• 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.

AIA Convention resolution - the 3rd try. Rebuttals, please!

(14) WHEREAS, NIST’s computer model — which terminates less than two seconds into the seven-second collapse — fails to replicate the observed structural behavior, showing large deformations to WTC 7’s exterior not observed in the videos, while not showing the observed period of free fall; and

(15) WHEREAS, NIST omitted critical structural features of WTC 7 from its computer model, which, in the opinion of independent engineers, if corrected, would show that the initiating failure reported by NIST had zero probability of occurring; and
Click to expand...

This little gripe of theirs always bothered me.

If Gage & friends want to really show some conviction in their opposition, why not use the gobs of dollars they've collected and build their own computer models instead of draining the coffers on crappy little pamphlets?
 
Sabretooth said:
This little gripe of theirs always bothered me.

If Gage & friends want to really show some conviction in their opposition, why not use the gobs of dollars they've collected and build their own computer models instead of draining the coffers on crappy little pamphlets?
Click to expand...

Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?
 
Oystein said:
Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?
Click to expand...
This is the project they got this statement from:

WHEREAS, NIST omitted critical structural features of WTC 7 from its computer model, which, in the opinion of independent engineers, if corrected, would show that the initiating failure reported by NIST had zero probability of occurring
Click to expand...

Funny how they determined that without actually finishing the project............:rolleyes:
 
What still bugs me about WTC 7 is that it's a tiny footnote to the events of the day. Nobody died in WTC 7's collapse. The absurd focus on WTC-7 among the truthers is that it is really just a gateway to claiming that if WTC-7 was a CD, then WTC1 and WTC2's collapses were CD as well.
 
So what to do about this resolution proposal?
Do we have a way of influencing the vote that the AIA delegates will take?

I wonder if pointing out Gage's flirt with holocaust deniers is a path to showing the AIA members what a crackpot he is - his recent visit to the Nation of Islam, where he spoke alongside the anti-semites Kevin Barrett and Christopher Bollyn - and was very coy about it (no news that I have seen).
We might also point them to his 2015 buddy Rudy Dent, a lover of Adolf Hitler, who is the only FDNY veteran to ever side with those whackjobs.
 
Oystein said:
Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?
Click to expand...

Nope, haven't heard. But I've been out of the 9/11 loop for a while. I stopped diving into the forums around the same time Chewy got banned. Now I just stop by once in a while to see what kind of trolling is still floating around.
 
Brainster said:
What still bugs me about WTC 7 is that it's a tiny footnote to the events of the day. Nobody died in WTC 7's collapse. The absurd focus on WTC-7 among the truthers is that it is really just a gateway to claiming that if WTC-7 was a CD, then WTC1 and WTC2's collapses were CD as well.
Click to expand...

Or a distraction from the rather obvious fact there was no CD in 1 and 2, no missiles at the Pentagon and no shootdowns in Shanksville.
 
Oystein said:
Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?
Click to expand...

Worth noting that there isn't anything out there I have seen substantiating the claims re how much they are spending on this project. They have two grad students at a public university in one of the lowest cost areas of the country working on this part time. If they spent more than $50k on this project in total, then that would just show their fiscal acumen is on par with their logical abilities.
 
According to the AIA 2017 convention rules, the AE911Truth 2017 WTC7 resolution (17-5) was voted on yesterday Wednesday, April 26, 2017, between 2:45 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. As of the time of this post, there is no update from AE911Truth to its followers re the status of resolution 17-5 and so I think it's fair to say that it failed and likely by an embarrassingly large margin that they cannot even pretend to claim represents progress in their efforts to persuade professionals.

+100 internet karma points to the individual who can find the exact vote tally!
 
Four hours later - it's lunchtime now in Orlando - still no hurray.
I emailed Pamela Day, the AIA Corporate Secretary and Managing Director in charge of organizing the Business Meeting, and asked her the voting result. Since she is at the Convention, I consider it likely that I will have to wait for a reply, if I get one at all.
 
Oystein said:
Four hours later - it's lunchtime now in Orlando - still no hurray.
I emailed Pamela Day, the AIA Corporate Secretary and Managing Director in charge of organizing the Business Meeting, and asked her the voting result. Since she is at the Convention, I consider it likely that I will have to wait for a reply, if I get one at all.
Click to expand...

I tingle with excitement. :D
 
Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions). The resolution’s sponsors questioned the conclusions offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2008 about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. They argued that the Institute should support “a new investigation into the total collapse of WTC7.”
 
2015 - AE911 Truth (the movement of idiotic lies) reported late this afternoon that the AIA convention in Atlanta voted 160 in favor, but 3892 opposed to its resolution, i.e., it was rejected by 96% of the votes!

2016 - Resolution 16-3, which was sponsored by 97 AIA members affiliated with AE911Truth(Liars and Fools), garnered 11% of the delegates’ votes, losing 529 to 4,176. The 11% tally represents nearly a threefold increase over the 4% won last year.

2017 - failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions)

If sane/rational people studied what the resolution uses as evidence, (path of most resistance, own footprint, symmetrical collapse, etc), the vote would be limited the fringe few insane cult members in AE911t.

Are there 182 members who are paranoid, or did they fail to study
 
beachnut said:
2015 - AE911 Truth (the movement of idiotic lies) reported late this afternoon that the AIA convention in Atlanta voted 160 in favor, but 3892 opposed to its resolution, i.e., it was rejected by 96% of the votes!

2016 - Resolution 16-3, which was sponsored by 97 AIA members affiliated with AE911Truth(Liars and Fools), garnered 11% of the delegates’ votes, losing 529 to 4,176. The 11% tally represents nearly a threefold increase over the 4% won last year.

2017 - failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions)

If sane/rational people studied what the resolution uses as evidence, (path of most resistance, own footprint, symmetrical collapse, etc), the vote would be limited the fringe few insane cult members in AE911t.

Are there 182 members who are paranoid, or did they fail to study
Click to expand...

Being generous an not counting abstentions as rejections of AE911Truth's resolution (and I think there is a good argument you should), this makes this year's result essentially a mirror image of 2015's and a substantial reduction in support from 2016's results (which were still pitiful for AE911Truth).

2015: 96.1% of delegates voted against the resolution
2016: 88.8% of delegates voted against the resolution
2017: 95.8% of delegates voted against the resolution

And, remember, the resolution itself isn't nearly as whackadoodle as we know AE911Truth's theories to actually be; it is a watered-down, dressed-up version that does not ask delegates to reach any conclusion re AE911Truth's controlled demolition theories. Can you imagine how poorly an honest resolution that actually represented AE911Truth's claims would fare?

Tony--why hasn't AE911Truth posted the results of this vote or the results of Iran's investigation into the Plasco collapse on its website? You all can raise funds off of these issues, but you don't feel you owe it to your followers to tell them the outcomes? Why does your organization so consistently withhold certain relevant but extremely inconvenient truths from its followers? Are you ever going to tell them about the availability of the Aegis expert or WAI studies of WTC7?

Are any of the non-Tony truthers out there still willing to donate money to AE911Truth after these last two years of its deliberate suppression of relevant and pressing info? Why do you think they want their donors ignorant?
 
Here's an idea.
Perhaps the 182 who voted for this resolution can get together and write a paper in which they detail their evidence for CD, and which they can then submit for peer review?
100 words each wouldn't be too hard, and it would make a nice fat document to smack us "officlal believers" in the face with, as well as salvaging their reputations.
Tony, fonebone et al, get on the phone, guys! Triumph and vindication await you!
 
pgimeno said:
In light of the recent happenings in Iran...

WHEREAS, prior to and since September 11, 2001, no steel-framed high-rise
has ever suffered a total collapse, except buildings demolished through the
procedure known as controlled demolition; and
Click to expand...
No longer true.
Click to expand...
Especially after the Plasco fire official investigation's conclusion, they should have modified this point before the presentation. Did they? Or did they just lie?
 
MileHighMadness said:
Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions). The resolution’s sponsors questioned the conclusions offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2008 about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. They argued that the Institute should support “a new investigation into the total collapse of WTC7.”
Click to expand...

Link: https://www.aia.org/articles/82671-new-resolutions-propel-aia-forward-in-a-time

I can't fail to note that ALL other resolutions passed - all but one with large margins in favor:
AIA said:
Resolution 17-1: Where Architects Stand: A Statement of Our Values, sponsored by the AIA Board of Directors, passed with 4436 votes in favor, and 90 votes against (with 16 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-2: Emeritus Membership—Proposed Amendments to the Institute Bylaws, sponsored by AIA California Council, passed with 4436 votes in favor, and 77 votes against (with 18 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-3: Housing Humanity—Elevating the Human Experience, sponsored by AIA California Council (and co-authored by AIA Chicago and AIA Illinois), passed with 4358 votes in favor, and 86 votes against (with 70 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-4: Specialty Credentialing, sponsored by AIA California Council, passed with 2227 votes in favor, and 2096 votes against (with 187 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions).

Bylaw Amendment 17-A: Appointment of Delegates ... passed with 4352 votes in favor, and 168 votes against (with 40 abstentions).

Bylaw Amendment 17-B: Technical Amendments to the Institute Bylaws ... passed with 4535 votes in favor, and 8 votes against (with 24 abstentions).

Resolution 17-6 [through -13 all] ... passed by acclamation, with a clear majority saying aye.
Click to expand...


17-4 got only 51.5% of the non-abstentions, all others got 96+% "Yes" votes.


Seems like the vast majority of AIA members can tell whether a proposal is contentious, or nonsense, or simply right.
The AE911Truth proposal evidently is not contentious in the minds of America's architects - it's obvious nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom