[Ed]Hardfire with Mark Roberts and Arthur Scheuerman

Redtail said:
I hearby admit I was wrong and someone from England can say " They hate our freedoms".

Now then what about the FDNY Fire Fighter who said he knew the Building (WTC 7) was coming down? Is he lying? Did "they" tell him it was coming down? Is he in on it?
Click to expand...

I suspect he was told.

How can a firefighter know for certain that a building will come down? It is out of his experience. Before 911, no skyscraper had collapsed in new york or anywhere else, so how did this firefighter become an expert on something so far out of his experience?
 
JHarrow said:
I suspect he was told.
Click to expand...

You suspect wrong.

How can a firefighter know for certain that a building will come down? It is out of his experience. Before 911, no skyscraper had collapsed in new york or anywhere else, so how did this firefighter become an expert on something so far out of his experience?
Click to expand...

How can you know for certain that he can't? It's out of your experience. On 9/11 he was actually there. He had a far better view of, and more time to view WTC 7 than you looking on the net for clips. How did you become such and expert on something so far out of your experience?
 
How many skyscrapers do you think in his career he has announced will collapse? Zero.

He is not a structural engineer and he did not know what would happen to 7, other than what people were telling him.
 
JHarrow said:
How many skyscrapers do you think in his career he has announced will collapse? Zero.

He is not a structural engineer and he did not know what would happen to 7, other than what people were telling him.
Click to expand...

Ok, provide proof that someone told him it would collapse. One picture, one memo, one recording, as proof that someone told him that it was going to collapse.
 
Redtail said:
Ok, provide proof that someone told him it would collapse. One picture, one memo, one recording, as proof that someone told him that it was going to collapse.
Click to expand...

Was he the head of the FDNY that morning? No.

Therefore he was under orders from somebody in charge. That alone tells you he was told by somebody else. Your average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals.
 
JHarrow said:
Was he the head of the FDNY that morning? No.

Therefore he was under orders from somebody in charge. That alone tells you he was told by somebody else. Your average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals.
Click to expand...


Under orders? So someone from the FDNY told him to say that?

As far as the "average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals." What's your proof that the average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals? In fact, what's your proof that he's an average fire fighter?
 
Redtail said:
Under orders? So someone from the FDNY told him to say that?

As far as the "average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals." What's your proof that the average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals? In fact, what's your proof that he's an average fire fighter?
Click to expand...


Stop trying to shift the burden of proof.

You introduced the man as evidence. Do you not even know his rank? If he wasn't the head of the FDNY then he was a subordinate.

You know as well I do that the average firefighter does not appraise buildings. Chiefs make those decisions and firefighters follow.
 
JHarrow said:
I suspect he was told.

How can a firefighter know for certain that a building will come down? It is out of his experience. Before 911, no skyscraper had collapsed in new york or anywhere else, so how did this firefighter become an expert on something so far out of his experience?
Click to expand...

Firefighters will be very aware of the possibility of partial or complete collapse of a building through structural damage and fire because they experience it during their careers. They can justifiably extrapolate this experience and apply it to a multi-storey structure such as the wtc towers and wtc7.

JHarrow said:
How many skyscrapers do you think in his career he has announced will collapse? Zero.

He is not a structural engineer and he did not know what would happen to 7, other than what people were telling him.
Click to expand...

There are plenty in the 'truth' movement who are not structural engineers and yet who insist that it was impossible for the collapse of those buildings to occur through structural damage and fire.

A firefighter will know and understand structural vulnerabilities.

'Truthers' don't have a clue.
 
JHarrow said:
How can a firefighter know for certain that a building will come down? It is out of his experience. Before 911, no skyscraper had collapsed in new york or anywhere else, so how did this firefighter become an expert on something so far out of his experience?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure whether this is a variant on the Jowenko fallacy, or a different one; I suspect the latter. The form is quite distinct:
  • An uninformed poster states that a particular event could not have happened.
  • Expert testimony is produced that the event could, in fact, have happened.
  • The uninformed poster argues that the expert was unable to make a definite statement that the event could have happened.
The only conclusion to be drawn from this is that an uninformed individual does not agree with the informed one. However, the conspiracist somehow infers the conclusion that the original hypothesis, that the event could not have happened, is either proven, or at least in some way supported.

It's partly an argument from incredulity, but that's only the first stage, and the second and third stages are a common characteristic. Anyone want to suggest a name for this one?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
I'm not sure whether this is a variant on the Jowenko fallacy, or a different one; I suspect the latter. The form is quite distinct:
  • An uninformed poster states that a particular event could not have happened.
  • Expert testimony is produced that the event could, in fact, have happened.
  • The uninformed poster argues that the expert was unable to make a definite statement that the event could have happened.
The only conclusion to be drawn from this is that an uninformed individual does not agree with the informed one. However, the conspiracist somehow infers the conclusion that the original hypothesis, that the event could not have happened, is either proven, or at least in some way supported.

It's partly an argument from incredulity, but that's only the first stage, and the second and third stages are a common characteristic. Anyone want to suggest a name for this one?

Dave
Click to expand...

its maybe an Inverse Jowenko?
 
JHarrow said:
Stop trying to shift the burden of proof.

You introduced the man as evidence. Do you not even know his rank? If he wasn't the head of the FDNY then he was a subordinate.

You know as well I do that the average firefighter does not appraise buildings. Chiefs make those decisions and firefighters follow.
Click to expand...

Absolutely wrong. Part of Firefighter training is to appraise the structural stability of a building. This is in case they find themselves someplace unsafe they can figure out if they need to self evacuate even if they were not ordered to leave. Assuming that a firefighter would stay in a building they feel is unsafe just because they don't have an explicit order to leave is ridiculous. You seem to think that firefighters are unthinking automatons.
 
You know as well I do that the average firefighter does not appraise buildings. Chiefs make those decisions and firefighters follow
Click to expand...

I am certified as Fire Safety Officer which means at major incidents am tasked to watch
the scene and report back to command any unusual or safety activities so can be
corrected. One of the things look for is structural safety of building -have been trained
to watch for signs of structural failure. My instructors in this matter were FDNY
chiefs (battalion/deputy), whom were in command on 9/11.

Care to make some more ignorant statements?
 
I've done another split for those of you choosing to ignore my directions about staying on topic. Now, please try and keep it on topic from here.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
JHarrow said:
Was he the head of the FDNY that morning? No.

Therefore he was under orders from somebody in charge. That alone tells you he was told by somebody else. Your average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals.
Click to expand...

You haven't even considered the twin towers earlier collapse as having a possible influence on the person in charge, affecting their decision to become more cautious.
Just some common sense JH, use it.
 
JHarrow said:
Was he the head of the FDNY that morning? No.

Therefore he was under orders from somebody in charge. That alone tells you he was told by somebody else. Your average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals.
Click to expand...

No, your wrong.

This is basic firefighting 101, maybe you should call the FDNY and ask for the Bureau of training at randalls island. Ask to speak to an instructor. Ask them about building collapses, ask them what the major warning signs are.


The number is 718 999 8369


What's stopping you?
 
JHarrow said:
Was he the head of the FDNY that morning? No.

Therefore he was under orders from somebody in charge. That alone tells you he was told by somebody else. Your average firefighter doesn't make those appraisals.
Click to expand...

So in other words, you think that someone in charge of the FDNY issued false claims that WTC7 would collapse? I suppose that makes them "in on it," huh?

Someone like Daniel Nigro...

"The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt." [Fire Engineering magazine, 10/2002]
Click to expand...

That's the guy who made the decision to "pull" back from WTC7 because it was gonna come down, something you claim was not possible without a demolition.

Any luck finding quotes from firefighters expressing shock at WTC7's collapse? No, I didn't think so.
 
Last edited:
JHarrow said:
How can a firefighter know for certain that a building will come down? It is out of his experience. Before 911, no skyscraper had collapsed in new york or anywhere else, so how did this firefighter become an expert on something so far out of his experience?
Click to expand...

See NYCEMT86's post. Firefighters are indeed trained in judging the potential for collapse. Your assertion is incorrect, such knowledge is not beyond a firefighter's experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom