AE911Truth Watch

[Christopher7]

Considering that you reject the work of the thousands (or tens of thousands) mentioned in Architects

???
Please list some of the tens of thousands of experts who say the official story is true.

who are you to criticise him for being skeptical of the claims of 283?
Especially since their claims have no basis in reality, and are instead based upon an almost embarassing misunderstanding of physics and engineering.

Who are you to say to say they are wrong or that a professor of physics doesn't understand the laws of physics?

 

[uk_dave]

Gravity's funny like that!

Thank you, that saved me the bother.

Jeez, what is it with 'truthers'? IMPLOSION is just a word. It describes many different phenomena, one of which is the collapse of a building towards it's centre.

It's just a way of defining that the building didn't 'topple' forwards or backwards or to the side, but that it suffered structural failure towards it's centre and (deep breath) pulled the remaining structure inwards.

Demolition experts use carefully designed and timed structural damage to cause a collapse in a predictable and (hopefully) clean manner. That is their talent.

But at the end of the day it is still just structural damage. Gravity does all the really hard work.

So, when a building such as wtc7 suffers structural damage (especially given that it has a cantilever structure over the con ed sub-station) and then un-fought fires over a period of hours (exceeding the specified endurance of the remaining fireproofing) and this damage effects it in such a way as to cause the centre of the structureto fail first and pull the structure at either side inwards, it could be said to have been imploded but this has nothing to do with controlled demolition.

It's a word. Get over it Chris.

 

[uk_dave]

???
Please list some of the tens of thousands of experts who say the official story is true.

If the US government said that cigarettes are good for you and can cure epilepsy, would you expect the worlds medical professions to remain quiet?

 

[DGM]

You admit that there is no evidence to back up your 'bending' hypothesis.
The large amount of slag on the outside of the column is a sign of thermite.

Why don't you demonstrate it and show us how it's done? Why don't you guy's just do this?

I've asked you this before but you never address this question. Why is that?

 

[Drs_Res]

Did you?
The cut was too high to make from the ground and too low to get around it with a platform.

Yes I did, you yourself suggested that a platform hanging under a crane, which is what the person you were answering had just said.

Point made.
What is the URL and how long has this been available?

Thanks for acknowledging the point, they were clearing the area and cutting columns at an angle.

What is the URL and how long has this been available?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FfgSr2eBXls
July 9, 2007

And that means what to you exactly?

That is when that version of the clip was added to YouTube. I was looking for the original version of that clip I saw months, if not a year ago.
The other version was the same, except the sync on the audio was better IIRC and it was longer.

In the first version of the clip, they also showed them "Pulling" a building (WTC 5? not sure) with cables.

 

[Foolmewunz]

By engaging in relentless adolescent insults, you only expose your own intellectual bankruptcy.

In case you missed it Chris, this is a thread that's supposed to be about A&E911blahblah. Anything posted (from the front page of his website, by the way) on said topic is viable. If I choose to make light of it, it's only because banging one's head against your constant slag-on-the-backside (great name for a band, by the way) is not worth the trouble, and I thought we'd maybe get back to discussing Gage and NOT YOU!

 

[Christopher7]

Thank you, that saved me the bother.

Jeez, what is it with 'truthers'? IMPLOSION is just a word. It describes many different phenomena, one of which is the collapse of a building towards it's centre.

Correct

It's just a way of defining that the building didn't 'topple' forwards or backwards or to the side, but that it suffered structural failure towards it's centre and (deep breath) pulled the remaining structure inwards.

This only happens in a CD.

Demolition experts use carefully designed and timed structural damage to cause a collapse in a predictable and (hopefully) clean manner. That is their talent.
But at the end of the day it is still just structural damage. Gravity does all the really hard work.

Correct

So, when a building such as wtc7 suffers structural damage (especially given that it has a cantilever structure over the con ed sub-station)

The cantilever played no part in the implosion.

and then un-fought fires over a period of hours (exceeding the specified endurance of the remaining fireproofing) and this damage effects it in such a way as to cause the centre of the structureto fail first and pull the structure at either side inwards,

The core area was mostly elevator shafts where there was no fuel to heat up the core columns.

it could be said to have been imploded

Correct
FEMA and the owner of a CD company said WTC 7 imploded.

The fires in WTC 7 did not cause the core columns to collapse.
The NIST hypothesis does not offer an explanation as to how the north and south core column rows collapsed.

CD explains how WTC 7 imploded, the NIST hypothesis does not.

 

[twinstead]

CD explains how WTC 7 imploded, the NIST hypothesis does not

Frankly, Chris, people who are every bit or more qualified than you state otherwise, both on this forum and in the 'real world'.

You opinion is noted.

 

[X]

???
Please list some of the tens of thousands of experts who say the official story is true.

Who are you to say to say they are wrong or that a professor of physics doesn't understand the laws of physics?

Did you catch that subtle little detail in my posts about how you are accusing thousands of people of being wrong on the evidence of mere hundreds, who have been shown to be wrong on a great many things?
The point is not the numbers. The point is that you are accusing us of doing exactly the same thing you and the rest of the Truth Movement does. Only, the Truth Movement ignores on a much grander scale.

I'll stick with the trustworthy majority, thanks.

 

[beachnut]

???
Please list some of the tens of thousands of experts who say the official story is true.

Who are you to say to say they are wrong or that a professor of physics doesn't understand the laws of physics?

If you are a 9/11 truth person, you are lucky, you have 0.0087 or less percent of all engineers on your side. Good job. Looks like you have not asked many physics teachers why your ideas, like Jones', are wrong on 9/11.

I am an engineer, and all those who support Gage's ideas on 9/11 are wrong. I think I can gather 1000 times the engineers Gage can if I needed to stop a rebellion, the likes of a NAZI take over. But since you and 9/11 truth are a fringe group, a group most people think are pure nuts running around saying "9/11 was an inside job", I will never have to put together a counter 9/11 real truth movement to put your experts down!

This is the closet 9/11 truth will ever be to breaking the big truth news.

So when will Gage take his evidence and expose 9/11? never

 

[Christopher7]

In case you missed it Chris, this is a thread that's supposed to be about A&E911blahblah. Anything posted (from the front page of his website, by the way) on said topic is viable. If I choose to make light of it, it's only because banging one's head against your constant slag-on-the-backside (great name for a band, by the way) is not worth the trouble, and I thought we'd maybe get back to discussing Gage and NOT YOU!

JamesB brought up the subject.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3467784#post3467784

The large amount of slag on the outside of the core column is evidence of thermite.
People here have tried in vain to explain how the this could occur using a cutting torch.

 

[Christopher7]

Did you catch that subtle little detail in my posts about how you are accusing thousands of people of being wrong on the evidence of mere hundreds, ......
I'll stick with the trustworthy majority, thanks.

You are assuming there are thousands of qualified people who support the official hype.
Please list their names them before making that absurd statement again.

 

[CHF]

Chris,

have you talked to any WTC clean-up workers regarding those "thermite" cuts?

 

[twinstead]

You are assuming there are thousands of qualified people who support the official hype.
Please list their names them before making that absurd statement again.

the authors and contributors to the NIST report are a veritable who's who of eminent 'qualified people'.

That's just the beginning, cause Purdue University's experts would probably be miffed to be left out of the list. So would many others.

A list of these people are available in the public domain, as is their contact information. Dude. It wouldn't be called 'the official story' if it wasn't out there for everybody to read.

Perhaps you should submit a list that equals or surpasses the list of qualified people I refer to; your insinuation that no real expert supports the official account by demanding we 'list their names' is a well-worn truther tactic.

 

[Christopher7]

CD explains how WTC 7 imploded, the NIST hypothesis does not

Frankly, Chris, people who are every bit or more qualified than you state otherwise, both on this forum and in the 'real world'.
You opinion is noted.

Please list the qualified persons who say "CD does not explain how WTC 7 imploded".

Name one person who says the NIST hypothesis explains the collapse of all the core columns.

 

[X]

You are assuming there are thousands of qualified people who support the official hype.
Please list their names them before making that absurd statement again.

No.
I am assuming there are thousands (and more) who do not support your conspiracy theory(ies).


Please answer my question:

Considering that you reject the work of the thousands (or tens of thousands) mentioned in Architects post, who are you to criticise him for being skeptical of the claims of 283?

 

[twinstead]

Name one person who says the NIST hypothesis explains the collapse of all the core columns.

Your loaded question noted. The key here is which theory BEST explains the collapse of all the core columns given ALL the available evidence.

Perhaps the CONTRIBUTORS to the NIST report would be a good place to start. Unless you deny their 'expertness'

 

[Christopher7]

the authors and contributors to the NIST report are a veritable who's who of eminent 'qualified people'.

We've been over this. Stop making the assumption that all the contributors to the report agree with [Bush appointee controlled] hypothesis.
How many of them have stated so publicly?

That's just the beginning, cause Purdue University's experts would probably be miffed to be left out of the list. So would many others.

Names and statements please.

your insinuation that no real expert supports the official account by demanding we 'list their names' is a well-worn truther tactic.

You have stated that there are thousands of qualified people who support the official hypothesis.
That is a baseless assumption.
Back up that statement or stop making it.

 

[A W Smith]

Ask yourself that question.
You have no proof that it was cut after the collapse.

It would be impossible to get a cherry picker in there for a cutter to cut that column.
Do you think someone used a ladder?
Do you think they would let something that heavy just fall?
Where is the piece that was cut off?
They would need a crane to move it so why not pick it up as it's being cut?
That would be a lot safer for the cutter.
It would also make the 45º angle cut unnecessary.

[URL]http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/2557/cutcorecolumnqg2.jpg[/URL]

Chris you are over your head when dealing with construction. The columns were accessed with both lifts and man baskets swung from cranes. You don't need to be inside the column to cut that face with the slag. All you need to do is cut from the preceding cuts reaching in with your lance on the left and right side. Trust me. You don't want to be positioned on that face of a column when cutting it. Thats the direction it will swing when you finish the cut.

Also your claim that the column tree photo was staged or fake is moronic. The video shows an entire row of column trees with that cut. You can also see in that photo that the lift is on the high side of the angle cut.

 

[Christopher7]

Your loaded question noted. The key here is which theory BEST explains the collapse of all the core columns given ALL the available evidence.

WRONG!
The NIST hypothesis DOES NOT explain how the north and south core column rows collapsed.