Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA
The tech briefing video has been removed from the NIST WEB site.
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

Stutter, stutter, stutter sounds like Bush.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsJaRxBiiPI
 
walkyrie said:
..... The controlled demolition of WTC building seven was a standard/usual controlled demolition procedure because was not hit by an airplane .....
Click to expand...


WTC7 Multifloor Damage And Simultaneous Fires Not Caused By Airplane
Walkyrie Proclaims
Nor Did Man Land On Saturn
​
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA
The tech briefing video has been removed from the NIST WEB site.
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

Stutter, stutter, stutter sounds like Bush.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsJaRxBiiPI
Click to expand...
It is bad when Bush figured out 911 before you, 9 years before you. Bad news.

No sections fell due to CD, or Demolition. That is made up by people who are not able to figure out 911 and make delusional statements the "Official Theory is Fictional".

If you pick single points to track velocities, you get velocities for that point, not the sections that point is connected or other section influencing the movement of that point. Studying single points for the collapse is moronic nonsense when used to make up accelerations that mean nothing, when their is no goal. Since the entire collapse took over 15 seconds, there is no mystery to this gravity collapse, only delusion made up by 911 truth due to ignorance.

If we take the all the mass, it fell at less than free-fall accelerations. You have no point, all of 911 truth has no point. Hi Ho Silver
 
femr2 said:
The NIST statement...

In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as exterior column buckling progressed and the columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This freefall drop continued for approximately 8 stories (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s.

...is misleading if read literally, and the values stated are inaccurate.

A more accurate representation of the WTC7 acceleration profile (for the NW corner) is...
[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/7/628055186.png[/qimg]

Note the amount of time that the red line is ON the black line. That is the amount of time the NW corner descended AT freefall.


Do you require explanation as to why this graph conflicts with your personal viewpoint ?
Click to expand...

Smokem if you gottem. (Be dumb if you like)

The entire building fell in concert. Isolating the NW corner to make a "point" is beyond insane.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Smokem if you gottem. (Be dumb if you like)

The entire building fell in concert. Isolating the NW corner to make a "point" is beyond insane.
Click to expand...

Did you know that the installations on the eastern half of the WTC7 roof ("east penthouse") disappeared in a collapse several seconds before the facade started moving?
Did you know that the west penthouse started descending before the facade did?
These facts are clearly discernible from several videos and prove conclusively that your assertion "The entire building fell in concert" is WRONG. The core failed first, the north perimeter last (I think we don't know very well how the south and east facades were timed). Clayton, your condescending style doesn't go well with your obvious lack of knowledge of basic facts about 9/11.

I agree though that all the truthers who isolate one point on the facade and claim it proves CD are beyond insane.
 
Clayton Moore said:
The entire building fell in concert.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. I am sure you will be one of those folk interpreting the *kink* in the roofline in a particular way. That alone must force you to include slight variation across the width of the building (without even mentioning the prior behaviour of the East penthouse).

The NW corner is fairly representative of facade motion behaviour, but of course slight variation of the acceleration profile occurs for differing points. Motion (twisting) of WTC7 actually began >100s in advance of release...
666377698.png


Isolating the NW corner to make a "point" is beyond insane.
Click to expand...
Stating *The entire building fell in concert.* and then rejecting the behaviour of a point on that building is a direct contradiction. Do you see what you did there ?

Note also that David Chandlers data (and NISTs) relate to *isolated points* too.
Do you reject both the NIST and David Chandler data ?

It would seem you must accept the NIST data and interpretation to use the 2.25s of freefall statement in support of anything else you say.

I have shown you data which refutes the NIST claim of 2.25s of gravitational acceleration.

Does that mean you think NIST is correct ?
 
Last edited:
walkyrie said:
... to fall basically on its own footprint, this is the reason the internal of the building seven fell first. The controlled ...
Click to expand...
How is across a street in its own footprint? Why do you make up nonsense like this? What engineering school did you graduate from? Do you have your paper ready for publishing?


lol
femr2 said:
.. I have shown you data which refutes the NIST claim of 2.25s of gravitational acceleration....?
Click to expand...
No you showed a graph you made up using methods you made up from data, which it looks like you smoothed erroneously. You did not show the data, or did you? Poor guy has no clue what you are talking about, but he does share your delusions that the "Official Theory is Fictional". You are in a truther on truther argument. It would be cool if there was a single place to follow the video you used to the data, to the final graph you call data, but is not, it is calculations you made from data, you collected and smoothed, making it not what happen, but what your methods did to the data. WTC 7 was a gravity collapse, it does not matter what you show, and call data.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
No you showed a graph you made up using methods you made up from data, which it looks like you smoothed erroneously.
Click to expand...
Ye gads beachnut. Just because you are not capable of following the very simple steps between raw feature trace data and derived acceleration profile data in graphic form does not mean it is not data. And OF COURSE it is smoothed. Erroniously ? What the hell is that supposed to mean ? You're just hand-waving, and you know it or you wouldn't have prefixed the *lol* (Thought you wanted to spend more time with the grandkids, rather than perpetuate the discussion with your court jester routine)

You did not show the data, or did you?
Click to expand...
Many times.

Poor guy has no clue what you are talking about
Click to expand...
Then I shall explain it if he's receptive.
 
Oystein said:
Did you know that the installations on the eastern half of the WTC7 roof ("east penthouse") disappeared in a collapse several seconds before the facade started moving?
Did you know that the west penthouse started descending before the facade did?
These facts are clearly discernible from several videos and prove conclusively that your assertion "The entire building fell in concert" is WRONG. The core failed first, the north perimeter last (I think we don't know very well how the south and east facades were timed). Clayton, your condescending style doesn't go well with your obvious lack of knowledge of basic facts about 9/11.

I agree though that all the truthers who isolate one point on the facade and claim it proves CD are beyond insane.
Click to expand...

Look up the definition of in concert.

with a common plan
 
walkyrie said:
Was a quite normal procedure for the controlled demolition team to install the cutting charges to remove "first" the internal support columns inside the building seven and allow the WTC building seven to fall basically on its own footprint, this is the reason the internal of the building seven fell first. The controlled demolition of WTC building seven was a standard/usual controlled demolition procedure because was not hit by an airplane , on the other hand to bring down the WTC North and South towers, the controlled demolition team choose to start the controlled demolition from the point of airliner impact because bring down on 9/11 the WTC North and South starting the usual demolition detonations from the lowest street level will make the disintegration of the towers looks suspicious even for george bush and glenn beck
Click to expand...

Have you considered for just a moment that turning such a national tragedy into a meaningless hobby is in the very least bad taste. Over 3000 people died that day and you act like this is a game. You don't even put effort into your fairy tales. Find something else to occupy yourself with. This topic deserve better than you.
 
femr2 said:
Ye gads beachnut. Just because you are not capable of following the very simple steps between raw feature trace data and derived acceleration profile data in graphic form does not mean it is not data. And OF COURSE it is smoothed. Erroniously ? What the hell is that supposed to mean ? You're just hand-waving, and you know it or you wouldn't have prefixed the *lol* (Thought you wanted to spend more time with the grandkids, rather than perpetuate the discussion with your court jester routine)


Many times.


Then I shall explain it if he's receptive.
Click to expand...
I have been an engineer since 1974, your work is at best nonsense. You have no place where it is, in one complete organized work. That is nonsense. My grandkids organize their work better than you do, yesterday my 3 year old grandson organized the popcorn popping exercise, and he directed the popping of four batches, in a machine exactly like a movie theater has; your work suffers from no organization, no goal, unlike my grandson who completed a task, and we are still enjoying. Nice try, but your work sucks, and if you could organize it, it might get worse. Yes, you erroneously smoothed your data, it is most likely why you think NIST is wrong, and failed to publish your work which is not organized to be published, now or ever?

Where is the raw data and the video again, or is this too much trouble for you to go to? Can you organize it into a usable form? Connect the dots?

And the poor guy thinks you are not a truther, and you think you are not a truther, but people who say the Official Theory is Fictional are truther, or closet truther if they deny their their truther status. The terrorists were proud to be terrorists, why are some truthers not proud to stand up; BCR stands up and is a truther, why are you ashame, with all your "Demolition" videos out on youtube, or have you retitled them gravity collapse?

You don't have data, you have made up data based on what you think you should do. Relax, not many people cares about your "data", it has the special no goal tag to it, and no one needs it to prove anything, as you have clearly stated, you will no publish, you will not inform NIST, you have no conclusion, you have no goals.

Where is that data? Not the smooth curve which actually is impossible as you presented it. Go ahead say the graph of acceleration is real, it is not. It is impossible from the data you got it from, and you can't apply the filters you used, you never studied the errors past waving your hands. I was trained to understand when contractors were spewing nonsense by the USAF when I got my masters degree, and you are pushing pure nonsense. You will not be getting the contract until you put your work in a usable form. Go ahead try to put your work into usable form.

How is your the "Official Theory is Fictional" coming along?
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
I have been an engineer since 1974, your work is at best nonsense. You have no place where it is, in one complete organized work. That is nonsense. My grandkids organize their work better than you do, yesterday my 3 year old grandson organized the popcorn popping exercise, and he directed the popping of four batches, in a machine exactly like a movie theater has; your work suffers from no organization, no goal, unlike my grandson who completed a task, and we are still enjoying. Nice try, but your work sucks, and if you could organize it, it might get worse. Yes, you erroneously smoothed your data, it is most likely why you think NIST is wrong, and failed to publish your work which is not organized to be published, now or ever?

Where is the raw data and the video again, or is this too much trouble for you to go to? Can you organize it into a usable form? Connect the dots?

And the poor guy thinks you are not a truther, and you think you are not a truther, but people who say the Official Theory is Fictional are truther, or closet truther if they deny their their truther status. The terrorists were proud to be terrorists, why are some truthers not proud to stand up; BCR stands up and is a truther, why are you ashame, with all your "Demolition" videos out on youtube, or have you retitled them gravity collapse?

You don't have data, you have made up data based on what you think you should do. Relax, not many people cares about your "data", it has the special no goal tag to it, and no one needs it to prove anything, as you have clearly stated, you will no publish, you will not inform NIST, you have no conclusion, you have no goals.

Where is that data? Not the smooth curve which actually is impossible as you presented it. Go ahead say the graph of acceleration is real, it is not. It is impossible from the data you got it from, and you can't apply the filters you used, you never studied the errors past waving your hands. I was trained to understand when contractors were spewing nonsense by the USAF when I got my masters degree, and you are pushing pure nonsense. You will not be getting the contract until you put your work in a usable form. Go ahead try to put your work into usable form.

How is your the "Official Theory is Fictional" coming along?
Click to expand...

You're kidding? You're a freaking engineer? Do you have a job? Did you ever have a job? I know. You were an inspector for the government.
 
Craig4 said:
Have you considered for just a moment that turning such a national tragedy into a meaningless hobby is in the very least bad taste. Over 3000 people died that day and you act like this is a game. You don't even put effort into your fairy tales. Find something else to occupy yourself with. This topic deserve better than you.
Click to expand...
Gullible Americans
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14531.htm
Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.

The two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission Report, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, have just released a new book, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.” Kean and Hamilton reveal that the commission suppressed the fact that Muslim ire toward the US is due to US support for Israel’s persecution and dispossession of the Palestinians, not to our “freedom and democracy” as Bush propagandistically claims. Kean and Hamilton also reveal that the US military committed perjury and lied about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners. The commission even debated referring the military’s lies to the Justice Department for criminal investigation. Why should we assume that these admissions are the only coverups and lies in the 9/11 Commission Report?
Click to expand...


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14566.htm

What we know and don’t know about 9/11

The uniformity of the US media has become much more complete since the days of the cold war. During the 1990s, the US government permitted an unconscionable concentration of print and broadcast media that terminated the independence of the media. Today the US media is owned by 5 giant companies in which pro-Zionist Jews have disproportionate influence. More importantly, the values of the conglomerates reside in the broadcast licenses, which are granted by the government, and the corporations are run by corporate executives--not by journalists--whose eyes are on advertising revenues and the avoidance of controversy that might produce boycotts or upset advertisers and subscribers. Americans who rely on the totally corrupt corporate media have no idea what is happening anywhere on earth, much less at home.

Despite the dark days in which we live, some readers find optimism in recent polls that show more than one-third of the US public now disbelieve the official account of 9/11 despite the Bush regime’s propaganda faithfully trumpeted by the US media. Bush’s own rock-bottom polls show that Americans, like the Russians of the Soviet era, can read between the lines of the propagandistic US media. Many Americans can still spot a liar and a cheat when they see one.
Click to expand...

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
 
Clayton Moore said:
You're kidding? You're a freaking engineer? Do you have a job? Did you ever have a job? I know. You were an inspector for the government.
Click to expand...
Yes, your tax dollars (you are a US citizen) sent me to school, Twice (actually to more than 7 schools from survival, pilot training, to management training and more), let me learn to fly high performance jet trainers, supersonic T-38, it was a trip, I flew heavy jets, KC-135, was an evaluator, instructor, aircraft commander, co-pilot, was an engineer for advance cockpit designs, ran a computer lab, did death notification, ran airlift for Bosnia and Herzegovina, flew the first night of Desert Storm, etc, etc, etc. And I am only a tanker toad...

1tankerflight.jpg

Forgot to mention, I am a scuba diver, and photographer. The plane in the lead is the type I flew, and I am flying one as the picture is taken, not sure if the Copilot took this or I did, since I would be cross cockpit; I forgot, this is from 1980, or so. I have about 4,000 hours flying these jets, would have more but I was also an engineer, and more during my career.

I was trained as an aircraft accident investigator, at a management level. I own, as the manage, aircraft accident scenes after the fire chief handed over the site.

I flew and worked as an engineer for the USAF for 28 years. No big deal, I enjoyed every second. Norway, Perth, Amberly, Guam, Okinawa, Diego Garcia, Italy, England, Belgium, Hawaii, Alaska, Nevada, Oregon, Georgia, Ohio, Oklahoma, Australia, and more where I worked for the USAF.

I am here because JREF is a skeptics forum, for critical thinking, and heard the claims of fantastic maneuver by jets flown by terrorists. Then I looked into it, and found the terrorists did not fly good enough to pass a check-ride. I found every single claim by 911 truth is false, based on hearsay and lies; no evidence. I have an ATP, what you need to fly Captain for the major airlines, but I only flew for myself and the USAF, since 1973, I have been a pilot. You remember the Right Stuff? "Who was the best pilot I ever saw? Well, uh, you're lookin' at 'im",,, C'est moi

Plus mom and dad made me take typing class... and go to engineering school, thanks mom, thanks dad
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom