Ground level steel beam

[beachnut]

OK, what are you saying?

The fact you are challenged to comprehend, is self evident by your posts.

You need to pay attention and read. If you try you can comprehend what people are saying. But you may have a disability at understanding simple things, yet alone 9/11 or what other people post to you.

He told you your earlier posts are in error and he told you why!

 

[LashL]

He he he, just as I thought.
Move along nothing to see here.

It's established fact that they lied about the toxicity of the ground zero site.
Everyone knows the place was full of asbestos - and knew at the time, it was no secret.
Everyone saw the place turned to dust.
Whats going to be in the dust Sherlock?
Where's all the asbestos going to go?

Utter spoon bender.

Actually, much of your post is incorrect. While it is certainly true that the collapse of large buildings and the burning of many hundreds of thousands of tons of building contents, including people, will and did create a toxic stew at the site, it is untrue that asbestos played much of a role in that.

One of the towers had asbestos fireproofing up to a certain level (I can't recall the exact floor off the top of my head but if memory serves, it was up to around floor 38) and the other tower did not contain any asbestos at all. WTC7 did not contain asbestos either.

The buildings did not "turn to dust".

Of course, there was a large amount of dust created by the collapses. That dust was tested and its contents were analyzed. The results are clear that asbestos was a very small portion of it.

 

[kookbreaker]

Obviously I must post this again, since scooby was too busy testing out his new masonry drill bits on his skull to see it the first time:

This is a picture of an I-beam from an actual demolition site. You may note the two smooth streaks of purple, and where they end a more jagged edge appears.

The reason is simple: To place the charges, the demolitionists cut 'windows' in the I-beams to place the charge with a blowtorch, hence the jagged cut. When the charge fires, the plasma from said charge produces the purple colored, comparitively smooth cuts on the beam in order to bring down the building.

Now, this is a much closer photo than the one the OP and Scooby are whooping about being 'demolition charge cuts', but even with the photo at that distant column you can tell that cut is not from any explosive cutting charge.

 

[CHF]

OK, what are you saying?

Pd, sock puppet. 100%

Scooby sounds just like Aphelion; the same "huh? Was that for me?" type mentality.

 

[Without Rights]

BWHAHAHAHA! You called yourself neutral them BOOM. Just like in the Income Tax thread. You didn't look at the page I sent you. You have made up your mind, much like you and your sock on the tax thread. Buhbye!

And another thing, on the income tax thread I didn't claim neutrality, so it appears that you can't get anything right. Maybe you should stick with MTV.

 

[Without Rights]

Actually, much of your post is incorrect. While it is certainly true that the collapse of large buildings and the burning of many hundreds of thousands of tons of building contents, including people, will and did create a toxic stew at the site, it is untrue that asbestos played much of a role in that.

I disagree. Reports say:

"WR Grace Asbestos containing insulation was used at the World Trade Center (WTC). James Cintani stated that Grace Vermiculite did not contain asbestos. Unfortunately this was not true this material was 2-5 percent asbestos. 100,000 80 pound bags of this vermiculite was used in the WTC. In addition 9,150 pounds of MonoKote 3 was used at the WTC. Monokote 3 was about 20 percent asbestos. Therefore in total about 201,183 pounds of pure asbestos fiber from Grace was used in the WTC."

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/9/12/192330/380

And the Seattle Post http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/54382_asbestos14.shtml

Federal and state officials have grossly underestimated the number of people in lower Manhattan who are at risk of lethal asbestos-related disease because of the collapse of the World Trade Center, independent experts say.

Evaluations by teams of leading asbestos researchers show the increased risk to people who live, work or study in homes or offices that have not been properly decontaminated could be as high as one additional cancer death for every 10 people exposed.

These figures come as leading government officials continue to insist that there is no long-term health risk to those living and working near ground zero from the dust of hundreds of thousands of tons of asbestos-containing products used in the floors, walls, ceilings and steel frame of the twin towers.

 

[Gravy]

That's a good photo, kookbreaker. I have dozens of photos of torch-cut columns and beams from Ground Zero, but none of a comparison beam cut with cutter charges. I wonder if that's unexploded detcord next to it.

Needless to say, of the thousands of people who handled the steel and examined all the debris for evidence, exactly zero found any evidence of the use of high explosives.

 

[kookbreaker]

That's a good photo, kookbreaker. I have dozens of photos of torch-cut columns and beams from Ground Zero, but none of a comparison beam cut with cutter charges. I wonder if that's unexploded detcord next to it.

It is detcord, my friend who took the picture of it was on site. There was lots of detcord, as well as the copper bracings that they used to hold the charges. Not to mention the stuff they wrap the charges in (carpet, wire, playwood boxes). He gave me some of the copper and used detcord. It was all over the place. Troothers seem to think the stuff burns away like flash paper.

That was from this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76343

 

[Gravy]

I disagree. Reports say:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/9/12/192330/380

And the Seattle Post http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/54382_asbestos14.shtml

LashL is correct about the use of asbestos in the towers. It was installed only on 38 floors of the north tower, and about half of that had been removed over the years as tenants moved in and out. There was no legal requirement to remove the rest, but new tenants generally insisted on its removal.

The asbestos in the WTC dust was still a potential hazard. The EPA did not properly sample it and did prematurely announce that the air in lower Manhattan was safe to breathe. Here are some WTC asbestos links.

Me on WTC asbestos abatement http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2122044&postcount=60

WTC Asbestos Abatement appeal: Port Auth NY & NJ v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co. WTC http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Dec2002/012513.pdf

ATSDR - Asbestos - World Trade Center Full Report http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/asbestos/asbestos/types_of_exposure/WTC_FullReport.html

Did the Ban on Asbestos Lead to Loss of Life? (Guy Tozzoli $ NYT 9/18/01) http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/18/s...tml?ex=1172379600&en=edb5e434a5f33a7c&ei=5070

NYC Dept. of Health Asbestos fact sheet http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/ei/eiasbest.shtml

OSHA asbestos sampling sector B2: WTC & NE http://osha.gov/nyc-disaster/b2.html

OSHA Asbestos Air Sampling Area Map - Lower Manhattan and World Trade Center http://osha.gov/nyc-disaster/map.html

 

[scooby]

I disagree. Reports say:


http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/9/12/192330/380

And the Seattle Post http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/54382_asbestos14.shtml

Thanks for posting that, it's good to see there is some honesty - and sanity on here - who the hell thinks its a good idea to lie about asbestos to win an argument? It's shocking. Somebody could have read that and thought that everything is OK - "Yeah asbestos in the roof Chuck? No problem it's safe in small quantities, I read it on the James Randi Educational Forum. Some joker claimed it was a health hazard - but they soon sorted him out ho ho ho."

It's back to the Dark Ages on here.

Here's the results of the USGS survey done at the WTC in the aftermath of the collapse ...

"Ground sampling consisted of collecting debris from 35 locations in the WTC area, including 33 dust, 2 concrete, and 2 steel beam insulation samples.

Optical photographs of a typical dust sample on the left (sample WTC01-27) and what appeared to be an insulation coating from a steel beam on the right (WTC01-8). The coating contains as much as 20% chrysotile asbestos. Scale bar is 10 millimeters."

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/

People who are new to this site should really consider carefully why information like this is being systematically dismissed on here by a certain group of posters who claim to speak for the forum itself. Corporate 'woo' is not challenged by them while they pretend that this is exactly what they do.

For a start they should read a book "Toxic Sludge is Good For You" by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton - all about how industry creates fake front groups that pretend to represent public opinion but are in actuality just back channels for corporate PR. It's called Astroturfing (fake grass roots support) and explained briefly on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

But the book deals with it in much more detail and gives many real examples of its use in recent history.

In a nutshell the principle is this. A company will be producing unsafe meat for public consumption. They will finance a fake grassroots organisation - "The Safe Meat Foundation" which will look like an independant citizens group. The Safe Meat Foundation will make a big song and dance about the need for safe meat - and will endorse their product.

And there are no if's or but's these days with situations like this - it will happen or they'll hire a new PR company to make it happen.

 

[DavidJames]

Thanks for posting that, it's good to see there is some honesty - and sanity on here - who the hell thinks its a good idea to lie about asbestos to win an argument? It's shocking. Somebody could have read that and thought that everything is OK - "Yeah asbestos in the roof Chuck? No problem it's safe in small quantities, I read it on the James Randi Educational Forum. Some joker claimed it was a health hazard - but they soon sorted him out ho ho ho."

It's back to the Dark Ages on here.

Here's the results of the USGS survey done at the WTC in the aftermath of the collapse ...

"Ground sampling consisted of collecting debris from 35 locations in the WTC area, including 33 dust, 2 concrete, and 2 steel beam insulation samples.

Optical photographs of a typical dust sample on the left (sample WTC01-27) and what appeared to be an insulation coating from a steel beam on the right (WTC01-8). The coating contains as much as 20% chrysotile asbestos. Scale bar is 10 millimeters."

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/

People who are new to this site should really consider carefully why information like this is being systematically dismissed on here by a certain group of posters who claim to speak for the forum itself. Corporate 'woo' is not challenged by them while they pretend that this is exactly what they do.

For a start they should read a book "Toxic Sludge is Good For You" by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton - all about how industry creates fake front groups that intend to represent public opinion but are in actuality just back channels for corporate PR. It's called Astroturfing (fake grass roots support) and explained briefly on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

But the book deals with it in much more detail and gives many real examples of its use in recent history.

In a nutshell the principle is this. A company will be producing unsafe meat for public consumption. They will finance a fake grassroots organisation - "The Safe Meat Foundation" which will look like an independant citizens group. The Safe Meat Foundation will make a big song and dance about the need for safe meat - and will endorse their product.

And there are no if's or but's these days with situations like this - it will happen or they'll hire a new PR company to make it happen.

Another rambling, off topic post by the poster child for A.D.D. tin hatters.

 

[T.A.M.]

Thanks for posting that, it's good to see there is some honesty - and sanity on here - who the hell thinks its a good idea to lie about asbestos to win an argument? It's shocking. Somebody could have read that and thought that everything is OK - "Yeah asbestos in the roof Chuck? No problem it's safe in small quantities, I read it on the James Randi Educational Forum. Some joker claimed it was a health hazard - but they soon sorted him out ho ho ho."

It's back to the Dark Ages on here.

Here's the results of the USGS survey done at the WTC in the aftermath of the collapse ...

"Ground sampling consisted of collecting debris from 35 locations in the WTC area, including 33 dust, 2 concrete, and 2 steel beam insulation samples.

Optical photographs of a typical dust sample on the left (sample WTC01-27) and what appeared to be an insulation coating from a steel beam on the right (WTC01-8). The coating contains as much as 20% chrysotile asbestos. Scale bar is 10 millimeters."

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/

People who are new to this site should really consider carefully why information like this is being systematically dismissed on here by a certain group of posters who claim to speak for the forum itself. Corporate 'woo' is not challenged by them while they pretend that this is exactly what they do.

For a start they should read a book "Toxic Sludge is Good For You" by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton - all about how industry creates fake front groups that intend to represent public opinion but are in actuality just back channels for corporate PR. It's called Astroturfing (fake grass roots support) and explained briefly on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

But the book deals with it in much more detail and gives many real examples of its use in recent history.

In a nutshell the principle is this. A company will be producing unsafe meat for public consumption. They will finance a fake grassroots organisation - "The Safe Meat Foundation" which will look like an independant citizens group. The Safe Meat Foundation will make a big song and dance about the need for safe meat - and will endorse their product.

And there are no if's or but's these days with situations like this - it will happen or they'll hire a new PR company to make it happen.

Scooby, people here, despite your paranoid delusions, are not here to "promote" the official story. The official story is simply the story which has the most reliable (in our minds) evidence behind it. It is the story the majority of people in the world, as a whole (please dont quote those poll results again) believe, and many of them, despite what you think, are smarter than you and I.

What you hope to accomplish with your insults is beyond me. I guess you, like us, get angry at the opposite sides inability to see it like you...fair enough, but that will not change, so you, like us, are beating your head off a brick wall.

I for one do not doubt that the air down at GZ was hazzardous. One of the things I find most frustrating with "truthers" is their assumption that our opinions on other issues must fall in line with some Neocon agenda. My personal views on many issues, would fall way more democrat than conservative. That is where the CTers are wrong. Most here at JREF are not on some "down with the democrats, down with freedoms" agenda. Most here are simply of logical minds, and have as of yet been shown no credible evidence that proves USG direct involvement in carrying out 9/11. We aren't persuaded by "oh isnt that fishy" and "well thats pecular", it isnt nearly enough to make us change our minds. Give me concrete evidence or go home, simple as that.


TAM

 

[Gravy]

For a start they should read a book "Toxic Sludge is Good For You" by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton - all about how industry creates fake front groups that intend to represent public opinion but are in actuality just back channels for corporate PR. It's called Astroturfing (fake grass roots support) and explained briefly on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

I own the book and have read it. "Astroturfing" has nothing to do with Ground Zero. Try to make your future arguments relevant to the topic.

 

[scooby]

I own the book and have read it. "Astroturfing" has nothing to do with Ground Zero. Try to make your future arguments relevant to the topic.

I'm not the one making ludicrous claims in this thread that could cause injury to the public. That you are taking your precious time to argue with me, and not them - I find very insightful.

 

[uk_dave]

scooby, have you ever looked for love on an internet dating site?

 

[LashL]

Scooby, once you learn to read for comprehension, your life will significantly improve. I suggest that you work on that, pronto.

 

[kookbreaker]

And then there's Craig Bartmer - do you by any chance know him?

[SIZE=-1] Former NYPD Officer and 9/11 First Responder Craig Bartmer worked on the rescue operation at Ground Zero. He, like many others who worked to clean Ground Zero, has developed respiratory illnesses as a result of the toxic dust inhaled at the site. Also like many others who were physically affected by the attacks, Craig Bartmer is now combating Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. In this interview he details his eyewitness account of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. He also speaks out against the official 9/11 story, the lies told by the EPA about the air quality at Ground Zero and the critical need for a fresh independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks.[/SIZE]

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2283625397351664218

It's shocking how they covered up the problems with toxicity at ground zero and sent everybody in without the proper equipment, and as a result many have now died and many are dying of asbestosis and similar respiratory problems. No doubt this has been 'debunked'? Care to add your seal of approval and say it ain't so, oh friend of the first reponders?

One thing, to date, that I have not mentioned is that a good friend of mine is a Manhattan EPA agent who was one of the first responders on the site. Now, I'm not sure about this 'coverup' but I have severe doubts that he was part of it. He was on the job making certain the disaster wasn't made worse by the clean-up efforts. One fun bit for him was with the destroyed hotel's (WTC4?) dry cleaning supplies rescued without a spill. You might think that's nothing, but when you realise that Dry Cleaning Fluid is some of the most toxic crap used on every corner of this planet and makes asbestos spray look like pollen.

Anyway, he was onsite for his whole shift in the weeks after the collapse, wearing a jacket that said 'EPA'. Naturally, many workers would come up to him and ask him about the dangers of asbestos and anything else. He was very straightforward with them . HE mentioned the asbestos, but pointed out there were other dangers in that tower, such as the phosphors from perhaps thousands of flouescant lights, not to mention the ones in CRTs that were on every desk in every office. (CRT had other toxic properties). One thing he points out to this day is that he never removed his mask, even in discussion, wheras everyone who approached him had their mask hanging uselessly around their neck. Why did they do that? The discomfort? No, it was so they could smoke.

The EPA did some monitoring, and some claim now that they had no business issuing reports saying the air was comparitively safe. The EPA as an institution was in the hard position of having no evidence of dangerous air, being required to say _something_ and having the pressure of workers wanting to clean-up and the world's largest city saying they wanted to go home. One can be critical now, and there is room for _some_ criticism, certainly. But I wonder how such intellectual giants such as scooby would have handled the situation. He'd probably make a sock-puppet and try to have it make the decision.

 

[scooby]

One thing, to date, that I have not mentioned is that a good friend of mine is a Manhattan EPA agent who was one of the first responders on the site. Now, I'm not sure about this 'coverup' but I have severe doubts that he was part of it ...

Oh nobody's claiming that rank and file EPA employees were involved in any coverup - they did the job they were supposed to do. Christine Todd Whitman is the one responsible for the deaths since, and those to come, this was her statement ...

Statement by Christine Todd Whitman ...

As soon as the first plane hit the North Tower, EPA activated its emergency response personnel from its Regional office in lower Manhattan. Before anyone knew the tragic consequences of the attack, EPA's responders were headed to the site to monitor the cloud of smoke and dust.

EPA immediately dispatched monitoring teams to test the ambient air quality around the World Trade Center site (WTC) and as far away as Jersey City, New Jersey. On the first day, tests were taken for asbestos, lead and a class of chemicals associated with fires and fuel called volatile organic compounds (VOCs). In most instances on the first day, EPA did not detect the presence of these pollutants. In some instances, we found them in very low levels - - well below a level that would be considered a health threat.

EPA performed environmental sampling of debris, as well as air monitoring and air sampling in the work zone and support areas. This data was used to ensure that health and safety plans were implemented to minimize the exposure to hazardous chemicals of the responders doing the firefighting, search and rescue efforts and criminal investigations.

http://epw.senate.gov/107th/Whitman_092402.htm

Her statements in bold, were known to be untrue when she made them, apparently under duress from the Whitehouse - "Go Shopping" ...remember?

You might be interested in this speech by four of the first responders a few months ago, describing the conditions they worked in and the situation that they are in now, it's difficult listening in parts, what with all the wheezing ...

New York Stories: 9/11 First Responders
Guns & Butter, KPFA Radio, Berkeley, CA 94.1 FM
http://gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=142

And by the way - of course they were taking their masks off to smoke - they were told it was safe to do so by Christine Todd Whitman, and we were all told it was safe to smoke by the Tobacco industry for 50 years as well. The full death toll as a result of this is expected to exceed the number of people who died on the day.

 

[Gravy]

I'm not the one making ludicrous claims in this thread that could cause injury to the public. That you are taking your precious time to argue with me, and not them - I find very insightful.

Thank you for finding me insightful. I appreciate it.

 

[WildCat]

scooby, have you ever looked for love on an internet dating site?

Actually, the more he posts the more convinced I am that scooby is not pdoh - but is in fact Stundie! The sentence structure, the improper use of words, the inability to comprehend what he reads, has Stundie all over it.