Science vs Teleology: Which lens is best for viewing 911?

[funk de fino]

Of 329 core column segments from the fire affected and collapse initiation regions, NIST had the capacity to identify only 4 of these?

Just a little reality check: Funk, does that claim really make sense to you?

Do you believe this claim? From what part of the NIST report did you get this info, NCSTAR 1-3c?

Does it really make sense to you that only 4 of 329 36 foot pieces of steel core column were recoverable and identifiable from the central failure regions and key points of interest?

You know you could actually ask NIST. Or try and find time to read it all.

Why would they only look at steel they could positively identify the as built location of MT? Think about it.

Why else do you think they only used this small amount MT?

Gumboot, thanks for the reply. The point of the Korean examples is that the American public was kept in the dark, not the Koreans. Happens all the time.

Do you think this could have been kept secret in this day of instant satellite reporting, 24 hours a day and also the internet?

 

[pomeroo]

Captures the essence of a confinement to what was referred to as "level one" perception, or consciousness. That which is literally shown to one is all that exists.

Believing in the puppet show.

The notion that the Bush-bashing media was complicit in your imaginary conspiracy's monstrous crime is beyond stupid. Unless electing more Democrats was the idea, your conspiracy seems to have lacked a motive.

Pomeroo ponders human consciousness:



It would be facinating to know who you would consider an authoritative voice on such a question.

Gee, any of my philosophy professors could have done a much better job. You liars never quite grasp this point, but words have meanings.

Wasn't A20 one of your serious researchers? When he expressed independent views his person was verbally attacked. Nobody has been able to address his posts criticizing NIST's application of the "scientific method".

You attack his person instead, possibly assuming that readers wouldn't notice that you are unable to address his criticism.

I don't attack Frank personally. I am grateful to him for all the help he gave me when I entered the arena. His grudge against NIST is hard to understand. Frank is a serious scientist, but when one scientist accuses one thousand scientists and engineers of neglecting the scientific method, one is entitled to be somewhat skeptical.

The latent level of hatred and hostility contained within the one-line insults in this thread is revealing.

I doubt that there is any real hatred here. It's just internet posturing.

 

[pomeroo]

Of 329 core column segments from the fire affected and collapse initiation regions, NIST had the capacity to identify only 4 of these?

Just a little reality check: Funk, does that claim really make sense to you?

Do you believe this claim? From what part of the NIST report did you get this info, NCSTAR 1-3c?

Does it really make sense to you that only 4 of 329 36 foot pieces of steel core column were recoverable and identifiable from the central failure regions and key points of interest?



Gumboot, thanks for the reply. The point of the Korean examples is that the American public was kept in the dark, not the Koreans. Happens all the time.



This is a popular opinion at JREF. But it doesn't only apply to 9-11. You are saying that any large scale operation of this magnitude carried out by an undetected "invisible hand" is impossible.

You are saying that certain moneyed elite with the highest govt connections in either the US, Russia or Israel do not have the capacity to stage such an attack?

You are claiming that we are safe from such a staged attack because of our capacity to move information rapidly.

Nobody can fool our well-informed public on such a scale. Isn't this your argument?

It is just not possible in today's world?

You liars keep ducking the reason why your imaginary conspiracy is impossible. I keep reminding you that you require that thousands of ordinary people in a wide range of professions (I will not reproduce my laundry list again) are perfectly willing to remain silent about their complicity in a mass murder. To quote Sam Goldwyn: "In two words, Im-possible." NOTHING could conceivably knock into line EVERY person who knows that it was an inside job.

 

[Major_Tom]

Why else do you think they only used this small amount MT?

These particular specimens contained all the information NIST claimed to be looking for:

1) Actual temperatures to which these columns were subject.
2) Temperature variation and burn scars between different points of the same specimen would show to what degree fireproofing was damaged by the airplane strikes
3) Comparing damage patterns found on groups of adjacent columns would reveal the actual failure mode causing collapse initiation.
4) Column buckling, high temperature column "creeping" could have been easily seen and verified.

In addition, NIST and yourselves could have easily quieted "nutty conspiracy theorists" the world over simply by showing us the columns in question and showing that there is no evidence of unexplained foreign chemicals or explosive devices.

Were these specimens available and testable, neither Max Photon, A20 nor anyone would have had a basis for argument. Even Pomeroo could have debunked these people with one simple argument: Here are the columns in question, show me the foul play.



Instead NIST settled for the following approaches:

1) Actual temperatures to which these columns were subject.

They guessed through computer modelling. They then state that they couldn't verify whether the model was accurate because they collected an insufficient number of core and perimeter column samples with which to compare the results.

They also admit that the samples collected do not show temperatures exceeding 250 degrees celsius.


2) Temperature variation and burn scars between different points of the same specimen would show to what degree fireproofing was damaged by the airplane strikes

Again, not having sufficient samples to work with, this was guessed at also

A decent analysis of this subject can be found at the following thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116122



3) Comparing damage patterns found on groups of adjacent columns would reveal the actual failure mode causing collapse initiation.
4) Column buckling, high temperature column "creeping" could have been easily seen and verified.

Column buckling was postulated and the actual buckle points on the actual columns in question were never examined or even discovered. No examples of high temp creeping could be shown in the reports due to a lack of samples.


So when you ask: Why else do you think they only used this small amount MT?

Theories based on an effort to cover up the actual evidence of the cause of collapse initiation do spring to mind.


Honestly, Funk, does the recovery of only 4 of 329 column sections containing the key information that NIST was looking for make sense to you?

325 36 foot long column sections of 329 couldn't be identified? Honestly?

 

[Major_Tom]

Do you think this could have been kept secret in this day of instant satellite reporting, 24 hours a day and also the internet?

American foreknowledge and observation are the items kept secret, not the murders themselves.

And yes, such foreknowledge and implicit approval of mass murder through secret agreements still do occur. The general public has gained the ability to watch some of the killings.

 

[Major_Tom]

Let's try viewing it a bit differently

The following series of photos show the collapse initiation of WTC 2

You can even see the axis around which the building originall pivots.

Now in order to understand what caused this, which particular column samples would you be looking for?

You do not have to be a genius to identify which columns would be most important to examine.

Obviously you would be most interested in in the 2 rows of core columns situated furthest to the east from the floors you can see give way.

You would also be interested in the eastern perimeter in the collapse initiation region.

Pretty easy.

From the first hours after the event any one of us could have known which particular columns would have been the key columns of interest.


So how could you identify such columns in teh staging areas?

Using the cross-sectional dimensions found at the following link, you could know the exact cross-sectional appearance and all relevent dimensions of any core column you wish.

The link shows cross-sections for all components of core column 501.

http://wtcmodel.wikidot.com/cc501

To see the exact cross section of the 36 foot segment at floor 78, you would simply ckick on the photo labelled CC501A077

Now you have all the info you need to uniquely identify this important column section in the staging area and separate it for further examination.

This isn't very difficult.

 

[Max Photon]

Okay everbody, on the Um...

To those who believe that our modern omnipresent media precludes a sustained mass deception, you are wrong. In fact, the presence of such media makes creating and sustaining a mass deception no more complicated than, say, creating and sustaining electrical resonance.

 

[Dave Rogers]

To see the exact cross section of the 36 foot segment at floor 78, you would simply ckick on the photo labelled CC501A077

Now you have all the info you need to uniquely identify this important column section in the staging area and separate it for further examination.

This isn't very difficult.

There are a couple of problems with this approach. Firstly, the core has two mirror symmetries, which means that in general a given cross-section will only identify a column as one of four identical ones. In the absence of any other information, it would be impossible to identify whether the column you found was the one you want or its counterpart on the opposite side of the core. Secondly, does the core cross-section vary enough between floors to determine unambiguously the height at which the column originated? I think you're trying to handwave away some very real identification difficulties here. And, of course, if NIST had used that approach, the conspiracy theorists would be claiming the technique was too uncertain and hence discarding their results.

Dave

 

[Pardalis]

This thread is really an admission of defeat when you think about it. Science failed them, so they have to look somewhere else.

 

[Major_Tom]

Firstly, the core has two mirror symmetries, which means that in general a given cross-section will only identify a column as one of four identical ones. In the absence of any other information, it would be impossible to identify whether the column you found was the one you want or its counterpart on the opposite side of the core. Secondly, does the core cross-section vary enough between floors to determine unambiguously the height at which the column originated? I think you're trying to handwave away some very real identification difficulties here.

There is reason to believe that columns were labelled as shown below

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_old/Photo_archives/general_debris/911_HighQualityPhotos208.jpg

It makes sense that columns would be labelled right out of the foundry to allow installation crews to know what goes where.

The collapse initiation zones of WTC 1, conservatively, would be from floors 90 to 100, whereas for WTC 2 it was from from floors 76 to floors 84 (to be more than liberal in these estimates).

I'm sure many people can recall that I've repeatedly pointed out that core columns were for the most part straight and broken cleanly along weld connections as they were seen in the rubble. A not-so-cleaver NIST engineer could use this pattern to focus the search on columns with the same cross-sections and dimensions as the ones in the collapse initiation zone AND appear heavily damaged, buckled and subject to fire and high temperatures.

The point is that finding only 4 of 329 core columns from the fire affected and collapse initiation regions must appear to a thinking person to be a ridiculously low percentage of recovery.

Why this happened is an important question outside the bounds of the scientific method. Motive, ulterior motive and the decision making processes of NIST and FBI "management" must be considered.

Please remember not to hotlink.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady

 

[Pardalis]

Why this happened is an important question outside the bounds of the scientific method. Motive, ulterior motive and the decision making processes of NIST and FBI "management" must be considered.

A visit to a shrink should also be considered.

 

[Max Photon]

Science - F

This thread is really an admission of defeat when you think about it. Science failed them, so they have to look somewhere else.

Wrong.

Investigators failed science.

 

[Max Photon]

Pardalis, is this a question of shrivelry?

The point is that finding only 4 of 329 core columns from the fire affected and collapse initiation regions must appear to a thinking person to be a ridiculously low percentage of recovery.

Why this happened is an important question outside the bounds of the scientific method. Motive, ulterior motive and the decision making processes of NIST and FBI "management" must be considered.

A visit to a shrink should also be considered.

Pardalis,

Surely you can agree 911 was a crime.

As Ryan Mackey and others have noted, 911 calls for a criminal investigation, which is the synthesis of method, opportunity, and motive.

So Pardalis, why do you shrink from Major Tom's simple point that motive should be considered?

 

[pomeroo]

American foreknowledge and observation are the items kept secret, not the murders themselves.

And yes, such foreknowledge and implicit approval of mass murder through secret agreements still do occur. The general public has gained the ability to watch some of the killings.

Stop lying. Your imaginary conspiracy is mathematically impossible. You require that the one thousand researchers who produced the NIST Report keep silent about a damning flaw in the trumped-up science. Fine--what IS that "damning flaw"?

Tell us why no scientists or engineers in other parts of the world have pointed it out. You keep tap dancing, but you never get around to engaging the critical issue: thousands of people, according to the mythology of your evil movement, know that 9/11 was an inside job. The air traffic controllers know that they didn't really track planes into the immediate vicinity of the WTC complex. Seismologists faked their readings. Forensic examiners faked their DNA tests. Firefighters relayed scripted assessments. And on and on...

WHAT KNOCKS ALL OF THEM INTO LINE?? Seven years down the road and NOBODY has spilled the beans. The simple math destroys your fantasy. You dare not confront the implications of your own innumeracy.

 

[Max Photon]

Identifying WTC columns

Major Tom,

I suspect that had investigators:

• Tagged and mapped (if only by photographs) where each piece came from in the debris field;
• Examined the cross-sections of the columns;
• Examined markings (if any);
• Use the steel-type maps;
• Used fire maps;
• Used the process of elimination;

the original locations of most of the steel columns could have been identified. Those that couldn't have been positively IDed would at least have been constrained to tight regions.

Max

 

[pomeroo]

Wrong.

Investigators failed science.

Stop lying. You have conspicuously failed to demonstrate any failures on the part of the investigators. Your imaginary, mathematically-impossible conspiracy makes no sense.

 

[Major_Tom]

I suspect that had investigators:

Tagged and mapped (if only by photographs) where each piece came from in the debris field;
Examined the cross-sections of the columns;
Examined markings (if any);
Use the steel-type maps;
Used fire maps;
Used the process of elimination;
the original locations of most of the steel columns could have been identified. Those that couldn't have been positively IDed would at least have been constrained to tight regions.

Exactly. And to make it easier, only the columns we already know to be of interest from videos of the collapse initiations would need to be considered.

There are well defined, key points within each tower where we all can see the initial "give" take place. These would have been the obvious columns to recover and study.

Frank made a subtle point on the first page of this thread:

Hence the crime of 9/11 will never be "solved" scientifically, mainly because of the lack of physical evidence.

Instead, we have to rely on the simulacra of second-hand reports fed to us through government agencies. This makes us detached from, and indifferent to, the real event.

"The simulacra of second hand reports". A computerized fire simulation as opposed to just looking at the columns in question and examining to see to what temperatures they were subject.

A simulated temperature distribution rather than the actual knowledge of the real temps.

A column creep theory rather than just looking at the columns in question and observing the actual creep.

An abstract theory of buckling rather than just looking at the columns in question and seeing how they buckled

Examination of actual key physical evidence replaced by the competing theories of "experts".

 

[Max Photon]

Seek and Ye Shall Self-Organize

Stop lying. Your imaginary conspiracy is mathematically impossible. You require that the one thousand researchers who produced the NIST Report keep silent about a damning flaw in the trumped-up science. Fine--what IS that "damning flaw"?

People see what they expect to see, not what is really there.

No one considered the hypothesis "inside job."

Everyone considered "outside job."


Guess what everyone saw?

Tell us why no scientists or engineers in other parts of the world have pointed it out. You keep tap dancing, but you never get around to engaging the critical issue: thousands of people, according to the mythology of your evil movement, know that 9/11 was an inside job. The air traffic controllers know that they didn't really track planes into the immediate vicinity of the WTC complex. Seismologists faked their readings. Forensic examiners faked their DNA tests. Firefighters relayed scripted assessments. And on and on...

WHAT KNOCKS ALL OF THEM INTO LINE?? Seven years down the road and NOBODY has spilled the beans. The simple math destroys your fantasy. You dare not confront the implications of your own innumeracy.

Pomeroo,

If you go for a walk on the beach some day after it's been windy, what do you see? Beautiful waves in the sand, evenly spaced, with magnificent bifurcations - always at just the perfect place to maintain the broad motif.

And as you look at those ripples in the sand, as far as the eye can see, ask yourself, "How do the zillions of tiny, dumb grains of sand 'know' how to arrange themselves into such coherent patterns many scale orders of magnitude greater than each grain?"

What would your answer be
Mr. Mathematical Impossibility?

 

[Max Photon]

911 Science - Now Filtered!

Major Tom,

As I've pondered the OP, I've come to feel "filter" is a more appropriate term than "lens".

For example, in seismology, if there is an earthquake somewhere and a seismogram is captured, the problem if viewed as a series of filters. The earth is a filter. The seismograph is a filter. If the seismogram is analog, digitizing it is a filter. Numerical analysis is a filter. Interpretation is a filter. Describing the fault mechanism in abstract terms is a filter.

The same is true for an event like 911. The first news reports are filters. The first investigators are filters. Search and rescue is a filter. Rearranging the steel is a filter. Selecting some steel and destroying the rest is a filter. The 911 Commission, FEMA, and NIST reports are filters.


Gosh, it's a wonder any of the original signal made it through at all.

 

[Max Photon]

Creepy nit-pickers

Exactly. And to make it easier, only the columns we already know to be of interest from videos of the collapse initiations would need to be considered.

There are well defined, key points within each tower where we all can see the initial "give" take place. These would have been the obvious columns to recover and study.

Frank made a subtle point on the first page of this thread:



"The simulacra of second hand reports". A computerized fire simulation as opposed to just looking at the columns in question and examining to see to what temperatures they were subject.

A simulated temperature distribution rather than the actual knowledge of the real temps.

A column creep theory rather than just looking at the columns in question and observing the actual creep.

An abstract theory of buckling rather than just looking at the columns in question and seeing how they buckled

Examination of actual key physical evidence replaced by the competing theories of "experts".

Major, I hate to nit-pick, but I don't believe a column-creep theory even exists. I think it has been more along the lines of, "assume column creep initiated collapse, and then use this starting point in collapse progression models."

Heck, people can even decide whether columns get weaker or stronger when first heated, let alone put out a coherent column creep model for the WTCs.