Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: neutronflux

Richard Gage is a con, and you been caught pushing debunked truth movement lies.

Attacking the person rather than what he says is a weak argument. You have personalized your bias and conflicts as it all Richards fault rather than the evidence he presents. I have not found any fault with his work.

While you do suffer from a bad case of Richard Derangement Syndrome, I don't know what I can do for you?

You do present some some good questions and arguments at times. While you still fail to see the controlled demolition and and question just what exactly caused the steel to liquidity and vaporize, i don't know what to say?

a reply to: kwakakev

I think you tried to dance around this one?

What was your answer to...


The question was

your fantasy of CD for the twin towers. If the core fell last. The floor connections were bent downward, or sheared down by a downward force.

Exactly how in you CD fantasy did the supposed charges interact with the twin towers. How many charges, doing what, and where.

The core was laid bare. No evidence of pyrotechnics cutting columns.

a reply to: kwakakev

For someone that wants truth, you sure ignore lots of questions. And spin true false questions.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Want to play too.

Let’s stay with this...

start with this..

A system of pyrotechnic charges would not have survived the jet impact and fires to initiate the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 as clearly seen by the video, audio, seismic record.

The truth movement fantasy of CD is dead on arrival. You get it.

—————

If kwakakev actually addressed the above. It should be easy for you to counter? Or quote and cite a response.

I am guessing you cannot.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

POST REMOVED BY STAFF

I have thought about it, at times it has really done my head in and need a break. There was lots of damage done that day, some of it still continues to today. There was a big psy op as part of the operation, lots of people struggling with it. Not much I can do about what happened. If I can help out someone still stuck in the psychological trauma it is something I guess?

Richard Gage presents the conclusions worked on and supported by thousands of engineering professionals. It make a lot more sense than the NIST corruption, fired everyone who even thought about a controlled demolition, dodgy computer models kept from the public. In trashing Richard it is trashing the the strong and open oeer review of the engineering community.

As for just exactly what type of explosives starred the collapse, I don't know.

The core columns are the strongest part of the building, the plane crash would not affected them too much. Maybe some charges did get taken out, was not enough to stop the collapse. Maybe some of the charges where protected by the office and jet fuel fire? Devices designed to cut thick structural steel are going to be tough. Maybe it was an extreme high temperature reaction in the basement designed to weaken the core?

ATTENTION!!!

Repeating the same info over and over, attacking other members and name-calling is a good way to get post banned.

All rules for POLITE debate will be enforced.
Members must also Stay on Topic!!!





You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: kwakakev

Then how did the collapse of each twin tower start when there was no way a controlled demolition system could have survived the jet impacts and fires?

a reply to: kwakakev

You

Richard Gage presents the conclusions worked on and supported by thousands of engineering professionals.

False. Richard Gage has created a mythology concerning the twin towers. His version is not what is in the actual video, physical, audio, photographic, seismic evidence.

One of his biggest cons is Gage pushing a photo of a column cut during cleanup by thermal lance as cut by thermite.

See:

Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later]
www.metabunk.org...

That one instance shows Gage has no credibility. He killed his own credibility long ago. But he knows “church” members of his “religion” of propaganda will literally buy into whatever he sales.

Until you can honestly admit that Richard Gage is caught in numerous falsehoods, your own judgement is called into question.

Now. Back to the actual collapse of the twin towers.

The coreS fell last.


The other big lie of Gage is the towers fell through the path of greatest resistance. The video evidence clearly shows, after collapse initiation, the floor systems sheared from the vertical columns. Then the vertical columns tumbling over from loss of lateral support provided by the floor system. Not cut.



Video shows long lengths of core columns tumbling. Not falling from being cut

———-
Now support for Richard Gage.

Who are these thousands of engineering specialists?

AIA Resolution 15-6 for WTC 7 in 2015 was voted down by 3892 AIA members voting no, and 160 voting yes.

Some interesting A&E facts

When will the AE911 petition finally reach juggernaut strength of 1%?


www.internationalskeptics.com...

Post 976
By Oystein

www.internationalskeptics.com...


On September 3, just before the release of the Hulsey report, the AE911Truth Petition had
3164 signatures from "Architects and Engineers"
22963 signatures from "Members of the Public"
The day after, they had lost 33 and 69 signatures, respectively.
And the day after that, lost another 57 / 108.
And today, another 9 / 16
That's a total loss so far of -99 and -176, respectively.

In just three days, they lost more than 3% of their A&E.

This has never happened before. Not nearly!
I don't know what's going on there.
Could be database housekeeping, and the lost signatures will be back and improved in a few days.
Could be they worked on a back-log of people who had asked to be dropped.
I don't know.

In case you're curious how many signatures they have collected since I last reported anything:

On 27th May 2018, I reported that they reached 3,000 A&E
By 3rd September 2019, 464 days later, they stood at 3164.

Until they reached 3000, it never took them more than 965 days to add another 500 signatures. After that, the pace was 1415 days/500 signatures. So they have never seen slower growth before. And of the 164 signatures, of course they just lost 99.

The "Public" signatures had reached 20K (actually 19987) on 1st December 2014. Until then, it never took them more than 300 days to add another 1000 signatures.
But it took them
507 days to reach 21K
582 days to reach 22K
And by 3rd September, when they had 22,963, the pace was
667 days to reach 23K (which they haven't reached yet)

So the petitions, both of them, are slower than ever.

The current membership of the American Institute of Architects is 95,000.

www.aia.org...


So no. There is no wide support for Richard Gage or his group.

a reply to: kwakakev

You

It make a lot more sense than the NIST corruption,

That’s your opinion. But it’s fact that Richard Gages manufactured mythology concerning the twin towers has no bases in reality concerning the actual physical, video, audio, seismic evidence. Unless you count him using items like photos of columns cut during cleanup by thermal lance as “evidence” of the thermite fantasy.

In trashing Richard it is trashing the the strong and open oeer review of the engineering community.

What peer review by people independent of Richard Gage’s group are you referring to.

I think I have posted this before. With people involved with the Hulsey report. And there ties to Architects and Engineers. Is that false?

You

As for just exactly what type of explosives starred the collapse, I don't know.

The collapse initiation was at the areas of jet impacts and resulting fires. Is that false.

Then there is no way a controlled demolition system would have survived to initiate collapse. The controlled demolition fantasy is dead from the starting gate.

You

The core columns are the strongest part of the building, the plane crash would not affected them too much.

Total BS.

Jet traveling at over 400 mph, and weighting close to 300,000 lbs would affect them very much. See simulation.

m.youtube.com...

The core columns grew less massive, and less thick with building hight.

The columns tapered after the 66th floor, and consisted of welded box-sections at lower floors and rolled wide-flange sections at upper floors.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

You

Devices designed to cut thick structural steel are going to be tough

The wiring and electrics such as remote control detonators would not be. Fire and heat are electronics worst enemy. And wherever the jet impacts would have stripped the structure to the bare metal of the structural steel, and damaged structural steel, any installed charges would have been dislodged. The any needed wiring system would have been destroyed.


—————

And now it’s time for...

There is zero evidence of any explosions, any over pressure event (that would accompany any explosives that used pressure to cut) that had the force to cut steel columns before the instance of collapse. As backed by video, audio, seismic evidence.

a reply to: kwakakev

Now. If Richard Gage has any professional credibility, why would he use proven falsehoods?

Because he has fallen into to the same trap of flat earthers, cryptozoology, and ufology. People of good intentions that sale out because they find they can make a living as long as they tell a biased and non-discerning audience what they want to hear.

Richard Gage is living proof.

Added a reply to: kwakakev

You

Richard Gage presents the conclusions worked on and supported by thousands of engineering professionals.

——skip——

In trashing Richard it is trashing the the strong and open oeer review of the engineering community.

What are these conclusions? And cite and quote what research specifically has Richard Gages’ name on it that has been “peer” reviewed. Please state what journal has peered reviewed research by Richard Gage concerting the WTC.

a reply to: neutronflux

Why do you keep calling one of the outer corners of the building the core of the building? Why don't you take the frame of the video you keep posting in context with the rest of the area? Why don't you show this video a few more seconds forward and see how all the steel vaporizes?

As for how the building started to collapse, something happened to compromise the core support structures of the building. The plane strike when it hit was not enough to do this. The subsequent office and fuel fire was not enough to do this either.

It has been the A&E for 9/11 truth where a lot of the peer review for Richard's conclusions has taken place. Have done a lot of good work over the years challenging the findings by NiST and forming a more realistic understanding of how the buildings collapsed.

a reply to: kwakakev

What are you talking about. The core fell last.

Remember I proved that. It’s fact.

You wonder why I repeat myself. Because you ignore you have been debunked beyond a reasonable doubt.

Again. The core after the floor system sheared away.






Built of straight columns. Like this.




That tumbled outward after loss of later support once the floor system completely failed.



Back by three sources to your opinion is wishful thinking and ignorance.

One...

3WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.

www.skeptic.com...

Two....

At about the 10 minute mark, it is explained the collapse of the twin towers was not through the cores with video evidence. The floors were torn from around the tube in tube design.

The Dumbing Down of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Three

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

www.nist.gov...

Three different sources that agree by looking at the video evidence, the core fell after being stripped of the floor system. The core columns tumbled outward after loss of the lateral support of the floor system?


Which looks nothing like the outside panels failing.




—