AE911Truth Watch

[X]

And therein lies the rub.

A wedge is not used to tip the balance and make the tree fall, is is used to keep the tree from binding the chainsaw when cutting past the center of gravity.

A wedge cannot lift 27 tons of steel and bend a piece of steel 22" wide and 4" thick.

So you ignore the physics because a tree is not a steel column?

Unbelievable.

Once again: They are both homogenous vertical elements. On a small scale, they will behave differently. But on a large scale, such as the overall behaviour of a tall, fresstanding homgenous item with a wedge being driven into it, they will behave similarily.

But obviously your an expert. So prove to us unknowledgeable peons that the cut absolutely could not have been made with a torch.

(Hint: repeatedly stating that the slag is on the "wrong side" for your percieved method of torch cutting does not constitute proof.)

 

[Christopher7]

Jones was fired for being nuts on 9/11.

Correct.

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

If someone can be fired for saying
"The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives"
there is no free speech.

Nationalistic fanatics say:
People should be fired for saying something so horrible as "The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives".
and
The Dixie Chicks should be banned for saying "I'm ashamed to be from the same state as Bush."
Rupert Murdock and the rest of MSM banned the Dixie Chicks.


Think about what you said.
You know the real reason why Jones was fired.
You can see thru the 'official spin'.
You know why the Dixie Chicks were banned, MSM was sending a message.


But the times, they are a'changin.
The Chicks are back.

More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

It is no longer unpatriotic to say:
"Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen so they could go to war in the Middle East"

It is no longer unpatriotic to say:
"Federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks"

 

[Christopher7]

So you ignore the physics because a tree is not a steel column?

You are the one ignoring the laws of physics.

Hitting a wedge with a 9 pound hammer will not lift 27 tons, much less bend a piece of steel 4" thick and 22" wide.

Give it up.

 

[Arus808]

give it up chris, your trolling here is not wanted.

you've been asked to prove your claims, yet you continue to post your ignorant unfounded and parroted claims of the 911 liar movement

since you wont:
1) demonstrate thermite cutting steel, in the way youve shown us in the photos
2) wont talk to the crews that cut those columns

why are you here? We do not take light of claim that implicate innocent people of murder. So,

you've been asked numerous times to provide proof

yet you can't

I suggest that anyone who replies to C7's lies, only answer with asking for proof (that he perform those cuts on a column with thermite)

other than that, he should be ignored;

 

[uk_dave]

If someone can be fired for saying
"The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives"
there is no free speech.

Whooooaa there.

You mean a person who is supposed to hold a position of authority based upon knowledge should be able to talk absolute crap as part of their job and not be fired?

So if a police officer says that it's really ok to have sex with a 12 year old, you don't think that police officer should be fired?

 

[CHF]

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

If someone can be fired for saying
"The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives"
there is no free speech.

Give it up, Chris.

Jones was suspended (and later resigned) because he falsely claimed that his paper was peer-reviewed when it wasn't.

He'd been questioning 9/11 for a while before that.

 

[Dave_46]

A professional cutter does not let the flame 'wander'.
The lower cut has a lot of slag on the outside.
It was NOT cut from the outside.

I do not agree with your assertions.

 

[Dave_46]

Correct

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

<snip>

Your right to say "The President is a sleaze bag" has not been withdrawn, as the post I have quoted demonstrates.

Dave

p.s. those colour tags make your posts awkward to quote, I had to remove them to tidy things up.

 

[WildCat]

Correct.

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

I see your knowledge of the 1st Amendment is a deep as your knowledge of thermite and cutting torches.

 

[Minadin]

Correct.

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

If someone can be fired for saying
"The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives"
there is no free speech.

BYU is a private institution. They aren't the government or any agent thereof.

The First Amendment to the Constitution states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Steven Jones was "fired" (suspended, then resigned) for not producing scholarly works per the expectations of his employer. Basically, he wasn't doing his job. But, even if he was, a private employer such as BYU is within their rights, and not violating his, if they should choose to terminate his employment for publicly holding positions that they don't agree with, which are contrary to the school's philosophy and goals, or which bring bad publicity to the university.

For instance, based on their mission statement, I think you'd have a difficult time retaining a professorship at the school if you were publicly on record stating something to the effect of, "Mormonism is a load of bunk."

Would you not agree?

 

[Christopher7]

give it up chris, your trolling here is not wanted.

you've been asked to prove your claims, yet you continue to post your ignorant unfounded and parroted claims of the 911 liar movement

No matter how many qualified experts come forward you will call them liars.

Your personal incredulity just won't let you believe that Cheney/Rummy/Wolfowitz could kill Americans to start a war.

It is now known that Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin.

58,000 Americans and 2,000,000 Vietnamese died in that war.

Our government does not take care of the men the send off to these wars for profit, based on lies.

1. We lost almost 59,000 men and women during the 16 years of Viet Nam. As of 5 years after the war was officially over, we had 150,000 Viet Nam Vets that had committed suicide.
2. The suicide rate for Viet Nam Vets is 86% higher than the national average of peers of the same age group.
3. 70% of all one car accidents is Viet Nam Vets (was it really an accident).
4. 60% of all Viet Nam Vets have serious emotional problems.
5. Between 50 and 60% have a history of alcohol and drug abuse.
6. The unemployment rate for Viet Nam Vets is double the national average.
7. The divorce rate for Viet Nam Vets is almost 3 times as many as the national average.
8. About 25% of all incarcerated people are Viet Nam Vets. (Most are non-violent crimes).
9. 56% of all homeless Americans are veterans, 44% are Viet Nam Vets.

http://www.capveterans.com/caprd_004.htm



It is now known that Bush/Cheney took us to war in Iraq based on a pack of lies.

120 vets commit suicide every week.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has rubber-stamped their disinformation, continuing to insist that their studies indicate that soldiers are killing themselves, not because of their combat experiences, but because they have "personal problems."

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/68713/


Yet you continue to deny all evidence, slander and dismiss anyone who says something you can't deal with.

You steadfastly defend the cold blooded, sub human monsters that have lied us into a war of conquest.

Don't claim your are not defending them.
By attacking the Truth Movement, you are defending them.

 

[Arus808]

No matter how many qualified experts come forward you will call them liars.

False. I want to see their PROOF. I want to see their calculations. I dont want to see them parroting the same unsubstantiated claims without so much as having their work peer reviewed by a RESPECTABLE and NOTABLE body of their peers. that's peer review.



They could be Albert Einstein for all I care; unless they produce their own research with their own calculations, that has been reviewed and tested by their peers, their CLAIMS are nothing more than bunk.



[snip crap about Vietnam that has nothing to do with this topic]

[snip even mor crap about stuff that has nothing to do with this topic]

Can't you stay on topic chris?

please provide a Peer Reviewed in a REPUTABLE scientific, engineering and fire saftey journal that the fRAUDs of AE911 have produced.

 

[Newtons Bit]

False. I want to see their PROOF. I want to see their calculations. I dont want to see them parroting the same unsubstantiated claims without so much as having their work peer reviewed by a RESPECTABLE and NOTABLE body of their peers. that's peer review.

Agreed. Those of us who have the same level (or more) of qualifications as the so called experts at AE911 and at JONES aren't impressed by their titles. We want to see their work.

 

[Christopher7]

Originally Posted by Arus808
....... the 911 liar movement

Originally Posted by Christopher7
No matter how many qualified experts come forward you will call them liars.

False. I want to see their PROOF.

You called Stephen Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard gage and hundreds of other professionals with degrees, LIARS.

You say their claims are BUNK. As if you were qualified to say that.


This is a fair and reasonable statement:
"I am skeptical and I won't believe these people until their findings have been peer reviewed by a RESPECTABLE and NOTABLE body of their peers."

This is denial and implicit support for Bush/Cheney's conspiracy theory:
"The 911 Truth Movement is a pack of liars and their claims are BUNK.

 

[WildCat]

You called Stephen Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard gage and hundreds of other professionals with degrees, LIARS.

You say their claims are BUNK. As if you were qualified to say that.

Many of the posters here are qualified to say that, Newtons Bit being one of them

None of your "experts" has published a single paper in a peer-reviewed journal - after 6 and a half years!

All Gage does is parrot David Ray Griffin.

This doesn't bother you Chris?

 

[Minadin]

What has Richard Gage produced that's original or in any way uses his supposed expertise? Kevin Ryan isn't qualified to comment. He tested water for UL, nothing relevant. Stephen Jones may have a physics degree, but it's in a completely different area.

Even yet, we would still evaluate their work rather than their credentials. If they had these same areas of expertise and were able to show themselves to be competent by making factual assertions backed by evidence, we would be much more kindly disposed. Instead, they want to flaunt their titles, degrees, or (former) professional affiliations. It's completely worthless.

By the way -
Do you still think that Stephen Jones or Kevin Ryan's 1st amendment rights have been violated?

 

[Arus808]

You called Stephen Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard gage and hundreds of other professionals with degrees, LIARS.

because they continue the parrot the same LIES after they were told THEY WERE LIES.

that makes them LIARS

Kevin Ryan, he was shown to be a HUGE liar, when he made himself out to be something he was not, and that's WHY HE GOT fired.

You say their claims are BUNK. As if you were qualified to say that.

I am qualified to say that. I have not seen ANY of those "experts" provide a PUBLISHED paper with evidence, calculations to RESPECTABLE engineering, scientific and fire saftey journals. If they have done so, they have never pointed it out, and have never made mention of it. Care to give us the name of these journals to which you can find their published and PEER Reviewed work.

I didn't take High School physics for nothing. either. I haven't used it in the nearly 18 years I've been out of high school, but I still remember alot of the crap I did learn.

 

[Confuseling]

Physics isn't my forte, so forgive me for butting in.

But surely you can use a wedge to lift a giant mass? The point is it's really tall, so you only have to lift it a minute amount, and all of its length will amplify that motion into sideways displacement of the top, past its tipping point.

As long as you've got a gap you can get the wedge into in the first place (which you can do, presumably, by putting it in before you've made the entire cut) and a substantial wedge with a shallow enough angle (and, lest we forget, a blooooming big hammer), this sounds entirely possible.

I don't understand how you can contest this Chris. If anything, the example of a tree, capable of deformation on a small scale, would seem harder to push over like this.

ETA: and Chris, your suggestion about how to cut it, starting at the lowest cut, then doing the diagonals, then the top, doesn't sound even vaguely safe. Surely then the top section would slide off, and could fall in more or less any direction?

 

[beachnut]

Correct.

The first casualty of the "War on Terror" was the first amendment right of anyone to say "The President is a sleaze bag" or worse.

If someone can be fired for saying
"The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives"
there is no free speech.

Nationalistic fanatics say:
People should be fired for saying something so horrible as "The trade towers and WTC 7 could not have fallen the way they did without explosives".
and
The Dixie Chicks should be banned for saying "I'm ashamed to be from the same state as Bush."
Rupert Murdock and the rest of MSM banned the Dixie Chicks.


Think about what you said.
You know the real reason why Jones was fired.
You can see thru the 'official spin'.
You know why the Dixie Chicks were banned, MSM was sending a message.


But the times, they are a'changin.
The Chicks are back.

More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

It is no longer unpatriotic to say:
"Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen so they could go to war in the Middle East"

It is no longer unpatriotic to say:
"Federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks"

your paranoia knows no bounds

you have no facts or evidence, just hearsay and the need to believe in false information and made up CTs about 9/11

120 vets commit suicide every week.

Don't claim your are not defending them.
By attacking the Truth Movement, you are defending them.

6256 vets killed themselves in 2005, that is included in the 32,439 total suicides in the US. This is sad, and has not a thing to do with 9/11! Can we do better about suicide? Yes, but still it has not a thing to do with the liars in 9/11 truth which you support!

We loose more kids on the roads than in combat. We need to do better in all areas, but this all has not a thing to do with 9/11 truth movement groups making up lies and spreading false information. You lack knowledge and make false analogies on 9/11.

We did not loose anything on 9/11 unless we do it to ourselves; it seems you are not concentrating on the problems we have, you are making up junk to make problems.

Does your faulty logic have bounds?; what does this have to do with 9/11? ZIP

 

[Christopher7]

Many of the posters here are qualified to say that, Newtons Bit being one of them

Newtons Bit doesn't know diddily squat.

First he says:
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit #2103
Christopher7, continous beam action is developed across columns that have fixed-moment connections such as the WTC. If a cantilevered beam is developed, an upwards load will actually develop in the columns furthest away from the damage.

Such is NOT the case.

Then it changes to:
#2183
the force from the column will force that beam into catenary action

First, the problem:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_16329463f7497a3a36.jpg

five columns and the second one from the left is removed.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_16329463f74b202f77.jpg

[FONT=&quot]. . . . . . X . . . . .Y [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1 N1 . 14.257 . 431.843 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1 N2 . . . . . .0 . . . . . . .0 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1 N3 -11.516 . 513.333 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1 N4 -.739 . . . .246.38 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1 N5 -2.002 . . .308.444

[/FONT] #2191
After one column is removed, a non-adjacent columns had it's load REDUCED to 246.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2587411#post2587411

The tables show column 1 got 432 kips and
column 3 got 513 or 171% of its original load.
column 4 got 246 or 82% of its original load. [due to the cantilever effect]
column 5 got 308 or 103% of its original load. [due to catenary*(?) effect]
*catenary: curve of cable


The cantilever effect reverses at each column, first reducing the load in column 4 and then slightly increasing the load on column 5.

Beyond column 5 the effects of the severed column would be negligible.


I stated that:
The upward load will be the greatest on the adjoining column (4), and to a lesser degree, on the columns further away.

Such is the case in NB's model.


NB was blowin smoke.