Care to Comment

[TSR]

We talk about an explosion that totally destroyed B2 and B3, caused major damage at B4 reaching out to the subway path as well as to the west side lobby.

.
And we find that there was no damage consistent with such bombs, and no debris which such bombs might have left -- and that the collapse was top-down so no bomb in the basement would have had any effect on That Day.

But we *do* know that jet fuel can cause such explosions, that jet fuel was present on That Day, and that the jet fuel had a way of getting to the basements.

And BTW, you think the debris of 100+ stories crashing down on the basements may have damaged a thing or two?
.

 

[achimspok]

No!

What's the damage Iraq did to America?
How many alleged hijackers were Afghans or at least Talibans?

 

[achimspok]

.
Better idea: google 757 and "fly by wire" and figure out why there could be no "cut a few wires" scenario. There is no way to "take over" the mechanical system of a Boeing such that the pilot cannot take control back even on a 777, which *is* fly by wire.

You claim the ground crew would not notice the modifications because they wouldn't be expecting them: this is exactly why they *would* be noticed -- as something that should not be there.
.

Oh, that cut a few wires scenario was just the scenario of 911myth to bring the control back into the hands of a (probably dead already) flight crew. So you answered on part of the question. Thank you.

"...as something that should not be there."? You deal with complex black box systems.

 

[Oystein]

Guuuuuys hold it hold it hold it!!


How is this thread responding to the OP the last dozend pages, and what is this discussion about? Seems achimspok is throwing in any and every idea he ever heard about 9/11, mixes and stirres. Is there any structure to this train wreck of thought? Any chance or even intention to get any one single issue settled? It all sure looks like goalposts on a stampede.

 

[BigAl]

It's a bit out of context. So let me summarize what is captured here.

Big Al believes the Stationary Engineer at the WTC meant something like this...
[qimg]http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/1036/50tonhydraulicshoppress.jpg[/qimg]
..."tipped over".

BigAl's belief is based on the article...

...and his assumption that Pecoraro usually had to press out ball bearings.

My belief is that the Stationary Engineer wouldn't have mentioned that little steel thing at all because that day he constructed a gantry to pull the heads of the smallest chillers at B6 - the 2500ton units.

achimspok has yet again demonstrated his knowledge is straight out of Google U.

A "2500 ton" chiller doesn't weigh 2500 tons. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton#Refrigeration​

A. really is the Renascence Man of ignorance.

 

[BigAl]

We talk about an explosion that totally destroyed B2 and B3, caused major damage at B4 reaching out to the subway path as well as to the west side lobby.

Based on the number and kind if injuries, we know that to the degree the above it was true, it was fuel fires and vapor explosions.

We know that was no demolition explosion because nobody has injuries that such explosions would cause and there are no reports of explosions consistent in loudness and brisance with man-made demolition.

 

[bill smith]

Based on the number and kind if injuries, we know that to the degree the above it was true, it was fuel fires and vapor explosions.

We know that was no demolition explosion because nobody has injuries that such explosions would cause and there are no reports of explosions consistent in loudness and brisance with man-made demolition.

What can you tell us about the nature of the injuries incurred ? Do you have any good links ?

 

[achimspok]

.
And we find that there was no damage consistent with such bombs, and no debris which such bombs might have left -- and that the collapse was top-down so no bomb in the basement would have had any effect on That Day.

Well done! The engineer on the scene recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure in 1993. You find that there was no damage consistent with such bombs.
Which bombs?

Would you say that the damage is consistent with a jet fuel fire ball but not with a bomb?

But we *do* know that jet fuel can cause such explosions, that jet fuel was present on That Day, and that the jet fuel had a way of getting to the basements.

And we *do* know that the only way to get there was blocked by elevator cabins and survivors inside the cabin of car 50.

And BTW, you think the debris of 100+ stories crashing down on the basements may have damaged a thing or two?
.

Yes, it would first crush the cabins into pieces.

 

[Oystein]

...
[qimg]http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/5979/bomb6.jpg[/qimg]
Would you say that the damage is consistent with a jet fuel fire ball but not with a bomb?
...

The damage is consistent with a supersonic boom in the lobby. I therefore conclude it was done by a Cuban sparrow on acid.
It is at the same time consistent with a bunch of footbaal hooligans on a rampage. I therefore conclude the towers were brought down by hools.

What would you say: Is that damage not consistent with a fuel conflagration? On what grounds would you day that? Other than "I can't believe/imagine..."?

 

[achimspok]

Guuuuuys hold it hold it hold it!!

How is this thread responding to the OP the last dozend pages, and what is this discussion about? Seems achimspok is throwing in any and every idea he ever heard about 9/11, mixes and stirres. Is there any structure to this train wreck of thought? Any chance or even intention to get any one single issue settled? It all sure looks like goalposts on a stampede.

Exactly, let's go back to the WTC7 free fall measurement I posted. That's what initiated a lot of other topics well connected to THE TOPIC. I'm still trying to answer all that nonsense about THE TOPIC e.g. a "tipped over" button press or Attas allegedly identified DNA or black box conversions or 3 meters of floor sagging in 20 minutes or a raging fire inferno of 1000°C upper layer temperature for at least 3 hours on 5 floors right around column 79 contradicted by the photographic evidence and all that ... hot air.
Let's go back! The initial question was: Did NIST a deliberate false measurement and what's the implication of the the data if you do it in the right way? Any answer?

It's just a little pity. I hoped anyone could solve my little riddle about Attas parking lot in front of the house of the wrong Alomari.

 

[achimspok]

The damage is consistent with a supersonic boom in the lobby. I therefore conclude it was done by a Cuban sparrow on acid.
It is at the same time consistent with a bunch of footbaal hooligans on a rampage. I therefore conclude the towers were brought down by hools.

What would you say: Is that damage not consistent with a fuel conflagration? On what grounds would you day that? Other than "I can't believe/imagine..."?

No it's not consistent with a fuel conflagration. The picture was taken in 1993 after a truck bomb exploded in the basement.
So stay with your hooligans if you want or show me some subsequent fires caused by a spray of fuel that ignited little trees in the lobby. Or show me some symmetry of the pressure expansion inside the core. Take the express shafts as the center.

 

[TSR]

The engineer on the scene recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure in 1993.

.
Similar != same.
.

You find that there was no damage consistent with such bombs.

.
Not in 2001, there was not.
.

Would you say that the damage is consistent with a jet fuel fire ball but not with a bomb?

.
No, but then this picture isn't from 2001.
.

And we *do* know that the only way to get there was blocked by elevator cabins and survivors inside the cabin of car 50.

.
Are you under the impression that elevator cars completely seal their shafts?
.

Yes, it would first crush the cabins into pieces.

.
And how many intact cars were found in the rubble?
.

 

[BigAl]

What can you tell us about the nature of the injuries incurred ? Do you have any good links ?

The hospitals saw lots of people with flash burns. They saw nobody with the concussion and physical trauma injuries associate with high explosives. "Thermite", if it was present close up would cause blindness and dissolve bone and flesh. Nobody reported that, either.

The NYC coroner's office reported no deaths consistent with high explosives.

Links? I dunno. Go to a library and use the computer to read the New York Times archives starting 9/12/2001.

 

[catsmate]

EDIT: Ah screw it... why leave a reply up to somebody I ignored right after posting?

Also... another addendum

I don't need to tell you things you already know (my patience just finally snapped) but I've given up on any hope that these people are capable of doing the few minutes of googling required to figure this stuff out. Not one of these CD proponents has shown any capacity to do it, ever. Until they learn it I see nothing that justifies taking them seriously anymore.

Agreed, add one to killfile.

Any chance you may stay on one subject instead of flittering around like “Tinker Bell”.

I doubt it. That's the only way he can create the illusion of actually having an argument, rather than a badly stitched together collection of lies, misrepresentations, quote mined rubbish and logical fallacies.

 

[BigAl]

Well done! The engineer on the scene recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure in 1993.

The 1993 bombing was heard by occupants all up and down the WTC towers and for blocks around.

Aside from the impact of the planes, nobody heard anything like on 9/11.

 

[achimspok]

achimspok has yet again demonstrated his knowledge is straight out of Google U.

A "2500 ton" chiller doesn't weigh 2500 tons. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton#Refrigeration​

A. really is the Renascence Man of ignorance.

Oh BigAl, you are the bright wikipedia guy here. Of course the 2500 tons chiller do not weight 2500 tons.
Here is a picture of a modern 2000 tons ice chiller.

and a 2600 tons water chiller

So much about the usability of your tipped over camping press.

 

[Oystein]

No it's not consistent with a fuel conflagration. The picture was taken in 1993 after a truck bomb exploded in the basement.
So stay with your hooligans if you want or show me some subsequent fires caused by a spray of fuel that ignited little trees in the lobby. Or show me some symmetry of the pressure expansion inside the core. Take the express shafts as the center.

How do you know it isn't? Just saying so?
That was all I wanted to say: You can't usually tell these things from a picture, and much less can you conclude these things from witness statements.

Some others have pointed out that there is no proof for a 2001 basement explosion (meaning: high explosive, bomb-type material) vs. a fuel conflagration.

More important to me is the consideration that in the 2001 scenario, a bomb in the basement would not make the slightest bit of sense: Why do this, when you smash planes into the tower high above, and have the towerd crash from top down? Any bomb in the basement would not have had any serious impact and would not have added in any meaningful way to the terror of what happened above. These explosions did some damage and caused some casualties, but they did not even pose a major obstacle to rescue and evacuation activities.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Let's look:
50 ton capacity or weight, Looks like "the official story" can't explain it.

"The official story" has explained it. You haven't even tried.

So come on then, put up or shut up. Explain the disappearance of the press coherently, in a way consistent with your preferred theory. Otherwise, I think we all know who's really engaging in "rhetorical masturbation" here.

Dave

 

[achimspok]

.
Similar != same.
.

.
Not in 2001, there was not.
.

.
No, but then this picture isn't from 2001.
.

.
Are you under the impression that elevator cars completely seal their shafts?
.

.
And how many intact cars were found in the rubble?
.

All 3 cabins were un-crushed after the destruction of the basement. (you could try to read the NIST report.) The effect of the basement bomb to the lobby was 1:1 the same as seen on 9/11 even if you try to crawl out of it.
And btw the explosion wasn't heard all over lower Manhattan. Even a witness inside the tower though it was an earthquake.
http://www.thoughtequity.com/video/clip/5110171AA3013_092.do
If you need more information on that then you could google for "1993 WTC bombing Salem FBI"

 

[Andy_Ross]

How big is the radius of a 25° banking at 497mph?

What has that got to do with it? If you are trying to hit a building you turn towards the building.