• 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.

9/11 Paper Accepted to Major Conference

"
January 26, 2020
Ann Hendricks, Secretary 9/11 Monthly Teleconference Call

**********************
Revised minutes for the December 4, 2019 conference call.

Present were:
Cheryl Curtiss, Teleconference co-facilitator, Connecticut 9/11 Truth
Craig McKee, Teleconference co-facilitator, Truth and Shadows
Ann Hendricks, Teleconference secretary
Peter Michael Ketcham, formerly of NIST
John O’Malley, DC911Truth
James Hufferd, 9/11 Grassroots
Fern Tishman
Lynn Bradbury, Maine 9/11Truth
Michael Cook, AE911Truth
Nita Renfrew, New York 911Truth
Bonnie Faulkner, Guns and Butter
Charles Ewing Smith, The Demolition of Truth
Jack Rasmus, jackrasmus.com
Marie Spike, 9/11 TAP
Cat McGuire, DeepTruth.info
Lawrence Fine, 9/11 Synthesis
Richard Gage, AE 9/11 Truth
Greg Flynn
Barbara Honegger, Lawyers’ Committee for 9-11 Inquiry
Marti Hopper, Colorado 9/11 Truth
David Meiswinkle, Lawyers’ Committee for 9-11 Inquiry
Mick Harrison, Lawyers’ Committee for 9-11 Inquiry
Frank Tolopko, Berkshire 9/11 Truth
Susan Serpa, Act Now Worchester
Alison Maynard, provided legal assistance to Sandy Hook activists.
Pat O’Connell, TX9/11Truth.us

The minutes of the October 30, 2019 conference call were APPROVED.


AE update on Hulsey Report reception
Richard Gage said AE has sent the Hulsey Report to 45 universities and 50 organizations and that some recipients have requested presentations. AE has given over a dozen talks to engineering groups who responded with overwhelmingly positive support for a new investigation. In response to a suggestion to inform 9/11-associated insurance companies about the report, Richard mentioned that anyone can download it from the AE website and email it to insurance investigators. He also spoke about the Hulsey Report documentary, now in production by Dylan Avery, and an interview about this can be heard here: https://www.ae911truth.org/news/626-dylan-avery-and-richard-gage-on-ae911truth-s-new-building-7-documentary"
 
Childlike Empress said:
Did you fail to even look up his CV or did you believe that nobody else would care to check? Sounds like he is a physicist first and mathematician on top, which seems to run a bit against your non-credentialed "assessment" (just run auto-translate people, I'm not going to bother):
Click to expand...


his CV: German


Ansgar Schneider studierte Physik und schloß sein Studium mit einer Diplomarbeit im Bereich der Quantenfeldtheorie, der Vereinigung von Relativitätstheorie und Quantenmechanik, ab. In seiner Promotion in Mathematik befaßte er sich mit einem Thema im Grenzgebiet von Analysis, Topologie und Stringtheorie. Seine anschließenden Tätigkeiten in Lehre und Forschung führten ihn an verschiedene Universitäten und außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen im In- und Ausland.

Er publizierte wegweisende physikalische Arbeiten über die Zerstörung des World Trade Centers, in denen er die bekannten mathematischen Einsturzmodelle zum Kollaps des Nordturms des World Trade Centers verbesserte und durch bislang unberücksichtigte empirische Daten zeigte, daß die Struktur der Türme prinzipiell stabil genug war, um einem fortlaufenden Kollaps standzuhalten, selbst als dieser schon weit fortgeschritten war.







I'll bother-- ENGLISH TRANSLATION



Ansgar Schneider studied physics and completed his studies with a diploma thesis in the field of quantum field theory, the association of relativity theory and quantum mechanics. In his doctorate in mathematics, he dealt with a topic in the boundary area of analysis, topology and string theory. His subsequent activities in teaching and research led him to various universities and non-university research institutions in Germany and abroad.

He published groundbreaking physical works on the destruction of the World Trade Center, in which he improved the known mathematical collapse models for the collapse of the North Tower of the World Trade Center and showed by previously disregarded empirical data, that the structure of the towers was in principle stable enough to withstand a continuous collapse, even when it was already well advanced.
 
Fonebone said:
his CV: German


Ansgar Schneider studierte Physik und schloß sein Studium mit einer Diplomarbeit im Bereich der Quantenfeldtheorie, der Vereinigung von Relativitätstheorie und Quantenmechanik, ab. In seiner Promotion in Mathematik befaßte er sich mit einem Thema im Grenzgebiet von Analysis, Topologie und Stringtheorie. Seine anschließenden Tätigkeiten in Lehre und Forschung führten ihn an verschiedene Universitäten und außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen im In- und Ausland.

Er publizierte wegweisende physikalische Arbeiten über die Zerstörung des World Trade Centers, in denen er die bekannten mathematischen Einsturzmodelle zum Kollaps des Nordturms des World Trade Centers verbesserte und durch bislang unberücksichtigte empirische Daten zeigte, daß die Struktur der Türme prinzipiell stabil genug war, um einem fortlaufenden Kollaps standzuhalten, selbst als dieser schon weit fortgeschritten war.







I'll bother-- ENGLISH TRANSLATION



Ansgar Schneider studied physics and completed his studies with a diploma thesis in the field of quantum field theory, the association of relativity theory and quantum mechanics. In his doctorate in mathematics, he dealt with a topic in the boundary area of analysis, topology and string theory. His subsequent activities in teaching and research led him to various universities and non-university research institutions in Germany and abroad.

He published groundbreaking physical works on the destruction of the World Trade Center, in which he improved the known mathematical collapse models for the collapse of the North Tower of the World Trade Center and showed by previously disregarded empirical data, that the structure of the towers was in principle stable enough to withstand a continuous collapse, even when it was already well advanced.
Click to expand...

Whether or not he published groundbreaking physical works, it seems to me that he missed the mark, as the north tower collapsed "even though the tower was in principle stale enough to withstand a continuous collapse." From what I have read the collapse wasn't continuous, but in finite segments as each floor in combination with those above collapse the next floor.
 
over educated nut fails to figure out 9/11 given the answers

Fonebone said:
his CV: German


Ansgar Schneider studierte Physik und schloß sein Studium mit einer Diplomarbeit im Bereich der Quantenfeldtheorie, der Vereinigung von Relativitätstheorie und Quantenmechanik, ab. In seiner Promotion in Mathematik befaßte er sich mit einem Thema im Grenzgebiet von Analysis, Topologie und Stringtheorie. Seine anschließenden Tätigkeiten in Lehre und Forschung führten ihn an verschiedene Universitäten und außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen im In- und Ausland.

Er publizierte wegweisende physikalische Arbeiten über die Zerstörung des World Trade Centers, in denen er die bekannten mathematischen Einsturzmodelle zum Kollaps des Nordturms des World Trade Centers verbesserte und durch bislang unberücksichtigte empirische Daten zeigte, daß die Struktur der Türme prinzipiell stabil genug war, um einem fortlaufenden Kollaps standzuhalten, selbst als dieser schon weit fortgeschritten war.







I'll bother-- ENGLISH TRANSLATION



Ansgar Schneider studied physics and completed his studies with a diploma thesis in the field of quantum field theory, the association of relativity theory and quantum mechanics. In his doctorate in mathematics, he dealt with a topic in the boundary area of analysis, topology and string theory. His subsequent activities in teaching and research led him to various universities and non-university research institutions in Germany and abroad.

He published groundbreaking physical works on the destruction of the World Trade Center, in which he improved the known mathematical collapse models for the collapse of the North Tower of the World Trade Center and showed by previously disregarded empirical data, that the structure of the towers was in principle stable enough to withstand a continuous collapse, even when it was already well advanced.
Click to expand...

What an idiot, he has no clue he is wrong. He must of graduated in the bottom of his class, he can't do the math to understand the floors in the WTC can only hold so much, and did not hold up the upper floors.

You could tell him since you seem to worship idiots who can't do math related to the WTC collapse of the towers. Do you understand the floors failed because they were overloaded, and then the next one would be overloaded more, and the mass causing each floor to fail was moving? Do you know this guy is an idiot with an education which failed him.

Simple math and know the limit of the floors in the tower prove Ansgar Schneider is an over educated nut on 9/11.

What, no comment on this idiot on 9/11? Are you unable to do the math like Ansgar Schneider failed paper?
 
Of course this jerk along with many truthers simply do not understand how the towers collapsed.

Each floor system had a capacity to support normal office tower super imposed loads with a typical factor of safety. You could not park a tank on a WTC floor... the floor would collapse and then the tank would drop onto the floor below that and it too would collapse and so on all the way to the ground.

The collapse once "initiated" by the "freeing" of floor mass including the superimposed loads from the structural matrix... it would go "runaway" down through the towers... passing the columns. The columns without floors for lateral bracing then became unstable and collapsed from what is called Euler buckling.

The entire building was a composite. Floors - structure and super imposed loads, of course were supported by columns... Columns required floors structures for bracing and stability. There was a co dependency between floors and axial systems.

The collapse was not driven by a failure of the axial system, but the floor system.

This is apparently too difficult for truthers to understand and who neglect the fact that columns can't stand tall without bracing which is provided by the floor systems. They are always going on about how massive the columns were.

What happened (the "mechanisms") did so in plain sight for anyone who looks at the videos of the collapse.
 
Last edited:
Time to first lie - immediate.
International Relations (IR) scholars uncritically accept the official narrative regarding the events of 9/11 and refuse to examine the massive body of evidence generated by the 9/11 truth movement.
Click to expand...

ETA - here's the abstract

Abstract
International Relations (IR) scholars uncritically accept the official narrative regarding the events of 9/11 and refuse to examine the massive body of evidence generated by the 9/11 truth movement. Nevertheless, as calls for a new inquiry into the events of 9/11 continue to mount, with the International 9/11 Consensus Panel and World Trade Centre Building 7 Evaluation inquiries having recently published their findings, and with a U.S. Federal Grand Jury on 9/11 having been announced, now would be an opportune moment for IR scholars to start taking the claims of 9/11 truth seriously. A survey of the 9/11 truth literature reveals that the official 9/11 narrative cannot be supported at multiple levels. Two planes did not bring down three towers in New York. There is no hard evidence that Muslims were responsible for 9/11 other than in a patsy capacity. Various U.S. government agencies appear to have had foreknowledge of the events and to have covered up evidence. Important questions regarding the hijacked planes need answering, as do questions about the complicity of the mainstream media in 9/11. IR scholars avoid looking at evidence regarding the events of 9/11 for several reasons. They may be taken in by the weaponized term, “conspiracy theory.” A taboo on questioning the ruling structures of society means that individuals do not wish to fall outside the spectrum of acceptable opinion. Entertaining the possibility that 9/11 was a false flag requires Westerners to reject fundamental assumptions that they have been socialized to accept since birth. The “War on Terror” has created a neo-McCarthyite environment in which freedom to speak out has been stifled. Yet, if IR scholars are serious about truth, the first place they need to start is 9/11 truth.
Click to expand...


EEETTTAAA - I count at least five David Ray Griffin references in the footnotes.
 
Last edited:
carlitos said:
Time to first lie - immediate.

ETA - here's the abstract

EEETTTAAA - I count at least five David Ray Griffin references in the footnotes.
Click to expand...

"massive body of evidence generated by the 9/11 truth movement"

LOL good luck with that one.

ETA:
"Two planes did not bring down three towers in New York" I was unaware that anyone indicated that WT7(the third tower) was brought down by an airplane. Now the falling debris from WT1 did cause damage and multiple fires in WTC7 and then caused damage to water lines. All those issues caused WTC7 to fall, in spite the beliefs by the truther crowd.
 
Last edited:
bknight said:
"massive body of evidence generated by the 9/11 truth movement"

LOL good luck with that one.

ETA:
"Two planes did not bring down three towers in New York" I was unaware that anyone indicated that WT7(the third tower) was brought down by an airplane. Now the falling debris from WT1 did cause damage and multiple fires in WTC7 and then caused damage to water lines. All those issues caused WTC7 to fall, in spite the beliefs by the truther crowd.
Click to expand...

This is really a playing with words matter. 7WTC would not have collapsed were it not for the fires started, the speinklers which did not work and mechanical damage caused by 1WTC collapsing.

It's also possible that the fires that started in 7WTC started from an explosion of a massive transformer in the Con Ed substation at the base of 7 WTC. THAT explosion was almost certainly caused by the AA11 hitting 1WTC and severing/shorting main 13.8kv risers. The short likely tiggered explosions in the sub basement of 1WTC and the ConEd sub station which went off line immediately after AA11 hit the tower.

But of course what brought down the towers was gravity... Mass was "released" from the structural matrix and once freed FEEL and destroyed the structure and its integrity in all 3 towers.

The entire process was one thing leading to another to another to another in a runaway process undermining the structures. Planes played a role in all three collapse events.
 
JSanderO said:
This is really a playing with words matter. 7WTC would not have collapsed were it not for the fires started, the speinklers which did not work and mechanical damage caused by 1WTC collapsing.

It's also possible that the fires that started in 7WTC started from an explosion of a massive transformer in the Con Ed substation at the base of 7 WTC. THAT explosion was almost certainly caused by the AA11 hitting 1WTC and severing/shorting main 13.8kv risers. The short likely tiggered explosions in the sub basement of 1WTC and the ConEd sub station which went off line immediately after AA11 hit the tower.

But of course what brought down the towers was gravity... Mass was "released" from the structural matrix and once freed FEEL and destroyed the structure and its integrity in all 3 towers.

The entire process was one thing leading to another to another to another in a runaway process undermining the structures. Planes played a role in all three collapse events.
Click to expand...

Yes and this is a tried and true method to get attention from those that haven' looked at the situation carefully. When I initially saw the buzz from the truther crowd concerning WTC7, the narrative was seductive and sounded good. But the more I studied it, I lost all intrigue with the truther narrative.

While fires may have been caused by a short in a transformer, that doesn't address the fact that there were fires burning out of control on multiple floors above the transformer. Of course the lack of internal fire suppression only made them more destructive, compounded by the damage caused by WTC1 falling.
 
bknight said:
While fires may have been caused by a short in a transformer, that doesn't address the fact that there were fires burning out of control on multiple floors above the transformer. Of course the lack of internal fire suppression only made them more destructive, compounded by the damage caused by WTC1 falling.
Click to expand...
Yes. So many get lost in details and lose the plot of the overall picture.

WTC7 was a steel framed tower designed around the known vulnerability of steel to fire. It had a three hour fire rating. It was left with unfought fires. Deliberate choice. It lasted LONGER than the three hours. Then it collapsed. End of discussion unless someone wants to understand the forensic structural details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom