JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Not assuming. My profession is quite generally aware that there are "controlled-demolition" conspiracy theories.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
- Status
Not assuming. My profession is quite generally aware that there are "controlled-demolition" conspiracy theories.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
No. We don't require every qualified professional to specifically and affirmatively disendorse all the crackpot claims that pertain to his field in order to defensibly characterize the general reaction of the field to them.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
Supply chain, employee training, and material and operational quality control are the biggest arguments against super secret ninja controlled demolition, IMO.
ProBonoShill
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,329
Do you believe if a large number of people from Aerospace industries around the world don't sign a petition about the Moon landing that means it was faked? How about one about UFO's, does that make them real all of a sudden?
What if many Zoologists never sign a petition saying there is no such thing as Bigfoot, does that make the fictitious creature real all of a sudden?
Why would Structural Engineers waste their time worrying about an idiotic conspiracy theory?
Animal
Master Poster
No one is assuming everyone who hasn't signed the petition disagrees with its claims, however, when an organization fails to enlist the support of 1/2 of 1 percent of the relevant licensed professionals, that should tell you the validity of claims by said organization.
The petition thing and the general pitch is deceptive. They make nit appear that they have large nunbers of *building professionals* who understand and support the CD conclusion. That's a lie. It may be a handful and that is hardly impressive at all.
The pitch is that there was a CD but they don't detail in their literature how this was done... vague notions and fuzzy logic and request a new investigation presumably to remove the fog (that they are lost in). Can't have it both ways... you KNOW it's a CD or you need a new investigation to KNOW what happened.
Surely most building professionals around the nation and the world have not studied the event and accept that steel buildings are susceptible to fire and there were uncontrolled fires in all three buildings and serious mech damage as well. These seem plausible explanations as to the causes of the catastrophic failures to most people including building professionals.
The pitch is that there was a CD but they don't detail in their literature how this was done... vague notions and fuzzy logic and request a new investigation presumably to remove the fog (that they are lost in). Can't have it both ways... you KNOW it's a CD or you need a new investigation to KNOW what happened.
Surely most building professionals around the nation and the world have not studied the event and accept that steel buildings are susceptible to fire and there were uncontrolled fires in all three buildings and serious mech damage as well. These seem plausible explanations as to the causes of the catastrophic failures to most people including building professionals.
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
From my admittedly non-specialist (in anything, really) perspective, it seems that the vast majority of qualified professionals ignoring the claims, or at least not bothering to sign petitions against them, is effectively a rejection of them. The crackpots would claim a victory either way anyway; if every expert in a particular field were to band together to formally deny a specific assertion, the crackpots would see that as academically legitimizing the assertion- "see, they're so worried about what we say that they had to officially contest it!" And when the professionals don't, the cry is "see, they're afraid to answer us!" There's no point in playing this sort of game (which is all it really is) with folks who make up their own definitions of winning as they play it.
Miragememories
Banned
WTC 7 was not as "neat" a design as the Twin Towers.
Besides the core columns for elevators, stairways and such, forming a rectangular core with no visible columns (like the Twin Towers), and the perimeter columns visible to all, it also had visible columns in the rentable space, specifically the columns supporting the East Penthouse.
Surely with all your experience in the Truther movement, you realize this. To refresh your memory:
You don't think that all that space between the inner core (to the right in the top photo and columns 79,80, and 81 went unrented, do you?
I'm amazed that in all these years, no Truther has interviewed anyone who worked in Building 7, or asked for old photos of their workplace, to get an idea of the layout of WTC 7.
I obtained a few interior views of WTC7.
Core columns are not visible and are well enclosed.
MileHighMadness
Muse
MM...you are missing the point...but don't let that stop you.
You don't understand, how did your fantasy version bad guys of 911 set the super secret silent high explosive incendiary thermite (SSSHEIT).
Who cut open the walls and insulation to place the SSSHEIT on the columns. What is your fantasy version of 911.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Yeah, that's how it works among qualified professionals. And it's not the first time Giorgio has tried to subtly suggest that the perception of ambiguity should be resolved in his favor. (The last time was in April.)
Yep, which is why I'm not playing it either.
Well, yes, but while the picturing of entire columns in free space can be avoided in photos you'll admit (I hope) that those interior walls have core columns close behind them. Your perps would need to get to work on those and repair the walls in an unobtrusive manner. Every one, over 8 storeys, including those built into elevator shafts.
Plus the exterior columns, which are an integral part of your 'theory'.
p.s. you didn't respond to comments about how paint-thin layers of nanothermite would fail to bring down massive structural steel members.
eta: looking at the width and spacing of the windows in your pics 1+2, I strongly suspect they're interiors of WTC1+2
Last edited:
I don't understand this. Please define what 'my favor' is in this context. If it's that there should be an opposing petition to help laypeople to evaluate the opinion of relevant professionals towards the claims made by AE911Truth then I'm not subtly suggesting that - I'm saying flat out that I think it would be a great idea.
If the claims of AE911Truth are invalid, an opposing petition, signed by significantly more people, would be a far more efficient way for people like myself who only partially understand the arguments presented from either side to form an opinion of their probable validity.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
What's the point of an opposing petition, when the majority of the professional community apparently things the matter isn't even worthy of consideration?
Don't you think that if the experienced and knowledgeable professional community sensed there was something wrong, they would be all over it? And yet after years of noise, the matter still cannot gain any traction.
Hell, I don't know why I even bother, except the young adults in my house keep bringing up CT crap they and friends get off of YouTube. And that's not really enough motivation for me.
Miragememories
Banned
Hear hear!
I wholeheartedly agree with you Georgio.
We keep hearing about this silent majority of engineers that supposedly disagree with the claims made by AE911 yet it has never been established that this silent majority is even aware of AE911 or its claims.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Asked and answered. It is well known in the engineering community that there are conspiracy theories claiming controlled demolition. None of them is taken seriously. People who claim the buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition are regarded by engineers largely as equivalent to the unkempt people on the street who carry on lengthy arguments with parking meters. I'm not exaggerating.
Last edited:
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
No comment on demonstrating paint on superthermite cutting anything, let alone a heavy steel column. ( I suspect it would not destroy much more than aluminum foil)
No comment on the fact that his quoted audio expert cannot be shown to have any expertise.
No comment on whether or not perimeter columns were loaded with explosives or not.
No comment on how every audio of the collapses demonstrate no similar explosive sounds as are captured on both pro and consumer equipment in known demolitions.
I've been shortening his name to MM. Perhaps it should be NC.
No comment on the fact that his quoted audio expert cannot be shown to have any expertise.
No comment on whether or not perimeter columns were loaded with explosives or not.
No comment on how every audio of the collapses demonstrate no similar explosive sounds as are captured on both pro and consumer equipment in known demolitions.
I've been shortening his name to MM. Perhaps it should be NC.
Last edited:
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
I just witnessed a guy having a heated argument with his bicycle. He did mention the CIA.
Miragememories
Banned
I agree.
There are any number of ways that weekend 'renovation-al work' could have been orchestrated. The important part would be to make sure that fresh drywall was in place before the next work day.
Personally, speaking as someone who has never been involved in such planning, I cannot see how a layer of thermitic paint could do much damage on its own.
But, I can see how it could be part of something much bigger which could take out major columns.
I believe it was Dr. Jones who suggested that such paint could also act as a fuse.
Normal thermite requires an extremely high activation temperature in order to guarantee ignition, ~4000F (~2204C).
Nano-thermite has been shown by Dr. Harrit et al to ignite at the more manageable temperature of ~806F (430C).
Painted on nano-thermite could be ignited at ~430C creating such a high temperature that igniting large caches of thermite in its path should be quite easy.
My best guess is that thermite would be used to initiate a major structural failure and that once that was in play, conventional explosives would immediately take out the required perimeter and core columns.
Based on the captions I found attached to those images, they are all supposed to be photographs from the WTC7 interior.
- Status