Merged 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[T.A.M.]

I only ever put one person on my ignore list... and it had nothing to do with 911 conspiracues... Unfortunately I seem to have some weird immunity to the utter stupid and aggravation from reading it...

Breaking news!!!!!! NWO infantry squad caught in action!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r38JNjFh0c

Wait...it comes. I spent a whole year here without a single person on ignore.

It wears ya down man!

TAM

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Wait...it comes. I spent a whole year here without a single person on ignore.

It wears ya down man!

TAM

I'm constantly tempted but my curiosity always (so far) gets the better of me

 

[funk de fino]

Wait...it comes. I spent a whole year here without a single person on ignore.

It wears ya down man!

TAM

I have never done it yet, but Christopher7 performance in an ongoing thread is putting him pretty close.

I would miss him trying to weasel out of the devastating witness testimony I have provided in his WTC7 thread though. He has ignored that thread for a few days now, even though it was pretty much the only one he posted in for a while.

 

[T.A.M.]

I have never done it yet, but Christopher7 performance in an ongoing thread is putting him pretty close.

I would miss him trying to weasel out of the devastating witness testimony I have provided in his WTC7 thread though. He has ignored that thread for a few days now, even though it was pretty much the only one he posted in for a while.

I guess everyone is different. I am use to people listening, taking my advice, when I explain things to them in the real world. The truthers are a different animal. I get fed up, and rather than allow them to continue to frustrate me, on ignore they go.

TAM

 

[bignickel]

Driving to work this morning, there were truthers on the highway crossover walkway, holding up a big 'inside job' sign. Bleh.

Why are these guys still around? Didn't someone tell them that Bush administration is gone?

 

[eromitlab]

They're just adapting to changing political conditions. When one's enemies are entirely imaginary, it's easier to re-shape them as needed to continue the fantasy.

 

[DavidJames]

Why are these guys still around? Didn't someone tell them that Bush administration is gone?

They are still around because the name or party of the person in the White House is irrelevant to most 9/11 CTists.

 

[T.A.M.]

Driving to work this morning, there were truthers on the highway crossover walkway, holding up a big 'inside job' sign. Bleh.

Why are these guys still around? Didn't someone tell them that Bush administration is gone?

was it a snow day at the local junior high by chance?

TAM

 

[Thunder]

Truther just can't understand why folks don't believe him

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/1194056/1/

Its fascinating to me how truthers just can't handle the fact that soo many American refuse to believe that 9-11 was an inside job.

All I can say is....this is exactly how we feel about them.

How in the name of God, considering ALL the evidence, testimony, investigations, research, can anyone still believe that 19 Islamist hijackers did not do it?

Talk about living in a dream world. Talk about obsessive denial. Talk about refusing to accept the simple truth.

But maybe that's the crux of the problem. The truth is just too simple. Some human beings just can't handle simple answers to complex problems. Some human beings desperately need giant reasons behind giant events.

"Lone loser gunman killed JFK? No way man. There's got to be sometime more to it"

"19 loser Muslim extremists attacked the USA? Can't be. We are too powerful for that. Must be something deeper and more sinister than that"

I guess I understand their vibrant imaginations. But still, I really just don't get them.

Oy vey.

 

[Whiplash]

Good points Parky.. truth is often stranger than fiction.

 

[RedIbis]

In the past, this thread has been effective keeping some of the nonsense out of the other threads, but recently it has returned with a vengeance. There is too much childish insulting, masking curse words, and other rule breaking in some of the other threads.

I'm posting this here first because I don't report posters. I'm not offended by internet posts, and I don't support any type of censorship, but I would consider starting to report these infractions because I'd like the same opportunity at cheap shots. If I were to make the same posts, numerous reports would be made and the mods would be swift in their action.

 

[Bananaman]

To be honest, Red, reading your ridiculous posts infuriates me far more than simply being called names. Sticks and stones etc... but your posts, like most hardcore troofers posts are wilfully obtuse, deliberately evasive, and borderline woo woo. I've rolled my eyes at stuff you've written more times than you've had Coco Pops for breakfast. To now get all prissy and say the nasty man was horrid to me is sad.

Grow up.

Bananaman.

 

[RedIbis]

To be honest, Red, reading your ridiculous posts infuriates me far more than simply being called names. Sticks and stones etc... but your posts, like most hardcore troofers posts are wilfully obtuse, deliberately evasive, and borderline woo woo. I've rolled my eyes at stuff you've written more times than you've had Coco Pops for breakfast. To now get all prissy and say the nasty man was horrid to me is sad.

Grow up.

Bananaman.

You've misread what I wrote. I'd simply like the same opportunity to take my cheap shots. I have no doubt that it would end up embarassing for most people the extent to which I can insult someone.

 

[Bananaman]

OK, fair point, Red. Actually, I'd love you to receive a few cheap shots, but in JREF terms I fear I'm too small fry to have ammunition squandered in my direction. I shall have to write several white papers and appear in a video debate to garner that sort of attention.

Ah well, one lives in hope.

Bananaman.

 

[RedIbis]

OK, fair point, Red. Actually, I'd love you to receive a few cheap shots, but in JREF terms I fear I'm too small fry to have ammunition squandered in my direction. I shall have to write several white papers and appear in a video debate to garner that sort of attention.

Ah well, one lives in hope.

Bananaman.

Well, you seem to have a sense of humor so that might pre empt the barrage.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I'm posting this here first because I don't report posters. I'm not offended by internet posts, and I don't support any type of censorship, but I would consider starting to report these infractions because I'd like the same opportunity at cheap shots. If I were to make the same posts, numerous reports would be made and the mods would be swift in their action.

You have the option of requiring others to abide by the agreement they made when joining this forum, just as they have the option of requiring the same standard of behaviour from you. There's a difference between censorship based on content, and sanctions based on violation of an agreement. I would suggest that, if you were to report any violations you're aware of, you might find that the quality of debate- in terms of focusing on content - might improve. As long as you choose not to do so, it seems a little pointless to complain that bad behaviour continues when nothing is done to deter it.

If you ever feel that a post of mine violates the membership agreement, I hereby specifically request that you report it. Otherwise, how will I know if my own behaviour strays outside the bounds of acceptability?

Dave

 

[RedIbis]

You have the option of requiring others to abide by the agreement they made when joining this forum, just as they have the option of requiring the same standard of behaviour from you. There's a difference between censorship based on content, and sanctions based on violation of an agreement. I would suggest that, if you were to report any violations you're aware of, you might find that the quality of debate- in terms of focusing on content - might improve. As long as you choose not to do so, it seems a little pointless to complain that bad behaviour continues when nothing is done to deter it.

If you ever feel that a post of mine violates the membership agreement, I hereby specifically request that you report it. Otherwise, how will I know if my own behaviour strays outside the bounds of acceptability?

Dave

Good points. Unless I'm mistaken, your posts are civil, reasoned and therefore persuasive.

 

[T.A.M.]

Red:

You have correctly identified the purpose of this thread. You have also correctly identified that the vitriol, name calling, and overall juvenile behavior has returned, though not as bad as it was. No forum is perfect, and this thread will not fix the problem.

It is, however, helping reduce the junk floating amidst the legitimate discussion and debate.

TAM

 

[DavidJames]

Once Red stops his disingenuous, obtuse, vague and deliberately coy responses, he will see the tone change dramatically. We can look at thread started by KTB for an example.

 

[T.A.M.]

I am not sure if Heiwa reads this thread, but given the thread it was in was closed, and i had no chance to address it, i want to address the following post he made.

Buka001 asked a question and I replied on behalf of us - the company.

When there is an incident, e.g. WTC1, people always ask how could it have happened. And always there are 'experts' with an answer. FOX, e.g., just asked some 'experts' in the street below WTC1 a few minutes later and they explained that upper part C dropped on part A and, naturally, part A (WTC1) was crushed down!

FOX didn't ask me! I would have answered that it looked like a controlled demolition from top down. Reason being that a small part C cannot crush a bigger part A all the way to ground! Part C could only cause local failures up at top of part A and then part C would have got stuck there.

Enters professor Bazant! He explained - and still explains in corrected, up-dated papers - that part C dropped because little part A1 disappeared (its columns buckled), so that part C dropped on part A2 that was compressed into part B - a layer of rubble! And it was part B + part C that then crushed down WTC1 - part A. All due to gravity, of course.

So you see! The first FOX experts in the street missed part B. The rubble layer.

Thus - to destroy a building from top down you need a layer of rubble - part B - and then you drop part C on it .... and WHOOPs, the building collapses.

Why? Professor Bazant says so. And who is Bazant. A retired expert of creep!

This is the typical NWO or, actually the OWO, in normal function, now with media assisting + Bazant.

Bazant has never demolished a building in his life - or done any structural damage analysis - but he becomes an expert. FOX slowly understood that you cannot rely on experts in the street.

NIST that also has never done any real structural damage analysis in its existence therefore refers to Bazant. Not experts in the street.

So that FOX then can confirm that every skyscraper in the USA will crush down, if you put a layer of rubble up top and drop a part C on it.

If you don't believe FOX, then you are mentally ill. According FOX.

This is not only really ****ing annoying, but it is slanderous, and simply ridiculous. This post above was made by a boat engineer.

Here is a link to publications of Dr. Bazant's:

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

Here is a brief snippet:

1 Books
1.1 Textbooks and Monographs
B1.
Baˇzant, Z.P. (1966). Creep of Concrete in Struc-
tural Analysis (in Czech). State Publishers of Technical
Literature (SNTL), Prague (monograph, 186 pp.).

B2.
Baˇzant, Z.P., and Cedolin, L. (1991). Stability of
Structures: Elastic, Inelastic, Fracture and Damage The-
ories, Oxford University Press, New York (textbook and
reference volume); republished (with updates) by Dover
Publications (No. 42568-1), New York 2003 (1011 pp. +
xxiv pp.).

B3.
Baˇzant, Z.P., and Kaplan, M.F. (1996). Concrete
at High Temperatures: Material Properties and Math-
ematical Models, Longman (Addison-Wesley), London
(monograph and reference volume, 412 + xii pp.) (2nd
printing Pearson Education, Edinburgh, 2002).

B4.
Baˇzant, Z.P., and Planas, J. (1998). Fracture and
Size Effect in Concrete and Other Quasibrittle Materi-
als. CRC Press, Boca Raton and London (textbook and
reference volume, 616 + xxii pp.).

B5.
Jir´asek, M., and Baˇzant, Z.P. (2002). Inelastic
Analysis of Structures. J. Wiley & Sons, London and
New York (textbook and reference volume, 735 + xviii
pp.).

B6.
Baˇzant, Z.P. (2002). Scaling of Structural
Strength. Hermes Penton Science (Kogan Page Sci-
ence), London; 2nd updated ed., Elsevier 2005 (Er-
rata: www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant.html)
(French translation (with updates), Introduction aux ef-
fets d’ ´echelle sur la r´esistance des structures, Herm`es
Science Publ., Paris 2004).

1.2 Published Lecture Notes

L1. Baˇzant, Z.P. (1979). Advanced Topics in Inelas-
ticity and Failure of Concrete (text of intensive course
given at Swedish Cem. & Conr. Res. Inst., Royal Inst.
of Techn.), publ. by Gotab, Stockholm (370 pp.); repub-
lished with updates by Ecole des Ponts et Chauss´ee, Paris
(1980).

L2. Baˇzant, Z.P., Schnobrich, W.C., and Scordelis,
A.C. (1978). Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures
by Finite Element Method (intensive course text), Politec-
nico di Milano (334 pp.); republished with updates by
Technische Hochschule Wien (1981).

1.3 Books Edited, with Chapters Con-
tributed

E1. Baˇzant, Z.P., and Wittmann, F.H. Eds. (1982).
Creep and Shrinkage in Concrete Structures, J. Wiley,
London (363 pp.).

E2. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1983). Mechanics of Geo-
materials: Rocks, Concretes, Soils, Preprints of IUTAM
Prager Symposium, Northwestern University, Evanston,
IL (664 pp.).

E3. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1985). Mechanics of Geoma-
terials: Rocks, Concretes, Soils, J. Wiley & Sons, Chich-
ester, New York (610 pp.) (Proc., IUTAM Symposium
held at Northwestern University, Sept, 1983).

E4. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1986). Creep and Shrinkage
of Concrete: Mathematical Modeling, Preprints of Fourth
RILEM International Symposium, Northwestern Univer-
sity (990 pp.).

E5. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1988). Mathematical Mod-
eling of Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete, John Wiley &
Sons, Chichester and New York.

E6. Mazars, J., and Baˇzant, Z.P., Editors (1989), Dam-
age, Localization and Size Effect (Proc. of France-U.S.
Workshop, held at E.N.S. in Cachan, France), Elsevier,
London (also Preprints, 1988).

E7. Li, V.C., and Baˇzant, Z.P., Editors (1989). Frac-
ture Mechanics: Applications to Concrete, Special Publ.
SP-118, Am. Concrete Inst., Detroit.

E8. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1991). Current Trends in
Concrete Fracture Research (reprinted from Special Issue
of Intern. J. of Fracture 51, 1991, No.1-2), Kluwer Aca-
demic Publishers, Dordrecht—Boston (202 pp.).

E9. Baˇzant, Z.P., Editor (1992). Fracture Mechanics
of Concrete Structures, Proc. of the First Intern. Conf.
(FraMCoS-1), held in Breckenridge, Colorado, June 1–5,
Elsevier, London (1040 pp.).

E10. Gerstle, W., and Baˇzant, Z.P., Editors (1992).
Concrete Design Based on Fracture Mechanics, Special
Publ. SP-134, Am. Concrete Inst., Detroit.

E11. Dempsey, J.P., Baˇzant, Z.P., Rajapakse, Y.D.S.,
Sunder, S. Shyam, Editors (1993). “Ice Mechanics 1993”
(Proc. of a Symposium as part of ASCE–ASME–SES
Joint Mechanics Meeting held in Charlottesville, VA.),
1
AMD Vol. 163, Am. Soc. of Mech. Engrgs., New York,
1993.

E12. Baˇzant, Z.P., and Carol, I., Editors (1993). Creep
and Shrinkage of Concrete (Proc., ConCreep-5—5th In-
tern. RILEM Symposium held in Barcelona, Sept. 9–6),
E & FN Spon (Chapman & Hall), London, U.K. (936 +
xx pages).

E13. Mihashi, H., Okamura, H., and Baˇzant, Z.P., Ed-
itors (1994). Size effect in concrete structures (Proc.,
Japan Concrete Institute Intern. Workshop held in
Sendai, Japan, Oct.31–Nov.2, 1993). E & FN Spon,
London-New York (556 + xiv pages).

E14. Baˇzant, Z.P., Bittnar, Z., Jir´asek, M., and
Mazars, J., Editors (1994). Fracture and Damage in Qua-
sibrittle Structures: Experiment, Theory and Computer
Modeling (Proc., Europe-U.S. Workshop held at Czech
Techn. Univ., Prague, Sept. 21–23, 1994, sponsored by
U.S.–NSF and European Union), E & FN Spon, London–
New York (pp. 647 + xiv).

E15. Baˇzant, Z.P., and Rajapakse, Y.D.S., Editors
(1999). Fracture Scaling (Proc., ONR Workshop on Frac-
ture Scaling, University of Maryland, College Park, June
10–12, 1999; special issue reprinted from Int. J. of Frac-
ture, Vol. 95, 1999.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dor-
drecht.

E16. Ulm, F.-J., Baˇzant, Z.P., and Wittmann, F.H.,
Editors (2001). Creep, Shrinkage and Durability Me-
chanics of Concrete and Other Quasi-Brittle Materials.
(Proc., 6th Intern. Conf., CONCREEP-6, held at MIT,
Cambridge), Elsevier, Amsterdam 2001 (811 + xviii pp.)

E17. Qu, Jianmin, and Baˇzant, Z.P., Guest Editors
(2002). A Volume in Honor of Jan D. Achenbach, special
issue of Int. J. of Solids and Structures 39 (21–22, Oct.–
Nov.), Pergamon Press (Elsevier Science Ltd.).

E18. Baˇzant, Z.P., Carol, I., and Steinmann, P., Guest
Editors (2003). Damage and Failure Analysis of Materi-
als, special isssue of Int. J. of Engrg. Science 41 (13–14,
August), Pergamon Press (Elsevier Science Ltd.)

E19. Baˇzant, Z.P., Christensen, R.A., and Torquato,
S., Guest Editors (2003), Advances in Composite
Materials—A Volume in Honor of George G. Dvorak, spe-
cial issue of Int. J. of Solids and Structures 40, Pergamon
Press (Elsevier Science Ltd.).

E20. Xi, Y., Baˇzant, Z.P., Pijaudier-Cabot, G., and
Bittnar, Z., Guest Editors (2005). Model-Based Simu-
lation of Durability of Materials and Structures, special
issue of J. of Materials Engineering ASCE 17 (3), 239–
369 (with Editorial, pp. 239–240).

In addition, he has published over 500 (yes, five hundred) journal articles, most on elements of materials, structures, and structural engineering.

So Heiwa, how is it that you or any of your truther "colleagues" are in ANY WAY more qualified to comment on elements of the WTCs collapse, then him?

TAM