Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[BigAl]

Why are peope trying to rewrite Evans' testimony?

He didn't say an hour ago, and he is certaily not talking about the collapse. He states that about an hour after the second plane hit there was a big explosion from much lower down and he doesn't know what on earth caused it. It wasn't the collapse because he would know what on earth caused that.

Evans describes noises consistent in time and loudness with planes hitting towers and gas vapor explosions.

You've been given a list of the many reports of gas and gas vapor in the towers down to the basement.

Here's what a gas vapor explosion looks and sounds like.

Paint store explosion
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2178600570591048350
News Story
http://blogs.chron.com/woodlands/archives/2006/02/fume_fire_paint.html
​

 

[cooperman]

Evans describes noises consistent in time and loudness with planes hitting towers and gas vapor explosions.

You've been given a list of the many reports of gas and gas vapor in the towers down to the basement.

Here's what a gas vapor explosion looks and sounds like.

Paint store explosion
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2178600570591048350
News Story
http://blogs.chron.com/woodlands/archives/2006/02/fume_fire_paint.html
​

No, Evans' clearly states that about an hour after the second plane hit there was a big explosion much lower down. How does a fuel explosion happen an hour after the plane has hit?

 

[BigAl]

He must have just been confused. Firefighters are only reliable expert witnesses when what they say supports the official story when their statements are read in their entirety and considered with all the other statements, the evidence and the laws of physics.

The debunkers will soon start to say that we should trck these firefighters down and ask them what they think now.

ftfy

The cherry-picked Evans quote is an example of the "Truth Movement's" abuse of ellipses. There are more than 100 ellipses in the documents on the Journal of 911 Studies web site and in essentially every instance these are the quotes of fireman and the ellipses were put there to hide inconvenient truths, that the firemen knew that what they called explosions were anything but CD.

 

[BigAl]

Why are peope trying to rewrite Evans' testimony?

He didn't say an hour ago, and he is certaily not talking about the collapse. He states that about an hour after the second plane hit there was a big explosion from much lower down and he doesn't know what on earth caused it. It wasn't the collapse because he would know what on earth caused that.

Thar would put his "explosion" at about when the North tower collapsed.

 

[twinstead]

One could turn that around on you cooperman and say that you consider firefighters reliable expert witnesses only when what they say supports your story.

But I would never say that because that would be a cop out, though, wouldn't it? Oh wait. That's what you did. Sorry, never mind.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Hey, heres an idea. Instead of reading Mackey's critique of Griffins summary of Evans' statements about something completely different, why don't we watch a nice video of Steven Evans describing the explosion I am talking about, that he personally experienced an hour after the sevond plane hit.

Is that a good idea?

Here it is

Or even better, we can listen to the available audio of the collapse which accompanies both the Naudet footage I posted earlier and the video in which Evan's testimony is recorded - both of which I posted. The former takes place at the time of the south tower collapse, the Evans interview is immediately before the North tower collapse. Since neither of the audio evidence, nor the physical evidence supports explosive detonations, I think we can safely conclude that he heard the impact of debris as the towers collapsed, and that his description of "explosions" is not useful support for explosives.

 

[Mancman]

I am not mixing details up. I don't dispute that there were lobby explosions when the planes hit. How is that relevant here?

Steven Evans, the BBC journalist, described a huge explosion at the base of the South Tower, just before it collapsed. That is an hour after the plane hit.

The fireman in the video describe a huge explosion in the lobby before the tower collapsed. Nothing to do with planes, they had hit an hour before.

Two misrepresentations. Steven Evans never stated anything about whether the tower had collapsed or not, he just said 'we had that big explosion from much lower, I don't know what on earth caused that'. Obvious to anyone he was describing the South Tower collapse, but didn't know at the time what had happened. It happened 56 minutes after the plane hit. 56 mins, one hour.

The firemen? Watch the Naudet film. J. Naudet is in the same lobby as those firemen, filming, the South Tower comes down next door, extremely loud, everyone runs, gets smothered in dust.
A fireman, on film, radios 'we took a hit on that last explosion'. They didn't know what had happened, even after they walked outside and saw the smoke and smashed Marriot Hotel they still didn't know the South Tower was down. They described the collapse as an explosion, simple as that.

 

[cooperman]

Two misrepresentations. Steven Evans never stated anything about whether the tower had collapsed or not, he just said 'we had that big explosion from much lower, I don't know what on earth caused that'. Obvious to anyone he was describing the South Tower collapse, but didn't know at the time what had happened. It happened 56 minutes after the plane hit. 56 mins, one hour.

The firemen? Watch the Naudet film. J. Naudet is in the same lobby as those firemen, filming, the South Tower comes down next door, extremely loud, everyone runs, gets smothered in dust.
A fireman, on film, radios 'we took a hit on that last explosion'. They didn't know what had happened, even after they walked outside and saw the smoke and smashed Marriot Hotel they still didn't know the South Tower was down. They described the collapse as an explosion, simple as that.

He was interviewed while standing in front of the North Tower while it collapsed. How could he not know the south tower had collapsed.

He clearly states at 10:25am that he doesn't know what on earth caused the big explosion much lower down. If he was talking about a collapse he would say so.

Unless you want to suggest that this journalist hadn't noticed the south tower had collapsed.

 

[Dave Rogers]

So, since we know the South Tower collapse - like the North Tower collapse - was top-down, that parts of the core remained standing for a few seconds after the collapse, that parts of the perimeter columns of both towers were still standing when everything had collapsed, and that therefore any explosion in the bottom of the tower can't have had any causal connection to its collapse, and - besides all that - that what Evans heard sounded like, but may well not even have been, an explosion, was there a point anywhere in sight here?

Dave

 

[T.A.M.]

Exactly, this idea of explosions in the basement is a non starter, because explosives in the basement makes no sense given what we know of the collapse, how it occurred, and the times that these alleged explosions occurred in relation to the collapses.

TAM

 

[BigAl]

He was interviewed while standing in front of the North Tower while it collapsed. How could he not know the south tower had collapsed.

He clearly states at 10:25am that he doesn't know what on earth caused the big explosion much lower down. If he was talking about a collapse he would say so.

Unless you want to suggest that this journalist hadn't noticed the south tower had collapsed.

Whatever he heard, it wasn't loud enough to be recorded on any of the countless video cameras in operation and wasn't intense enough to cause deaths and injuries consistent with barotrauma.

Barotrauma Executive summary: These links describe what injuries are characteristic of high explosive detonation. They also catalog the terrorist bombings of the 90s on. WTC on 9/11 is only listed as a terrorist attack and makes no mention of blast injuries.

I can't find a single reference to a barotrauma injury or death at WTC on 9/11, the literature for other bombings is full of them.

Explosions have the capability to cause multisystem, life-threatening injuries in single or multiple victims simultaneously. These types of events present complex triage, diagnostic, and management challenges for the health care provider. Explosions can produce classic injury patterns from blunt and penetrating mechanisms to several organ systems, but they can also result in unique injury patterns to specific organs including the lungs and the central nervous system.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/822587-overview​

Explosions and Blast injuries - A Primer for Clinicians
http://www.cdc.gov/masstrauma/preparedness/primer.pdf

Blast Injuries
http://www.rph.wa.gov.au/anaesth/downloads/Blast Injuries (Mr S. Rao).pdf


This is a good description of injuries due to blast. Unfortunately, it's PowerPoint. Not everyone can view it.
www.southbaydrc.org/users/blast.ppt

subscription required. Can someone look at it for me? http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMra042083


Page 42
http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&...vWHuBzK9oNpUvH40rLZTZYQio#v=onepage&q&f=false

===========================================

http://archsurg.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/140/11/1068

Results The major cause of morbidity for the September 11, 2001, patients was smoke inhalation (30.0%); followed closely by chemical conjunctivitis and corneal abrasions (16%); lacerations, abrasions, and soft-tissue injuries (15.5%); isolated orthopedic complaints (12%); and psychiatric complaints (10%). Multiple-trauma patients were 3% of the patients seen. There were 5 fatalities at Saint Vincent’s Hospital.

=========================================


Blast injuries traditionally are divided into 4 categories: primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary (or miscellaneous) injuries. A patient may be injured by more than one of these mechanisms.1,2

* A primary blast injury is caused solely by the direct effect of blast overpressure on tissue. Air is easily compressible, unlike water. As a result, a primary blast injury almost always affects air-filled structures such as the lung, ear, and gastrointestinal (GI) tract.
* A secondary blast injury is caused by flying objects that strike people.
* A tertiary blast injury is a feature of high-energy explosions. This type of injury occurs when people fly through the air and strike other objects.
* Miscellaneous or quaternary blast injuries encompass all other injuries caused by explosions, such as burns, crush injuries, and toxic inhalations. For example, the crash of two jet airplanes into the World Trade Center only created a relatively low-order pressure wave, but the resulting fire and building collapse killed thousands.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/822587-overview

 

[beachnut]

Like that's ever going to happen.

Steven Evans explains what happened when the first tower was hit:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/forum/1548674.stm

I was in the hotel room on the phone broadcasting. I didn't realise that pictures of those were going out live, so I was describing the scene that was in front of me. I couldn't actually see the tower because it was masked by a wall just to my right. But what happened at that moment, as I described with the ambulances below and the north tower which I could see, is a sort of whoosh of smoke and gusts and that kind of thing coming into that street below me. It was at that point that the phones went and that hotel was then evacuated and the alarms went off. But all the phones in the area had gone obviously and you couldn't use your mobile so that's why I went out of contact but I was then getting away from that area to a point a little bit further back.

Broadcast being talked about above.




Then we have Cooperman's video, where Evans has left his room and we can see a tower collapsing. Which tower would that be Cooperman? If Evans had heard an explosion from below an hour ago what would he be describing?





Now comes the truly funny part, Evans debunking Cooperman.:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/forum/1548674.stm


Something that comes into my mind about all this. My uncle is an engineer and he was teaching the next day in McGill and coincidentally the lecture he was giving was about high-rise buildings. So he started off his lecture by saying: there is no way of avoiding this, we can't avoid talking about what happened yesterday and the whole class apparently - I wasn't there, he was there - was just utterly silent from the start. He then described the engineering of that crash - what happened to those buildings and what he says is that those buildings would have been built to sustain that kind of knock. It is not the knock from the airliners which demolished them.

He says that an airliner could have flown through those buildings and they would have stayed standing. But it is the heat that actually did it and you need a temperature - according to him - no greater than burning wood basically. And what that does is, it just makes the metal slightly pliable. Right at the top it gets pliable with the heat - the heat at the top apparently gets hotter. So it bends and collapses at the top and that weight goes down so it demolishes like the pack of cards you saw.

911 truth will continue to quibble and ignore the facts. Cooperman posted lies about One Meridian Plaza and never retracted them, he will not recognize this. He missed this post, and keeps pushing his Pulitzer Prize winning quote mining.

 

[Mancman]

He was interviewed while standing in front of the North Tower while it collapsed. How could he not know the south tower had collapsed.

He clearly states at 10:25am that he doesn't know what on earth caused the big explosion much lower down. If he was talking about a collapse he would say so.

Unless you want to suggest that this journalist hadn't noticed the south tower had collapsed.

He couldn't say the 'explosion' was caused by the collapse if he didn't know there had been a collapse. He never mentions anything about tower collapse during his retelling, you think he would considering that's a rather significant event. But that would require him to know about it.

Listen to what Jules Naudet says after he walks out of WTC1 after the WTC2 collapse: "There's debris everywhere, there's dust covering the entire place, and we look and the tower's here, so ok, it's probably just something else, it's standing, the other one we can't see but it's probably just on the other side....no one tells us, we have no clue"

Jules Naudet and the firefighters he was with didn't know WTC2 collapsed, and they were 150 feet away at the time. So yeah, I'd say a journalist in the street might not know what had occured. If he had seen the tower collapse he would have mentioned it.

 

[twinstead]

Yea but Naudet and the firefighters with him were in on it. Silly sheeple

 

[ProBonoShill]

Two misrepresentations. Steven Evans never stated anything about whether the tower had collapsed or not, he just said 'we had that big explosion from much lower, I don't know what on earth caused that'. Obvious to anyone he was describing the South Tower collapse, but didn't know at the time what had happened. It happened 56 minutes after the plane hit. 56 mins, one hour.
The firemen? Watch the Naudet film. J. Naudet is in the same lobby as those firemen, filming, the South Tower comes down next door, extremely loud, everyone runs, gets smothered in dust.
A fireman, on film, radios 'we took a hit on that last explosion'. They didn't know what had happened, even after they walked outside and saw the smoke and smashed Marriot Hotel they still didn't know the South Tower was down. They described the collapse as an explosion, simple as that.

Bolding mine.

He was interviewed while standing in front of the North Tower while it collapsed. How could he not know the south tower had collapsed.

He clearly states at 10:25am that he doesn't know what on earth caused the big explosion much lower down. If he was talking about a collapse he would say so.

Unless you want to suggest that this journalist hadn't noticed the south tower had collapsed.

Cooperman, you are a typical lazy truther who is so easy to debunk because you never investigate your sources.

Lets watch the following video shall we, pay special attention to what Mr. Evans says at the 1:18 mark:



You're not faring very well here, maybe you should go back to lurking.

 

[femr2]

therefore any explosion in the bottom of the tower can't have had any causal connection to its collapse

Are you, by inference, suggesting that events low within WTC 7 can't have had any causal connection to, say, the East Penthouse descent ?

Evans

What he said, was what he said. Same as the video doing the rounds of the fire-fighters talking about explosions. Folk can speculate about what they personally think Evans and the firefighters were saying, if they hadn't said what they did, but it doesn't change what they said If Evans released a statement specifically stating that what he was referring to was *X*, then fine, otherwise it remains...

There was another big, big explosion, in the other tower. Flames coming out (inaudible) billowing grey smoke. People still not panicking. People not quite understanding what was going on. Then somebody said that they saw an airliner go into one of those towers. Then, er, I don't know, an hour later than that we had that big explosion, from much much lower. I don't know what on earth caused that.

My tuppence worth ?

There was another big, big explosion, in the other tower.

Another explosion. After the first impact. The second impact. In the other tower, WTC 2.

Flames coming out (inaudible) billowing grey smoke.

Yep, second impact.

People still not panicking. People not quite understanding what was going on. Then somebody said that they saw an airliner go into one of those towers.

He didn't see the impacts, so described them as explosions.

Then, er, I don't know, an hour later than that

An hour after second impact.

we had that big explosion, from much much lower. I don't know what on earth caused that.

At the time of WTC 2 descent.

 

[cooperman]

So, since we know the South Tower collapse - like the North Tower collapse - was top-down, that parts of the core remained standing for a few seconds after the collapse, that parts of the perimeter columns of both towers were still standing when everything had collapsed, and that therefore any explosion in the bottom of the tower can't have had any causal connection to its collapse, and - besides all that - that what Evans heard sounded like, but may well not even have been, an explosion, was there a point anywhere in sight here?

Dave

Can you prove the bolded statement? The initiating event in wtc 7 occured at the 13th floor and that led to the penthouse collapsing first 34 stories higher up.

 

[bill smith]

He must have just been confused. Firefighters are only reliable expert witnesses when what they say supports the official story.

The debunkers will soon start to say that we should trck these firefighters down and ask them what they think now.

This scientific study of the firefighter statements is even more appropriate today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Cooperman wouldn't know what I think of him brining in these dead CTs that died long ago.

Cooperman, I'm a firefighter & everything you might think happened or what the firemen said is utter garbage. So do yourself a favor, stop quote-mining people, especially firefighters.

The FDNY is sick of you Truthers, none of you has the balls or guts to visit their fire houses to talk with them directly. If the FDNY should go all "Gangs of New York" on you Truthers, I wouldn't blame them.

The CTs are just a bunch of "Queen Dicks"!

 

[cooperman]

Cooperman wouldn't know what I think of him brining in these dead CTs that died long ago.

Cooperman, I'm a firefighter & everything you might think happened or what the firemen said is utter garbage. So do yourself a favor, stop quote-mining people, especially firefighters.

The FDNY is sick of you Truthers, none of you has the balls or guts to visit their fire houses to talk with them directly. If the FDNY should go all "Gangs of New York" on you Truthers, I wouldn't blame them.

The CTs are just a bunch of "Queen Dicks"!

I wonder how firefighters would react if a debunker turned up at the firehouse to tell them that they are all violent thugs.

To be honest, if it were really true that a firefighter would physically assualt me for my view then I don't like firefighters.

By the way, I would indeed be prepared to tell a firefighter face to face that I don't accept the NIST theory on collapse.