• 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.

Anomolies at ground zero

Dr Sunder, Head of official NIST report on Building 7 says:

"We are studying the horizontal movement East to West,internal to the structure, on the fifth to senenth floors, but truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on building No. 7"
(New York Magazine, March 27th 2006)
 
A neutron bomb would have killed thousands upon thousands of people instantly. Every single digital camera anywhere near the WTC would have fried itself. The police and news helicopters around the site would have suffered catastrophic system failures.

Need I go on?

-Gumboot

I agree with you. When are you going to pay attention?
 
Docker said:
Well the point is that these cars were not near the towers, they werent hit by anything and didn't catch fire.

Sources and evidence, please.
 
Dr Sunder, Head of official NIST report on Building 7 says:

"We are studying the horizontal movement East to West,internal to the structure, on the fifth to senenth floors, but truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on building No. 7"
(New York Magazine, March 27th 2006)
Oh. I stand corrected. I wasn't aware NIST's final report on building 7 was going to be published in New York Magazine.

I better go through my back-issues of Highlights to see if Goofus and Galant have any info on that Cheney stand-down order.
 
Last edited:
Oh. I stand corrected. I wasn't aware NIST's final report on building 7 was going to be published in New York Magazine.

I better go through my back-issues of Hilights to see if Goofus and Galant have any info on that Cheney stand-down order.

Why do people here resort to sarcasm when they are losing?

The point is that the head of the investigation hasn't got a clue why it collapsed. It collapsed 5 years ago and all your beloved experts can't work out why.
 
Why do people here resort to sarcasm when they are losing?

The point is that the head of the investigation hasn't got a clue why it collapsed. It collapsed 5 years ago and all your beloved experts can't work out why.
The point is the investigation is on-going. That's how investigations work. You can't just sit at home and GoogleVideo all your answers. And forgive me for not putting much stock in your quote. I have this nagging feeling some precious context is missing.
 
Judy Wood does make a good point. Why dont these collapse all around the world?

 
Last edited:
The point is the investigation is on-going. That's how investigations work. You can't just sit at home and GoogleVideo all your answers. And forgive me for not putting much stock in your quote. I have this nagging feeling some precious context is missing.

Right so if the investigation is on-going, why are you claiming it wasn't controlled demolition?

Do you know more than NIST does? Maybe they need you on their team.
 
I did hear about some increased lymphoma rates among the clear up people.

No I don't have a source
Well, at least you're showing that you've been here long enough to know that you'll be asked for a source for an assertion like that. The next step is for you not to even post a controversial statement until you've checked it yourself, and then you will post a link to the source at the same time as the thing that needs sourcing.

But congratulations on the progress that you have made.
 
Right so if the investigation is on-going, why are you claiming it wasn't controlled demolition?

Do you know more than NIST does? Maybe they need you on their team.

This is why:

14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse?
When NIST initiated the WTC investigation, it made a decision not to hire new staff to support the investigation. After the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. With the release and dissemination of the report on the WTC towers in October 2005, the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed. Considerable progress has been made since that time, including the review of nearly 80 boxes of new documents related to WTC 7, the development of detailed technical approaches for modeling and analyzing various collapse hypotheses, and the selection of a contractor to assist NIST staff in carrying out the analyses. It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007.
The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:
  • An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;
  • Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and
  • Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors) resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.
A crazy idea.. when you want to know the status of a NIST investigation... go to their website: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
 
Right so if the investigation is on-going, why are you claiming it wasn't controlled demolition?

Do you know more than NIST does? Maybe they need you on their team.
I've seen no preliminary evidence pointing towards demolition. I see no motive in bringing it down. If I had to guess, NIST isn't so concerned with the "WHY" but with the "HOW". And by "HOW" I mean the progression. Where the collapse started. What failed first. What failed second. And so on.
 
Dr Sunder, Head of official NIST report on Building 7 says:

"We are studying the horizontal movement East to West,internal to the structure, on the fifth to senenth floors, but truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on building No. 7"
(New York Magazine, March 27th 2006)
but truthfully we really dont know the question hes responding to here

Judy Wood does make a good point. Why dont these collapse all around the world?

[URL]http://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/ARG/Image185.jpg[/URL]
maybe because no wood burning stoves are supporting 500,000 tons of skyscraper?
 

Back
Top Bottom