$1M Controlled Demolition Challenge?

[Jackanory]

I think that logic and visual evidence alone is convincing enough to a layman. The impact floors were basically all but gone, giving a 2 floor + void for the floors above to fall unrestricted - as they did.

The very fact that clear visual evidence from all angles show that the top of both towers listed and effectively dropped inside intself in a V or wedge shape. It did not remain upright - as shown in many models.

This i believe affects the way in which that section behaved as it fell. It literally cut through the entire height as it dropped.

In my eyes it was probably guided by the buildings own central core supports. These supports being already weekened are then simply forced outwards, cracking the concrete floors ahead of any weight coming down. Hence the visual lateral displacement of all that material.

That, in laymans terms, is how i see it.

 

[Drs_Res]

In my minds eye I strip away the floors and the cladding and see only the massive interbraced steel structure. Then I imagine the whole thing as a line 13 units long falling a tiny distance to land on a slightly thicker line 97 units long. Then I watch the13 units push the 97 units into the ground. Then I say.....Nah.

Bill, if you did nothing but: "strip away the floors and the cladding" what do you think would happen to the building?

 

[bill smith]

'But pore ole Les completely forgot that the core ws still intact preventing the floors falling free. the drop was only 20 inches anyway. Pore ole Les.'

Bill, congratulations! You are arrogant enough to believe you know more than the original SE on the towers.

I rest my case. Ignorance and arrogance in a toxic combination produces anti-knowledge. Always has, always will.

It's back to the dark ages of critical thinking.

I think Les and many others are very economical with the Truth. lol

 

[bill smith]

Bill, if you did nothing but: "strip away the floors and the cladding" what do you think would happen to the building?

This was an analogy to provide an uncomplicated visual. I am aware that the floors formed part of the interbracing.

 

[tsig]

I suppose you can run your real world replica test side by side with Heiwa running his paper based one. The more activity on the 9/11 front the better. I think the world's engineers would prefer to sit in a bar in the evenings after work examining the oficial story to see if they can validate it and win one million dollars. If they find that they cannot they can contact www.ae911truth.org for advice and councelling on what to do next.
www.ae911truth.org

So some engineers chit-chatting in a bar are going to prove CDs?

Do you really think that engineers worldwide have not analyzed 911?

 

[tsig]

Nah....I think it should be offered to engineers as a puzzle to work out on paper. The object might be to coerce or shame Bazant into showing up himself so Heiwa can dismantle him in the full light of publicity . There would have to be a time limit on he offer too. Otherwise it could go on forever.

Engineering problems are not solved by "cagematches" or public debates.

 

[tsig]

In my minds eye I strip away the floors and the cladding and see only the massive interbraced steel structure. Then I imagine the whole thing as a line 13 units long falling a tiny distance to land on a slightly thicker line 97 units long. Then I watch the13 units push the 97 units into the ground. Then I say.....Nah.

You got X-Ray vision?

Your mind's eye needs an optometrist.

 

[A W Smith]

Heiwa has lots of catching up to do.

Nah....I think it should be offered to engineers as a puzzle to work out on paper. The object might be to coerce or shame Bazant into showing up himself so Heiwa can dismantle him in the full light of publicity . There would have to be a time limit on he offer too. Otherwise it could go on forever.

Heres a thought, Why doesn't Anders Bjorkman get published first? Bjorkman has yet to put a single equation to paper. He is an utter fool.

http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/docs/Bazant/publicat.pdf

 

[alienentity]

Gentlemen, isn't it high time to throw Bill's Heiwa and A&E apologia out the window, and challenge the 'truth' movement to demonstrate a real-world demolition?

You could have the finest minds on the planet come up with intricate and perfected physics calculations, and guys like Heiwa will just trash it with pseudo-analysis, followed by their lay-person wrecking balls.

THEY are the ones who must be tasked with PROVING unambiguously that their pet theories are in fact correct,by a demonstration.

That's what this thread is about.

 

[R.Mackey]

big sigh.

This is SO ridiculous. The Truth Movement has been going for over seven years now, so it's become harder for them to top themselves, but they have.

Why are you offering a million bucks? I'll see you and raise you a hundred million.

Think I'm kidding? Consider this: The insurance payouts at the WTC alone totaled roughly $5 billion. Now, if someone could actually prove that it wasn't a result of terrorism, but instead a covert action by the U.S. Government, the insurance companies would be getting that back.

So if you have this information -- for real, not make-believe posturing on an obscure message board -- go talk to them. Name your finder's fee. I'll bet they'd peel off 2% for you, no matter how insane or inept a negotiator you are.

But, no, you're arguing here. Wasting your time and your brilliant insight here. Gee, I wonder why.

---

On the flip side, you're all up in arms over Heiwa and his "million dollar" challenge. This is even stupider. If there's anyone who believes Mr. Bjorkman has a million bucks he's willing to stake on a fair contest, while his pet organization AE911T is holding a pledge drive -- and failing -- to raise a measly $6,000 for a booth at an AIA meeting, then you need your skeptic filters adjusted. (One also wonders why they're running a booth rather than presenting papers... but then, no one doesn't.)

Think about this, carefully. They aren't going to pay out if we can show it to them. They'll only pay out (at best) if we convince them that we've showed it to them, and this is fundamentally impossible.

We've already seen what Mr. Bjorkman claims is impossible happen, in real life, twice. It's among the most watched clips in the history of the human race. It was covered by every single news organization that could field a camera. Innumerable investigations, reports, interviews, books, and follow-ups confirm the facts. But they deny it. Even though they can't even offer even a single coherent alternate explanation.

Next they challenge scientists to prove it can happen. It's already been done! I can name papers from three different teams, off the top of my head, that all agree the progressive, total collapse was not only possible, but inevitable. Will they pay out to these people? Of course not. They'd rather drag legitimate researchers' names through the mud. Just look at the abuse heaped on Dr. Bazant, in particular, even though he's published more science on September 11th in a mere two days than the entire Truth Movement has managed in over seven years!

So now there's a "contest." The money doesn't exist, but no matter. Basically, in addition to the raw power of denial, we are now giving them a financial incentive to deny reality. The harder they deny, the less they have to pay.

Why make it even more difficult for them to let go of their delusions?

Yes, they started it, but a sick person rarely knows he or she is sick. It's up to us not to play these idiotic schoolyard games. Do the right thing.

 

[Drs_Res]

This was an analogy to provide an uncomplicated visual. I am aware that the floors formed part of the interbracing.

And that is not an answer.

What happens to the building if you remove that part of the structure?

 

[Arus808]

Gage, Fetzer et al will have to find engineers who are even capable of creating brand new, never-before-seen nanothermite explosive charges which cut laterally. That will probably take a few years to develop.

uh..actually they need to use the EXACT mechanism that was use in 2001. What can be made 9 years later wouldn't qualify, since its...9 years later.

since no "never before seen nanothermite explosive charges that cut laterally" existed in 2001, then that part of the challenge is already debunked.

 

[alienentity]

Dr Mackey,

Is this not the whole point of presenting a challenge, as jref has done for years?

I value your response on this thread, and I did invite suggestions, including 'get lost you idiot'. Your point is taken.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Mr Mackey has a good point, but I'm replying because it's a fun topic.

I can't modify the 1st post anymore, so here's a repost with mods:

Proposed $1M Controlled Demolition Challenge

1) A controlled demolition of a highrise steel-structured building without conventional explosives
2) Some form of Thermite or Thermate (nano thermite as well) as proposed by Dr. Steven Jones must be used
3) Energy Beam weapons could be used (as proposed by Fetzer/Wood et al) provided they were positioned in near-earth orbit. Ground-based weapons would not qualify.
4) No blasting caps, det cord or any other conventional means of detonation can be used - since no evidence was found at WTC collapse sites
4a) If conventional methods were used, any evidence of such found after demolition would disqualify the challengers.
5) Buildings would have to collapse in a fashion essentially identical to the 9/11 collapses, (WTC7 or WTC1 and 2, whichever is chosen as the model)
6) Pools of molten steel would need to be produced as a byproduct of the demolition, as claimed by Jones and Gage
7) Debris fires at temperatures of at least 1500 celsius would need to be present for several weeks after demolition.
8) a) Security personnel simulating the presence of office workers or equivalents must be present day-to-day while demolition charges are put in place.
b) Eyewitnesses on the day of the 'demolition' must judge the building collapse.



Please feel free to propose refinements and modifications to the above, as well as any other suggestions (such as 'get lost you idiot') to improve the regime.

9) The building must fall "faster than freefall", so the floors must collapse sequentially faster than the debris is falling.

 

[tfk]

AlienE,

I like the idea of "role reversal" to try to let someone see what they are demanding. And to find out if they'll be as demanding of themselves as they are of others.

And, with that in mind, let me offer a (fantastical) thought experiment.

Suppose that a whole bunch of PhDs, Professional Engineers, etc, got together, did elaborate analyses & testing, fabricated themselves a bunch of carefully crafted experiments that were validated each step along the way, and then built & tested a slew of WTC models that showed that the towers should NOT have collapsed. And subsequently, the analyses & experiments were reviewed by the engineering community at large & found to be valid.

What do you think would be the Twoofers' response if we were to reject all the evidence of these experiments & analyses that were laid open before us ...

... because we claimed that the experimenters, and the engineering community at large, were "politically motivated" or cowards?

Just curious if they can see themselves in the mirror.

tom

 

[R.Mackey]

Dr Mackey,

Is this not the whole point of presenting a challenge, as jref has done for years?

I value your response on this thread, and I did invite suggestions, including 'get lost you idiot'. Your point is taken.

There is a material difference between the JREF Million Dollar Challenge and the stunted creation here. For starters, the JREF actually has a million dollars.

More importantly, the JREF MDC sets no a priori guidelines, but instead pushes the applicant to get her act together and propose a working protocol. Those who cannot are disregarded. This minimizes making fun of the intellectually challenged and the insane.

The Truth Movement has had 90 months to come up with a protocol, between all of them. They haven't got one. Time to close the book.

ETA: P.S.: I have several degrees, but no Ph.D. "Mr." is fine, mmm'kay?

 

[TJM]

For starters, the JREF actually has a million dollars.

Thanks. That made my morning. And my iPhone still works even though I just spit coffee all over it.

 

[alienentity]

The Truth Movement has had 90 months to come up with a protocol, between all of them. They haven't got one. Time to close the book.

ETA: P.S.: I have several degrees, but no Ph.D. "Mr." is fine, mmm'kay?

Thank you for clarifying Mr. Mackey. I apologize for mixing up your credentials.

I think I understand some of your views, I don't share all your sentiments. This is merely a little thread to discuss and refine an idea, that's all. There is no pretense beyond that.
I would never suggest that JREF would ever be involved in something like it either.

peace

AE

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

3) Energy Beam weapons could be used (as proposed by Fetzer/Wood et al) provided they were positioned in near-earth orbit. Ground-based weapons would not qualify.

Can we use a ground based weapon in concert with an orbital reflector?

 

[alienentity]

Can we use a ground based weapon in concert with an orbital reflector?

Well, I guess to be fair we need to allow that. We don't want to artificially limit the possibilities.

I'd be interested to see them test the system (after building it first). According to a paper by Dr. Greg Jenkins titled 'The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish
the World Trade Center Towers'


'If no counter force is provided, then a massive reflecting satellite of
22,400 kg, the maximum payload of the space shuttle, 36 would accelerate toward the outer reaches of the solar system at 276 g. It would be travelingat 60,000 miles/hour away from the earth after demolishing one WTC tower.'

I'm sure these are just a few small technical problems which will be solved readily.