Loose Change - Part III

[Gravy]

What the hell have I been doing for the past ten years cooking left over pizza? 450 to be precise, for 4 minutes.

ETA. Nevermind also.
I like pizza.
Carry on.

 

[Mancman]

I want to shoot myself now.

Someone on my YouTube video is claiming that he is an engineer and many other engineers disagree with the official theory, and that the fires couldn't have gone higher then 200 degrees celcius (I cook my pizza at 400 degrees!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZGscWP5Osw

[qimg]http://www.doctorsecrets.com/your-mind/suicide.gif[/qimg]

Oh god, I don't even bother with youtube comments anymore. They're even more infuriating than the Loose Change forum. I recently had someone say 'no your wrong the towers came down in 8 seconds top to bottom'. It might as well be renamed wootube.

And a question to all - Silverstein Group bought the WTC lease from the NYPA for $3.2 billion dollars. But how much of this was eventually paid back to the Port Authority? All of it? Any of it?

 

[WildCat]

IIRC, to cook a proper Chicago deep dish pizza you need 600 F. Which is why you can't make one at home.

 

[MarkyX]

Okay so I decided to check out some conversations..

I warm up my pizza at 450-470 F for 4 minutes

450F - 232 C
470F - 243 C

So what this "engineer" is stating is that the fires in the world trade center, or more specifically, the "pockets of fire", could not have produced more heat then my oven (despite the carbon-based material, plastics, chairs, carpetting, the drywall, and the fuel)



Please don't tell me that I just owned a college-educated "engineer"

 

[Abbyas]

So what this "engineer" is stating is that the fires in the world trade center, or more specifically, the "pockets of fire", could not have produced more heat then my oven (despite the carbon-based material, plastics, chairs, carpetting, the drywall, and the fuel)

I've heard this bs, that there were no raging fires in the towers. I remember walking over the brooklyn bridge that day after the first tower went down and before the second one did. The fires were so large, that from where I was, you could see details in the individual flames.

Grumblegmblgestupidgrmblegrmblectidiotsgrmblegrmble.

 

[jhunter1163]

Silverstein is still paying $120M/year to the Port Authority. Seems that having your building destroyed doesn't let you out of the lease. Also, the towers were insured for considerably less than replacement cost. I guess Silverstein didn't expect to have to replace them...

(edited for grammar)

 

[realitybites]

Is this a new thing with the woo? I know the temperature of the fires has always a bone of contention with them, but there seems to be a new wave of people spouting off ridiculously low temps.

One guy over at LC yesterday said the towers didn't even reach 200 degrees F. (He later admitted he might have exaggerated.) But still....

Common sense should enter into the equation at some point, no?

 

[chipmunk stew]

This quote from ian neal, one of The British 9/11 Truth Campaign's board Organisers, is very encouraging:

Hi Ally

I'm not having a go but I do seem to make this point quite often. You know when you (and other campaigners) go on other boards that are vehemently anti-conspiracy theories and we get labelled fruitloop, wingbat, conspiraloon, right-wing nutjobs and similar ad hominem attacks. And that can be a pretty irritating and effective method of derailing any discussion and turning readers off.

Well the same applies here. Everytime 'we' accuse someone of being a shill, troll, disinformationist or spook (based on zero evidence other than they don't agree), it pisses them off and make the whole dialogue antagonistic. This is taken as proof by our critics that 'we' are all closed minded, fundamentalist fanatics who are unwilling to engage in evidence based debate. I've seen this happen.

Sure engaging with our critics can be tedious and repetative. My advice is if it is boring don't bother replying to tedious people.

Your idea of a troll hole (or a separate area where we debate our critics) was suggested by me earlier on in the Rachel thread and was not widely supported and I don't feel it is required

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=12778#12778
What a contrast from TheQuest!

 

[Mancman]

Silverstein is still paying $120M/year to the Port Authority. Seems that having your building destroyed doesn't let you out of the lease. Also, the towers were insured for considerably less than replacement cost. Seems Silverstein didn't expect to have to replace them...

Ah right. So he's paid about $600 million so far.

From 911myths - "That lease envisions a rent increase in August 2006 to $138 million a year."

At $138 million a year he'll pay off the remaining $2.6 billion in 18.8 years. He'll be dead by then.

 

[azazal]

Is this a new thing with the woo? I know the temperature of the fires has always a bone of contention with them, but there seems to be a new wave of people spouting off ridiculously low temps.

One guy over at LC yesterday said the towers didn't even reach 200 degrees F. (He later admitted he might have exaggerated.) But still....

Common sense should enter into the equation at some point, no?

Common sense and CTers, ah now that'sa good laugh

 

[Gravy]

At $138 million a year he'll pay off the remaining $2.6 billion in 18.8 years. He'll be dead by then.

Nah. He was fitted with remote-control by Marvin Bush in August of 2001. He is now immortal and unstoppable. He eats superthermite for breakfast. His next mission will be to pull all the missiles in North Korea (his handlers are keeping him away from the Middle East).

 

[chipmunk stew]

I just got an email from Jon Ronson. He has registered here and is waiting for approval, so I expect we'll be seeing him on the boards before long.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Ah right. So he's paid about $600 million so far.

From 911myths - "That lease envisions a rent increase in August 2006 to $138 million a year."

At $138 million a year he'll pay off the remaining $2.6 billion in 18.8 years. He'll be dead by then.

Boy, he really didn't think this conspiracy thing through, did he?

1. Destroy my own buildings
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!! D'OH!!!

 

[kookbreaker]

Is this a new thing with the woo? I know the temperature of the fires has always a bone of contention with them, but there seems to be a new wave of people spouting off ridiculously low temps.

One guy over at LC yesterday said the towers didn't even reach 200 degrees F. (He later admitted he might have exaggerated.) But still....

Common sense should enter into the equation at some point, no?

This is usually based on some very selective cherry picking from the NIST report. At one point, NIST tested the peeled paint on some of the columns that they were able to identify and were exposed to fire. This meant the columns were perimeter columns since the other had their paint burned off or blown off. In any case, the tests showed the perimeter columns reach about 200 degrees (C or F I cannot remember). This test was of importance to the NIST since it showed the it was not the perimeter columns that failed.

But of course, the woowoos cherry picked it and exclaimed that "NIST said WTC temperatures never got above 200!!!!!! PWNED!!!!"

Of course, temperatures got well above 200. The actual tempertaure the failed columns will never be determined since you cannot test bare steel to see how hot it got.

I have not seen this youtube video, but is there any proof that this person is actually an engineer?

 

[Mancman]

Boy, he really didn't think this conspiracy thing through, did he?

1. Destroy my own buildings
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!! D'OH!!!

I was bored recently and worked out some basic analysis of Silverstein's losses. As we know, he has recieved $5 billion in insurance, often used as CT evidence usually tying in with 'pull it'. But I've never seen any CTer factor in the loss of office rental.


He owned leases on the following buildings, and owned WTC7 outright:

WTC7 - 1,868,000sqft
WTC5 – 784,000sqft
WTC4 – 576,000sqft
WTC2 – 4,761,000sqft
WTC1 – 4,761,000sqft

Total: 12,750,000sqft.

I've not found any figures which state how much of the complex was under rent on 9/11, so i'll estimate it was 90%. And i'll estimate an average office rent of $50 per square foot. A little high, possibly, but asking prices for vacant suites at WTC were in that ballpark: http://www.unblinking.com/arc/2001-09c.htm

12,750,000sqft x 0.9 = 11,475,000sqft. X $50 = $573,750,000 loss per year.
Upto 9/11/2006, Silverstein would have lost $573,750,000 x 5 = $2,868,750,000 in office rent.
Add the $600m in rental paid to the PA, and the loss grows to $3,468,750,000 by September 11th, 2006.


But this can be taken further. The 'Freedom Tower' is now under construction, but not due to finish until 2011, and even then it will be 2.3m sqft which is about 50% the size of one of the twins. The rest of the buildings are due later than that.
At this point, WTC7 is subtracted from the equation since the new one opened in June 2006, though it was only 25% pre-let when it opened, so there will be further losses here, but it is removed to keep things simple.


Subtracting a 90% let WTC7 leaves us with 9,793,800sqft to calculate the loss between 2006-2011.

9,793,800 x $50 = $489,690,000 loss per year.
x 5 = $2,448,450,000 loss.
Add the $630m in rent that would be paid in those 5 years at £138m a year, and we have a total of $3,078,450,000.

Total ten year loss on office rents: $5,317,200,000
Portion of original lease paid from 2001-2011: $1,230,000,000

It would be interesting to refine these figures with more accurate data for the average office rent price and the amount of space which was occupied on 9/11.

 

[chipmunk stew]

I was bored recently and worked out some basic analysis of Silverstein's losses. As we know, he has recieved $5 billion in insurance, often used as CT evidence usually tying in with 'pull it'. But I've never seen any CTer factor in the loss of office rental.


He owned leases on the following buildings, and owned WTC7 outright:

WTC7 - 1,868,000sqft
WTC5 – 784,000sqft
WTC4 – 576,000sqft
WTC2 – 4,761,000sqft
WTC1 – 4,761,000sqft

Total: 12,750,000sqft.

I've not found any figures which state how much of the complex was under rent on 9/11, so i'll estimate it was 90%. And i'll estimate an average office rent of $50 per square foot. A little high, possibly, but asking prices for vacant suites at WTC were in that ballpark: http://www.unblinking.com/arc/2001-09c.htm

12,750,000sqft x 0.9 = 11,475,000sqft. X $50 = $573,750,000 loss per year.
Upto 9/11/2006, Silverstein would have lost $573,750,000 x 5 = $2,868,750,000 in office rent.
Add the $600m in rental paid to the PA, and the loss grows to $3,468,750,000 by September 11th, 2006.


But this can be taken further. The 'Freedom Tower' is now under construction, but not due to finish until 2011, and even then it will be 2.3m sqft which is about 50% the size of one of the twins. The rest of the buildings are due later than that.
At this point, WTC7 is subtracted from the equation since the new one opened in June 2006, though it was only 25% pre-let when it opened, so there will be further losses here, but it is removed to keep things simple.


Subtracting a 90% let WTC7 leaves us with 9,793,800sqft to calculate the loss between 2006-2011.

9,793,800 x $50 = $489,690,000 loss per year.
x 5 = $2,448,450,000 loss.
Add the $630m in rent that would be paid in those 5 years at £138m a year, and we have a total of $3,078,450,000.

Total ten year loss on office rents: $5,317,200,000
Portion of original lease paid from 2001-2011: $1,230,000,000

It would be interesting to refine these figures with more accurate data for the average office rent price and the amount of space which was occupied on 9/11.

And that's just loss in lease income. How much are the rebuilding costs?

 

[JamesB]

Okay so I decided to check out some conversations..

I warm up my pizza at 450-470 F for 4 minutes

450F - 232 C
470F - 243 C

So what this "engineer" is stating is that the fires in the world trade center, or more specifically, the "pockets of fire", could not have produced more heat then my oven (despite the carbon-based material, plastics, chairs, carpetting, the drywall, and the fuel)



Please don't tell me that I just owned a college-educated "engineer"

Yeah, Fetzer goes on about this. He insists the fires didn't top 500 degrees, although the previous fire they had at the world trade center was over 2000. He never explains why this fire is so much cooler.

 

[jhunter1163]

Last estimate I saw for total project rebuilding cost (this was from Silverstein himself) was $12 billion over 10 years (includes Freedom Tower and ancillary structures). I've seen varying figures for the amount of insurance he had but none of them were close to $12 billion. "Who benefits from 9/11?" Sure doesn't seem to be Silverstein...

 

[Kent1]

Yeah, Fetzer goes on about this. He insists the fires didn't top 500 degrees, although the previous fire they had at the world trade center was over 2000. He never explains why this fire is so much cooler.

That's ripped from here
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_1975_fire.html


I'll bet he meant to say 700C. Again he takes from a poor source to begin with (WHR) and only makes it worse.
This is the site were nes gets much of his info from. Its run by Michael Rivero.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Rivero

 

[Brainster]

Silverstein is still paying $120M/year to the Port Authority. Seems that having your building destroyed doesn't let you out of the lease. Also, the towers were insured for considerably less than replacement cost. I guess Silverstein didn't expect to have to replace them...

(edited for grammar)

This is one area where I can provide some "expert" knowledge, as a former commercial loan officer and underwriter. Buildings are typically not insured for the replacement cost, or even the replacement cost less accrued depreciation. Most lenders will insist on a policy to at least cover the loan amount; by all accounts Silverstein had to negotiate this with the money partners and tried to keep the insurable value as low as possible, because higher values require correspondingly higher premiums.

Of course, if he was running some sort of planned demolition, he would have wanted the insurable value to be as high as possible.