Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD

[Gravy]

Could I remind people at this point that NIST haven't studied anything after the collapse started. So the idea that the collapse could be total from gravity alone is pure conjecture. Russells theory holds far more water.

False. We've already posted links here to several studies that show not only was it possible, it was inevitable. Please post your studies that contradict the official version.

It's not possible for 3 steel frame buildings to have non symmetrical damage and fall symmetrically straight down on the same day within 3 blocks of each other with fire as a primary cause for the first time in history.

It's mutually exclusive with physics and probability.

Russell, this is my fifth request: please provide your calculations that show that the "official version" must be false. If you cannot, just say so. This is about the truth, right?

 

[jessicarabbit]

See, there's the problem.

People who know buildings and know the effects of fire and structural damage on a building are going to see a bloody great plane hit the tower, followed by a catastrophic structural failure and say "Well, a bloody great plane hit the tower".... and they are not really going to say "But lets forensically check every section of steel for explosive residue, just to be sure".

Whereas someone who doesn't know buildings.......

As I posted earlier the MO of al quaida has always involved explosives. You think they would bother to check.

 

[Moving On]

The 9/11 Commission was tasked with finding out why the attacks occurred, what could have been done to prevent them, and to recommend ways to prevent future attacks. Theirs was not an engineering report that discussed damage to ancillary buildings. NIST was tasked with that job. This is very simple stuff, Russell.

Then why did they even bother to consult with architects on WTC 7?

Why didn't they say they had and provide a footnote saying that the WTC 7 investigation was beyond their scope and NIST would handle it?

Slow leak. Remember he volunteered the WTC 7 info according to the article.

 

[jessicarabbit]

False. We've already posted links here to several studies that show not only was it possible, it was inevitable. Please post your studies that contradict the official version.

Please show me where nist study the collapse after initiation. That is what I specifically refuted.

 

[Gravy]

Operation Northwoods as a plan was kept secret for nearly 40 years.

Operation Northwoods was a study that didn't get past McNamara in 1962. Please stop this foolishness.

 

[Moving On]

False. We've already posted links here to several studies that show not only was it possible, it was inevitable. Please post your studies that contradict the official version.



Russell, this is my fifth request: please provide your calculations that show that the "official version" must be false. If you cannot, just say so. This is about the truth, right?

This is my second request for you to prove the documents you reference are true, complete and unedited by the FBI.

 

[jessicarabbit]

Then why did they even bother to consult with architects on WTC 7?

Why didn't they say they had and provide a footnote saying that the WTC 7 investigation was beyond their scope and NIST would handle it?

Slow leak. Remember he volunteered the WTC 7 info according to the article.

Russell in your honour i shall change my avatar....

 

[Moving On]

Well you have to watch it... but the windows were blown out and bodies were on fire near the entrance.

The 'official' version is that fuel travelled down the elevator shaft.

Of course...if you have a better explaination..........

No. I believe that the fuel explosion could travel down the core shaft.

 

[beachnut]

I took the time to detail this once, but go read this here. About 40 firefighters experiencing explosions. This was supressed by the USG until August 2005.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html

I assume you have proof the USG supressed this? Hello?

I heard these almost 5 years ago?

and we can share in some of these on video

this is not new, this is old stuff

now show me a new interview today with all these guys saying the think explosives were there

this is real weak

too weak

just like your web site, just talk, no follow up, no follow thru

how many of these guys, heard the sounds we heard in live tv and video?

 

[uk_dave]

As I posted earlier the MO of al quaida has always involved explosives. You think they would bother to check.

WHY? A plane was flown at high speed into the building!!

Why on earth would anyone say "OK guys, be real careful with that steel your moving there to see if any survivors can be found, because there might be trace elements or scarring which indicate explosives were used"??

WHY?
Plane hits building
Plane destroys several structural column
Parts of plane also destroy fireproofing to indeterminate number of structural members
Fires are started within the building in a number of locations

Building is designed to withstand impact from smaller, slow moving, virtually empty of fuel passenger jet.

9/11 attack exceeds design parameters.

Why should they look for explosives?

 

[Gravy]

Please show me where nist study the collapse after initiation. That is what I specifically refuted.

Already posted in this thread. NIST refers to Bazant & Zhou's calculations.

We've also got calculations from Bazant, 2006; Greening, 2005-6.

NOW CUT THE CRAP AND SHOW US YOUR CALCULATIONS THAT PROVE THE OFFICIAL VERSION WRONG.

 

[Moving On]

Operation Northwoods was a study that didn't get past McNamara in 1962. Please stop this foolishness.

Speaking of foolishness - from now on if I don't respond to a post whether or not demanded to, it is because I have deemed it not serious enough.

 

[Kent1]

This is my second request for you to prove the documents you reference are true, complete and unedited by the FBI.

Respect falling......come on Russell, read my posts.

 

[Moving On]

Russell in your honour i shall change my avatar....

Ok......maybe I'll add one.

 

[Gravy]

Did you notice the absense of open flame let alone an inferno?

Have you read my paper on WTC 7 yet, Russell, or do you choose to live in a fantasy land?

 

[Moving On]

Respect falling......come on Russell, read my posts.

The respect I get here is not my problem.

Assume that my respect after observing the use of primarily insults, accusations and insinuation as a tool in this forum may have slipped too.

Not you as you are documented and fair.

 

[Gravy]

Speaking of foolishness - from now on if I don't respond to a post whether or not demanded to, it is because I have deemed it not serious enough.

Is this serious enough?

It's not possible for 3 steel frame buildings to have non symmetrical damage and fall symmetrically straight down on the same day within 3 blocks of each other with fire as a primary cause for the first time in history.

It's mutually exclusive with physics and probability.

Sixth request, Russell: please provide your calculations that show that the "official version" must be false. If you cannot, just say so. This is about the truth, right?

You make a deadly serious claim, Russell. Show your calculations or retract it. Think of the truth.

 

[Moving On]

Have you read my paper on WTC 7 yet, Russell, or do you choose to live in a fantasy land?

I am reading it side by side with a document Scott linked me to and a WTC 7 report that is like your but takes a different angle. When I am done, you will know because it will be the basis for my Silverstein evaluation.

 

[R.Mackey]

I took the time to detail this once, but go read this here. About 40 firefighters experiencing explosions. This was supressed by the USG until August 2005.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html

I read it. This is not evidence of explosives. Further, I don't believe you when you say this was "supressed" by the United States Government -- now you have yet anothert thing to back up.

Not only have you still not provided evidence of explosives, you are now being deceptive. Dirty pool, Russell.

 

[Gravy]

Also the kinetic energy of the plane crash the designers envisioned was actually greater than the kinetic energy of the planes that hit the towers.

Astonishing.

Okay, Jessica, produce your evidence. I can't wait for this.

Is any of this sinking in, Jessica? Still content to be the mole in Whack-a-Mole, while providing ZERO evidence for your absurd claims?

Jessica, why are you behaving this way? Just having fun?