 dB to 140 dB". And that was just to get column 79.

 

[000063]

For comparison, a rock concert is usually put at around 100 dB. 120 is jackhammers. 140 or so is a gunshot or military jet taking off.

If there was a blast, there would be evidence of barotrauma and deafness. There would be no question about it, no need to cherry-pick quotes about things that "sounded like" explosions.

 

[jaydeehess]

The petition calls for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives.

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

AE911T's petition calling for a new investigation is not the same as "disagreement with NIST's collapse sequence". The petition merely speaks of "sufficient doubt" and does NOT CLAIM use of explosives in a CD. All these A&E's have signed is a request for a new investigation that examines the possible use of explosives, an inquiry which had not yet been completed when the petition was created in 2007 but has been done since (NCSTAR 1-9 "Hypothetical Blast Scenarios", Appendix D). Gage for some reason leaves that part out.

While the wording of the petition is ad you describe, there have been other very public claims made by members of AE921T that directly dispute various aspects of the NIST reports. One such is the fire spread investigation wrt WTC7. The specific claim concerns, of course, the duration and temp of fire gasses near the area of beam expansion that eventually led to the failure of col 79.
Now it would be relatively easy for a group of trained engineers to perform their own fire spread and gas temp fea. However instead of coming up with values for combustibles , air infiltration, wall construction and other parameters and then plugging this data into one or more fire Sim software programs, they instead insisted that NIST give them the input parameters that NIST utilized and when refused this they made noise about this. The inference being that NIST was hiding deliberately fudged input data and or deliberately fudged computer results. It is therefore apparent that AE911T wanted to rerun the exact same NIST Sim to determine if it resulted in the same results that NIST published and to nitpick issuses of input parameters. This approach, obviously, presupposes malfeasance on the part of NIST, it is an approach designed to demonstrate NIST mistreatment of the investigation, and not an approach designed as a new independent line of investigation..
So what have the members, the architects and engineers of AE911T, done concerning research into WTC7 fire simulation? Not a thing! Instead , AE911T posted and endorsed the treatise put together by Christopher Sarns. This consists of a series of computer diagrams he created himself based on his assumptions on fire duration and spread for which he used a few simplistic assumptions; that fire would spread to adjacent compartments only, and that that fire duration in any one location would be about 30 minutes.
One wonders first of all why engineers would leave this type of report to a carpenter and why they would endorse one so based on a simplistic and highly subjective approach.

 

[jaydeehess]

For comparison, a rock concert is usually put at around 100 dB. 120 is jackhammers. 140 or so is a gunshot or military jet taking off.

If there was a blast, there would be evidence of barotrauma and deafness. There would be no question about it, no need to cherry-pick quotes about things that "sounded like" explosions.

I experienced a 0.95 Mach low altitude fly by of a CF18 fighter at an airshow yesterday. After that the Canadian flight acrobatic team the "Snowbirds" performed. That is a dozen Tudor jet trainers, subsonic and generally below 400 knots. There is no way one would mistake the sound of a Tudor even at max speed for the sound of an F18 at 710 mph, the later being noticeable as louder than even multiple Tudors.

By the same token, truthers would have us believe that the loud noises inherent in a collapsing structure are sufficient to be attributed instead to the sound of high explosive detonations.

 

[Mark F]

"For locations where sound propagation was unobstructed, the sound level from all building perimeter openings at 1 km would have been approximately 130 dB to 140 dB". And that was just to get column 79.

There is a simple way around this. Just do what the producers of Loose Change did: when you compare a video of an actual CD to a video of 7 going down, simply mute the audio of the CD.

Problem solved.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

So I suppose what I am asking is what more research and investigation do ae911truth expect to do to complete their investigation.

Everything they have done to date has been widely refuted and even ridiculed. What more do they want to do and how much money do they think it wold take.

If you're looking for a serious answer to that it's difficult to answer in one stroke. What research they're willing to do is only a fraction of issues that surround them, as it's frankly untenable if the assumptions they utilize for the experiments is based on erroneous knowledge. Some of their problems lie not with their evidence or assumptions about the events that day, but with some of the most fundamental concepts of design and engineering.

Are they willing to approach their research with proper procedure, approach, and knowledge? Are they then willing to undertake the research to support their theories? What if their conclusions don't connect with their underlying assumptions? Unlikely these'll ever be really answered, or rather, they are answered without them doing anything further, unless their base assumptions are rectified.

 

[Sabretooth]

This is essentially what I'm talking about. You need to go through a ton of information before you can begin to intimately understand the official narrative, and whether or not it actually holds water. I have concluded, for various reasons, that it does not. Unfortunately, that has the end result of putting me in a black hole, where I have had to assemble disparate bits of data to come to conclusions, and rely on speculative or circumstancial evidence to generate a narrative. As far out as a false flag attack would appear to the layman, it is the only plausible explaination for myself at this point, which I offer no apologys for.

Apparently, you've never heard of Occam's Razor.

 

[Miragememories]

"Apparently, you've never heard of Occam's Razor."

"the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"

That would be confirmation that WTC7 was a CD.

MM

 

[000063]

"the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"

That would be confirmation that WTC7 was a CD.

MM

So you think "fire made the building fall" is a simpler explanation than "top-secret explosives with unknown properties that would have to match no conventional explosives were smuggled into one of the busiest areas of Manhattan, secretly planted in a building in an unconventional fashion, and worked perfectly despite having been exposed to fire for several hours in a building that sustained random damage that just happened not to damage the explosives"?

 

[Dave Rogers]

So you think "fire made the building fall" is a simpler explanation than "top-secret explosives with unknown properties that would have to match no conventional explosives were smuggled into one of the busiest areas of Manhattan, secretly planted in a building in an unconventional fashion, and worked perfectly despite having been exposed to fire for several hours in a building that sustained random damage that just happened not to damage the explosives"?

And didn't go bang or leave any discernible evidence of their use in the rubble left behind. Apparently that makes it an even simpler explanation.

Dave

 

[TheJamesrocket]

Apparently, you've never heard of Occam's Razor.

There are only two things a debunker can say that will put a real smile on my face. One is when they believe that the law of parsimony is something they can use to bolster their position.

But please, why don't you go ahead and tell me how occams razor proves the official story?

 

[000063]

James, please see post 54. Most truther theories aren't just more complicated than the OS, they're often physically impossible.

 

[Sabretooth]

There are only two things a debunker can say that will put a real smile on my face. One is when they believe that the law of parsimony is something they can use to bolster their position.

But please, why don't you go ahead and tell me how occams razor proves the official story?

19 terrorists take advantage of airline protocol to allow hijackers to take over a plane...who then use that loophole to fool the crew and passengers into believing they are returning to the airport to have "demands" met...then intentionally fly into the WTC and Pentagon.

Yes, it's that simple.

Earlier in this thread, you said:

Stop being so naive. The number of coincidences required for your beloved OCT to work is through the roof.

I'd like to know what world you live in where your ridiculous web of pure crap is somehow more realistic than that of the "OCT". For any CT to work, you'd need far more than coincidence...you'd have to suspend reality.
Nano-thermite cutters installed without a single witness? Demolitions without noise? The thousands and thousands of participants that would be required to either set up the operation or turn a blind eye? All to set up a false flag to gain public support to start a war claiming retaliation which is really a war to take over Middle East oil?

You can have your proprietary reasoning. Believe me...no one wants it.

 

[Miragememories]

"So you think "fire made the building fall" is a simpler explanation..."

Do you read what you write?

I think that; "fire made the building fall", is easily the most complicated scenario.

If office furnishing's fires orchestrated that complex, total demolition of WTC7, than they were directed by human intelligence.

MM

 

[Sabretooth]

Do you read what you write?

I think that; "fire made the building fall", is easily the most complicated scenario.

If office furnishing's fires orchestrated that complex, total demolition of WTC7, than they were directed by human intelligence.

MM

You keep harping on that CD nonsense with absolutely no theory.

Let's see...normal people look at the facts & evidence...such as:

1. Fires in 7 start by collapse of North tower
2. Fires spread due to being unfought and uncontrolled.
3. Fires slowly destroy the interior structure over a period of 8 hours.
4. Support structure begins to fail internally over a period of time as reported by witnesses.
5. Complete failure of internal structure brings down WTC7.

Then...we have your CT theory...

5. It must be a CD.
4. It looks funny.
3. Science must be wrong.
2. Not sure.
1. Don't know.

You CTer's have been harping on this CD nonsense for years and not a single one of you have bothered offering so much as a single sentence to a hypothesis as to how it was carried out.

You are working backward. You do not start with a conclusion and then go back to fit square pegs in the round holes. That's stupid. What's even more stupid is that CTer's then try to task debunkers with disproving a conclusion that is pure fantasy. It's maddening to listen to this pure crap year after year after year after year and none of you folks in the CD crowd has presented a minute shred of fact that explains away any documented event of 9/11.

Truthers have failed. Miserably. The movement is dead. Go on with your life.