JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Happy now?
I will be when you answer my questions above. Since you're back in the debate today, I assume that won't take too long.
Happy now?
I will be when you answer my questions above. Since you're back in the debate today, I assume that won't take too long.
Just so you know, I do not reply to pomposity.
Carry on.
[qimg]http://i1265.photobucket.com/albums/jj515/Miragememories/NIST5-95_zpsa1dc3196.png[/qimg]
Happy now?
As you can see, the damage from WTC1 debris fall is well away from the destroyed 6th floor stairwell.
[qimg]http://i1265.photobucket.com/albums/jj515/Miragememories/NIST5-95_zpsa1dc3196.png[/qimg]
Happy now?
As you can see, the damage from WTC1 debris fall is well away from the destroyed 6th floor stairwell.
Could you point out where in the building Mr Jennings was (and at what time) he observed the towers still standing?[qimg]http://i1265.photobucket.com/albums/jj515/Miragememories/NIST5-95_zpsa1dc3196.png[/qimg]
Happy now?
As you can see, the damage from WTC1 debris fall is well away from the destroyed 6th floor stairwell.
Could you point out where in the building Mr Jennings was (and at what time) he observed the towers still standing?
I'm sure you can also connect this time to the other events he mentioned.
MM, give us his "smoking gun" timeline. I'd bet you weasel out of this challenge.
I think he's trying to say that his critics describe a progressive failure among interior columns that can't be seen in any of the photography, but that what he can see in the videos -- i.e., the facade, presumably connected to the perimeter columns -- isn't moving. He wants to examine only the behavior of the perimeter columns which he infers from the behavior of the visible facade, and ignore everything else.
This is true.Yes, you could be acting pompous (of course, eye of the beholder is the final word). That means a free out in the MM rules of debate.
.
Had there been a progressive total vertical failure, the building would have tilted and fallen towards the side that initially started failing (presumably the east side).
Clearly this did not happen!
So human ears are less likely to be flooded by a "streetscape cacophony of noise" than microphones. Got it. And the complete lack of windows blown outClearly these events must have generated high volume sound. Microphones flooded by a streetscape cacophony of noise are easily over-modulated making it near impossible to distinguish individual sounds.
You also ignore human hearing.
Um, the barotrauma would've, at least, deafened him. If he didn't get killed. Of course, that assumes explosions consistent with explosives, and we're all well aware of attempts to conflate the two. As well as claiming dozens of columns were blown in a manner completely invisible to people outside the building. You know, the building chock-full of fire and smoke, which would make any rapid change in air pressure even more visible than usual.Explosions were reported by a number of eyewitnesses.
Barry Jennings who was trapped inside WTC7 after an explosion blew out the stairwell he was using to evacuate, reported clearly hearing repeated internal explosions, yet they were not recorded, or noted, by outside observers.
You are delusional. Nobody, but nobody, reported anything remotely similar to what a controlled demolition of all the columns on eight WTC7 floors would have sounded like. Jennings heard the collapsing north tower hit WTC7, and he got out hours before WTC7 collapsed. Show me a controlled demolition where the building fell hours after the explosives went off. This is just more sloppy logic applied to a tiny subset of the facts.
Again, I repeat, if you think the pre-implosion sounds of WTC7 should have been quite audible, WHY, do we not hear in the recordings, or from eye witnesses, the sound of the east penthouse crashing though the roof?
Why do we not hear the buckling collapse of the massive column 79 which supposedly started it all.
Why do we not hear the horrendous noise of WTC7's interior steel structure supposedly collapsing?
You readily accept that inaudibility but deny the credibility of inaudible alternative sounds of internal destruction.
Citing the 'spin' placed on what Barry Jennings said is not the same as recounting what Barry Jennings actually claimed.
Have you ever looked at where those lower stairwells were located in WTC7 and compared that to the known damage caused by WTC1 at 10:28 am.
[qimg]http://i1265.photobucket.com/albums/jj515/Miragememories/JenningsComp_zps4d4d6fff.png[/qimg]
Barry Jennings never recanted what he heard and saw.
He claimed in a documented interview that he experienced the collapses of WTC2 and WTC1 after his aborted evacuation attempt via the demolished WTC7 6th floor stairwell.
Michael Hess who was with Jennings at the time claimed in an interview that he thought the explosion had come from the basement of WTC7.
Neither of their testimonies is a fit for debris from above pummelling halfway through the 6th floor of WTC7
Just so you know, I do not reply to pomposity.
Carry on.
Yes, you could be acting pompous (of course, eye of the beholder is the final word). That means a free out in the MM rules of debate.
Clearly these events must have generated high volume sound. Microphones flooded by a streetscape cacophony of noise are easily over-modulated making it near impossible to distinguish individual sounds.
You also ignore human hearing.
Explosions were reported by a number of eyewitnesses.
AFAIK, the only cameras that caught the start of the collapse were two continuously running mounted cameras and two interviews using WTC 7 as a background. And they don't record any sound. Perhaps you can point us to a video of typical demolition where the sound of the charges can't be heard? No? I thought not.This is true.
Naturally, the mental gymnastic MM uses to skirt answering this simple question will be more telling than his answer. On the other hand, he could lie................
My prediction. He accuses me of calling Mr Jennings a liar.![]()
Um, no.AFAIK, the only cameras that caught the start of the collapse were two continuously running mounted cameras and two interviews using WTC 7 as a background. And they don't record any sound. Perhaps you can point us to a video of typical demolition where the sound of the charges can't be heard? No? I thought not.
![]()
As you can see, the damage from WTC1 debris fall is well away from the destroyed 6th floor stairwell.
Could you point out where in the building Mr Jennings was (and at what time) he observed the towers still standing?
I'm sure you can also connect this time to the other events he mentioned.
MM, give us his "smoking gun" timeline. I'd bet you weasel out of this challenge.
Even though well shielded by columns and elevator banks, we are expected to believe that debris penetration was so intense as to be able to explosively remove the 6th floor stairwell landing.
The OEM was locked so they returned to the ground floor lobby and police and security took them back up in a freight elevator and they were able to get into the OEM.
He observed that the OEM was deserted.
Many claim that it was this second power interruption, which inhibited Jennings and Hess from taking the elevator, was in fact the 9:59 collapse of WTC2. We are asked to believe that from approximately 8:52+ am to 9:59 am Barry Jennings was consumed by such limited activity and that at no time was he informed by police or security about the second impact and the obvious WTC7 early evacuations.