Controlled demolition vs. the towers collapsing

leftysergeant said:
He has the ends of the columns in the upperand lower blocks meeting squarely post-initiation.

Utter rubbish.
Click to expand...

I'm referring to his "The Sustainability of the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis for the Destruction of the Twin Towers", April 24, 2007, paper, the safety factors cited within which Trifor claims have been "proven wrong" "time and time again".
 
Anders Lindman said:
And parts of the wings? Not to mention the three jet engines that somehow evaporated into thin air along with all the black boxes.
Click to expand...

Neither a 767 or 757 has three engines. You can't even get basic details correct and you want to argue whether or not WTC was a CD?

I don't know how old you are or if your mom knows you are playing on her computer...but stop trolling the boards with this crap. Go over to LCF if you want acceptance...you're not going to get it here.
 
ergo said:
Big Al, you didn't answer my question about the tabulation of WTC deaths and injuries that you spoke of.
Click to expand...

You are so cute when you demand cites when all you do is fling unsubstantiated claims against the wall.

None of it sticks.

Thanks to T.A.M.:

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.
Click to expand...

None of the above qualify as barotrauma.

Explosions and Blast injuries - A Primer for Clinicians
http://www.cdc.gov/masstrauma/preparedness/primer.pdf
 
Last edited:
ergo said:
Sorry, don't see much debunking going on here. Or even "debunking". What was the main error that Tony supposedly made? Can you summarize for us?
Click to expand...

TOny says the safety factor is 5. Everyone else, including the NIST says something else.
 
leftysergeant said:
Not all elevator shafts ran through the impacted floors. Nobody took an elevator from the impact area.
Click to expand...

That's not the point. The point is, with the staggered elevator shafts, which would also have had their own fire barriers, the fuel could not have run down one and then the other from the impact floors.
 
Guys, guys, guys. Some people heard loud noises on 9/11 before the towers fell. It must have been CD. I don't know why you're still arguing, there is no other explanation.
 
sabretooth47 said:
Neither a 767 or 757 has three engines. You can't even get basic details correct and you want to argue whether or not WTC was a CD?

I don't know how old you are or if your mom knows you are playing on her computer...but stop trolling the boards with this crap. Go over to LCF if you want acceptance...you're not going to get it here.
Click to expand...

I didn't count this planted engine of wrong type:

wtc16.jpg


What happened to the other 3 engines? [EDIT: Correction: What happened to all 4 engines?]
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
TOny says the safety factor is 5. Everyone else, including the NIST says something else.
Click to expand...

Well, we already know NIST has lied on several points and omits large amounts of evidence, so to say that his calculations don't agree with NIST's is not saying anything particularly shocking. Who is "everyone else"?
 
ergo said:
Well, we already know NIST has lied on several points and omits large amounts of evidence.
Click to expand...

Oh? So why not take the large amounts of evidence and submit it to NIST along with an explanation on how their analysis was incorrect? Surely you can do that? It would be a lot more useful than plugging away on JREF, where nothing useful will ever get accomplished.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
I didn't count this planted engine of wrong type:

[qimg]http://www.apfn.org/apfn/images2/wtc16.jpg[/qimg]

What happened to the other 3 engines?
Click to expand...

planted? wrong type? 2006 much? Guys, someone help this guy out...he seems to be new at this.

TAM:)
 
Anders Lindman said:
I didn't count this planted engine of wrong type:

[qimg]http://www.apfn.org/apfn/images2/wtc16.jpg[/qimg]

What happened to the other 3 engines? [EDIT: Correction: What happened to all 4 engines?]
Click to expand...

What's wrong about it?

Careful here, kiddo...I am a trained aircraft technician...
 
ergo said:
I believe all my claims here have been substantiated.



yes, thanks TAM.



Fair enough, but I'll point out those are stats regarding those who died. Also, Bellevue took a number of patients.
Click to expand...

No they are not. They are based on Emergency Room Visits. You are mistaking the word MORBIDITY (injury/disease) for MORTALITY (Death).

TAM:)
 
ergo said:
That's not the point. The point is, with the staggered elevator shafts, which would also have had their own fire barriers, the fuel could not have run down one and then the other from the impact floors.
Click to expand...

Cite your source.....
 
Anders Lindman said:
I didn't count this planted engine of wrong type:

[qimg]http://www.apfn.org/apfn/images2/wtc16.jpg[/qimg]

What happened to the other 3 engines? [EDIT: Correction: What happened to all 4 engines?]
Click to expand...

I see what you did there. You want evidence of something, but when it is provided, you handwave it away. How cute.....
 
Java Man said:
Where were those explosions reported? Lower floors, basement, upper floors? Where?
Click to expand...

I don't recall off the top of my head, but I am sure your truther friends have a compiled list...it is irrelevent, as the buildings were losing their structural integrity, losing/lost their electrical, and had bodies, and elevators, etc...falling, so it wouldn't surprise me or be suspicious (to me) if anyone, anywhere in the building, reported a loud bang that they describe as an "explosion".

TAM:)
 
ergo said:
Well, we already know NIST has lied on several points and omits large amounts of evidence, so to say that his calculations don't agree with NIST's is not saying anything particularly shocking. Who is "everyone else"?
Click to expand...

Really? Cite the lies, and provide the evidence as to why it is a lie.

Read the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom