911 WTC collapse (only!)

[Tirdun]

Oh that you guys are soo skeptical today.

Uh, this is a skeptical forum. On a skeptical site. Hosted by a well known skeptic. See?

This thread might be slightly more snappish than normal, but only because your questions appear here with annoying frequency. It is a tried and true Troother tactic to post a question in a naive tone as bait, hoping to pounce with some "aha!" when ignored or laughed at. Maybe that's not your motive, but you've followed a well-worn path.

Facts never hurt, do they?

And they're not hard to find, provided you steer clear of troother web sites. You're asking a skeptical board to do your research for you.

 

[T.A.M.]

Uh, this is a skeptical forum. On a skeptical site. Hosted by a well known skeptic. See?

This thread might be slightly more snappish than normal, but only because your questions appear here with annoying frequency. It is a tried and true Troother tactic to post a question in a naive tone as bait, hoping to pounce with some "aha!" when ignored or laughed at. Maybe that's not your motive, but you've followed a well-worn path.

And they're not hard to find, provided you steer clear of troother web sites. You're asking a skeptical board to do your research for you.

You see that is the mark, the "Mark of Woo", and though for now I hold on pronouncing it in him, I think there is a good chance it is very strong here.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

FACTs...you want facts....

Fact #1: hundreds of people in NYC watched the planes hit the towers on 9/11.
Fact #2: The towers collapsed within approximately 1h of impact.
Fact #3: Numerous investigations conducted by scientists and engineers with more education and more intelligence then every single truther in existence, studied the attack, and determined that the cause of the collapses were (A) Impact damage with (B) subsequent removal of fireproofing, and (C) Uncontrolled fires initiated by jet fuel, and superheated and sustained by the contents of the skyscrapers.

Want some more.

TAM

 

[Azure]

I don't think JJM 777 understands what a controlled demolition is.

It would have been pretty obvious to anyone watching IF the building was being brought down by explosives.

 

[Azure]

I know I was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-leve] flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

Q.: Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

A: No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too.

I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever.

http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm

 

[JJM 777]

You see that is the mark, the "Mark of Woo", and though for now I hold on pronouncing it in him

How refreshing to meet a Philosopher, in person. And also a soothsayer, I see. I am deeply moved by your sincere hospitality.

As for the topic of this discussion, I thank everyone who has bothered to focus on the facts, instead of building a conspiracy theory about my person.

---

Gosh, my posting statistics just jumped from 20 to 240. (The moderator revealed my previous indentity from the past version of JREF forum, and summed up the posting statistics.)

 

[Belz...]

Oh that you guys are soo skeptical today.

Facts never hurt, do they?

Facts ? Where ?

 

[Belz...]

As for the topic of this discussion, I thank everyone who has bothered to focus on the facts, instead of building a conspiracy theory about my person.

I don't think you know what a conspiracy theory is, if you think that deception by one person constitutes a conspiracy.

 

[JJM 777]

if you think that deception by one person constitutes a conspiracy.

I would be keen to learn what kind of deception I have been involved in. Theories thereof have been presented here though. Even such that speculate a link between me and a wider community of Truthers -- possibly conspiring to get their message through in this place, by way of deception.

Never mind.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I would be keen to learn what kind of deception I have been involved in. Theories thereof have been presented here though. Even such that speculate a link between me and a wider community of Truthers -- possibly conspiring to get their message through in this place, by way of deception.

Never mind.

I believe Belz... was saying, "if you think that 'deception by one person constitutes a conspiracy'," not that he thought you were part of a conspiracy.

 

[beachnut]

I would be keen to learn what kind of deception I have been involved in. Theories thereof have been presented here though. Even such that speculate a link between me and a wider community of Truthers -- possibly conspiring to get their message through in this place, by way of deception.

Never mind.

It is time for you to take your points and explain what you think about each point.

The fires did not melt the steel, the truth movement just says junk about it. Can you explain that too? Just technical stuff, try not to bring up fantasy junk from the truth movement except the points you posted.

 

[JJM 777]

It is time for you to take your points and explain what you think about each point.

The top of the building fell through the entire building, rather than falling aside. It would be interesting to test the mechanisms of these two theories with a model of adequate size, e.g. 10% of the original. Otherwise I guess that I will never firmly believe how it works, until I see how it works.

 

[Pardalis]

The top of the building fell through the entire building, rather than falling aside. It would be interesting to test the mechanisms of these two theories with a model of adequate size, e.g. 10% of the original. Otherwise I guess that I will never firmly believe how it works, until I see how it works.

Here's the full scale model just for you.

 

[Loss Leader]

even if the fire were just hot enough to melt steel, the steel pillars would transfer the heat to other parts of the building, and the temperature would remain quite moderate at any location (is this true or not?)

I'm pretty sure these people jumping to their deaths would disagree that the temperature remained quite moderate.

 

[maccy]

The top of the building fell through the entire building, rather than falling aside.

Do you have any calculations that may suggest why the top of the building would fall aside?

It would be interesting to test the mechanisms of these two theories with a model of adequate size, e.g. 10% of the original.

How do you scale fire? How would allow for the fact that different stuctural properties do not scale in the same way?

Otherwise I guess that I will never firmly believe how it works, until I see how it works.

Do you have a similar problem with atomic physics?

 

[maccy]

Gosh, my posting statistics just jumped from 20 to 240. (The moderator revealed my previous indentity from the past version of JREF forum, and summed up the posting statistics.)

Yes, you were originally registered as JohnJoeMittler. Is there a reason why you registered again, rather than using your old account?

For anybody who is interested, John has a website:

http://www.johnjoemittler.com/

 

[firecoins]

JJM 77

The facts of the collapse have been widely established. There were no explosives, demolitions or other such nonsence placed in the building at all. None. Zero. This is not debatable. I see your from Finland. I live in NY. I was in the WTC several times. Tens of thousands of people worked in the building at the peak of the day and lots of people worked there 24 hours a day. This is not a complex where explosives just get set up without anyone noticing. Any "theory" based on explosives is flat out wrong.

 

[T.A.M.]

JJM 777:

Simple question...do you believe the NIST theory on collapse initiation to be valid? yes? No?

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Yes, you were originally registered as JohnJoeMittler. Is there a reason why you registered again, rather than using your old account?

For anybody who is interested, John has a website:

http://www.johnjoemittler.com/

Websites are ... interesting.

Far from a social or economic conservative...lol. Then again, socially anyway, I am pretty liberal myself. I just don't think someone with 10 years of education should make the same wage as the burger flipper at Mc Donalds...sue me.

TAM

 

[Loss Leader]

Websites are ... interesting.

Far from a social or economic conservative...lol.

You were able to get that? To me, the websites appeared to be absolute gibberish. I couldn't understand one thing written in any of them. Except the one selling skirts; that one I got a handle on.