• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What does AE911T plan to do with data on WTC 7?

I still fail at understanding why an organisation that boasts 1700 Architects and Engineers strong are crying at NIST instead of creating their own analysts, data, report etc. How many years have they had now?..
 
jaydeehess said:
This old guy's got you covered there. "apps" are the small sampler dishes served before your main course at a restaurant, short for "appetizers". Not sure how that relates to a phone though.....:D:D:D
Click to expand...
I'm facing a three way conspiracy - rcon43, mcon70, lcon71 against me econ41 (AKA ozeco41). All them female and (started out as) red heads (before time told)....can't return any of them - they are all 'out of warranty' :(
 
Last edited:
cjnewson88 said:
I still fail at understanding why an organisation that boasts 1700 Architects and Engineers strong are crying at NIST instead of creating their own analysts, data, report etc. How many years have they had now?..
Click to expand...
It's not their goal.

The current goals are:
1) Keep Gage's income stream going; BY
2) Throwing mud at NIST hoping some will stick.

The most obvious tactic, reading the C7 TSz postings on the 'Girder Walk-off Thread' as one example, is to get an admission of a minor error of detail out of NIST. That so they can make mileage as they did with the 'free fall' nonsense with Chandler. Remember the 'forced NIST to admit' hogwash and all the interminable discussions. All pointless. But it is the consolation prize they are content to accept.

AE911 is stuck with a silly choice of tactics - i.e. basing claims on CD at WTC when there was no CD and it is easy to prove. All the sillier when you remember that they adopted that core belief in 2007 - when all the serious CD at WTC discussion was over. No CD.

So they picked their own handicap and are stuck with it. And it still gives Gage an income. The cost to some of the core supporters being that they need to keep appearing as clowns on the circus of this sub-forum to keep a bit of the pot stirring.

And plenty of us here have spoons. ;)
 
jaydeehess said:
Other than Christopher 7, who has ignored this thread and my posing the question in another thread, are there any other proponents, or members, of AE911T posting on this forum?

If so will none of then address the question?

Will none of them go to Gage et al and ask?

Is it not considered important by them to know what their organization has planned in this matter?

Really, I expected some reply, even if it was along the lines of "that's for us to know and you to find out".
Click to expand...

I created this thread a week ago now and expected at least a token response from any AE911T proponent/member. I actually am suprised that none has been forthcoming. (I am not being sarcastic, I am suprised)

Perhaps a week is not long enough or there are not enough AE911T members posting on JREF.

Perhaps there is an agreement among AE911T members not to discuss this topic.

Perhaps it just has not been seen by anyone who could address it.

or perhaps ozeco41 is on the right track as to AE911T's methods of operation.
 
jaydeehess said:
Proponents of AE911T have called for the release of data that NIST used as input to the fire simulation program FDS. The claim is that they want it to "verify" ,,,,something. I am not clear on whether they wish to verify the veracity of the data input values or that these values would produce the results that NIST published.

If the former then obviously AE911T has the wherewithal to perform an FDS of their own since they must be capable of generating that data themselves. Therefore one wonders why in 11 years they have not bothered to do so..

If they simply wish to run the NIST data through the same FDS to confirm or refute the NIST published results then that's another matter. Since a computer is incapable of deception then they are essentially (actually they come right out and say it) accusing NIST of absolute fraud, and by extension, accusing the researchers of fraud as well in either changing the results themselves , manipulating the data, or covering up for those who did.
This of course is hardly the way to go to convince someone to hand over their work. With a prejudice that NIST researchers lied in those asking for the data, what possible impetus would there be for those researchers to do so?

Furthermore if AE911T is incapable of generating its own input data then NIST could conveivably offer them data values that would repeat the results they published and AE911T would be incapable of disputing that data.
Click to expand...

A post on 9/11 Blogger today by Steven Jones answers some of your questions.

http://www.911blogger.com/news/2012-07-20/requesting-release-nist-computer-model-wtc7

Yesterday, I went to a town hall meeting with an aid to US Senator Mike Lee (UT) and expressed my concerns regarding NIST's report on WTC 7. The Senator's aid was open minded and well aware that some felt strongly that events of 9/11 were allowed by the US government or even “orchestrated” (his term).

It seems to me that a new investigation by Congress would be most unlikely at this stage. Instead, I requested that NIST's computer model for the WTC7 failure and fall be released to us so that independent testing can proceed (my letter below). The aid to Senator Lee assured me that he would pass this request along to the Senator and include my concerns in his report to Senator Lee.

Do you think this approach has merit? Could we successfully apply pressure to NIST to release their WTC 7 computer model, via Senators, Congresspersons, polls, etc? Is this a worthwhile goal for the 9/11 Truth Community? Could AE911Truth engineers run the model if it were released?

To: Senator Mike Lee (Utah)
From:
Dr. Steven E. Jones

<snip>

5. In particular, NIST states in their 2008 report,
“The steel was assumed in the FDS model to be thermally-thin, thus, no thermal conductivity was used.” I challenge that assumption, and wish to insert into the computer model the known physical value for thermal conductivity, to see how this changes things.

6. There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society, and I am confident that our combined expertise will permit us to perform the independent verification of the NIST WTC7 computer model, once that computer simulation is released in full to us, in computer-ready form.
Click to expand...

He has no idea whether they can get the data.

But if they do get the data, they will "correct" it to make it show what they want it to show.

:oldroll:
 
So they have a 1,700 strong team of experts and still won't do any research :confused:
 
Spanx said:
So they have a 1,700 strong team of experts and still won't do any research :confused:
Click to expand...

Nope. They think a few clicks on a keyboard signing a futile petition and that's their job done.

Welcome to the forum, Spanx! :w2:
 
Perhaps they could start with a bit of simple research, like how their $20,000 truth sign failed :o

At least you can give them credit for entertainment value:D

Thanks for the welcome
 
Spanx said:
Perhaps they could start with a bit of simple research, like how their $20,000 truth sign failed :o

At least you can give them credit for entertainment value:D

Thanks for the welcome
Click to expand...

Oh, do tell/remind me about the sign.

Yep, they're a constant source of amusement. :)

You're welcome.
 
It would be far better to hear about the success of the sign from a truther.

Now I've made a few posts can you tell me how I go about getting my payment from the CIA and what's more important, Do they pay in CASH;)
 
Last edited:
911 truthinator has a clip on youtube where they were supposed to cut the sign in half with thermite. They failed and decided ignite a bucket of thermite under the the sign.

It is YouTube so it could be Bs

I would provide a link but I'm not sure how to do it on this machine :o
 
Spanx said:
911 truthinator has a clip on youtube where they were supposed to cut the sign in half with thermite. They failed and decided ignite a bucket of thermite under the the sign.

It is YouTube so it could be Bs

I would provide a link but I'm not sure how to do it on this machine :o
Click to expand...
The epic fail of this is it was supposed to be much larger. The original plans had column supports equal to WTC core columns. I have the original drawings (by Gage) somewhere. (I submitted a bid to fabricate it)

The funny part is, they could have built it as planed. They never considered how heavy it would be and had to down size after they found out they couldn't afford to ship it.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Have any of you guys noticed that the 911 truth forum uk is really gathering pace. It has over 4,000 members, new members every day. I think someone is taking the pith out of them big time. Most of the new members have web sites for cheap handbags and porn:D
 
Spanx said:
Have any of you guys noticed that the 911 truth forum uk is really gathering pace. It has over 4,000 members, new members every day. I think someone is taking the pith out of them big time. Most of the new members have web sites for cheap handbags and porn:D
Click to expand...

I'll bet most of those members are P'Doh.
 
They either make their own members, or never check their members list. 90% of them have never posted.
 
ozeco41 said:
Age beats me again - needed to consult the "Urban Dictionary for "borked". I see it means something that engineers of my vintage described with a word related to consensual sex activities.... :o -- whatever they were

Talking about the dynamic of language - I'm running a losing battle with my daughters over the (alleged) word "apps". They bought me an iPad for my recent birthday. Me, a 'punched card era'* 'fortran 2'* type. :(





* if you are too young to know just ask
Click to expand...

I wrote my first program on punch cards. By wrote I mean sitting in front of a punch card writer and typing out the cards one line at a time. It compiled without error but didn't run because I forgot to put a run command on the last card.

Yes, it was uphill, against the wind thru three feet of snow both ways to school.:)
 
tsig said:
I wrote my first program on punch cards. By wrote I mean sitting in front of a punch card writer and typing out the cards one line at a time. It compiled without error but didn't run because I forgot to put a run command on the last card.
Click to expand...
Those were the days.
tsig said:
...Yes, it was uphill, against the wind thru three feet of snow both ways to school.:)
Click to expand...
North of England for me - so several 'snowy' days per year but rarely over 6" and that half melted slush - which is colder because it gets your shoes wet. Plus (those days) smog from coal fires. Came to AU 1952 - very little snow round here - like once every few years and about 1/2" - only couple days per year temperature below zero Co.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom