Popular Mechanics responds to Rosie the Ranter

link to article

Seems that Popular Mechanics has decided to show Rosie a few pointers and offersome help after her rant on The View.

Recently, Rosie O’Donnell, a co-host of ABC talk show The View, made comments on the show that renewed controversy over the collapse of World Trade Center 7.

While saying she didn’t know what to believe about the U.S. government’s involvement in the attacks of Sept. 11, she said, “I do believe that it’s the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel. I do believe that it defies physics that World Trade Center tower 7—building 7, which collapsed in on itself—it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved. World Trade Center 7. World Trade [Center] 1 and 2 got hit by planes—7, miraculously, the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible.”

She continued: “To say that we don’t know that it imploded, that it was an implosion and a demolition, is beyond ignorant. Look at the films, get a physics expert here [on the show] from Yale, from Harvard, pick the school—[the collapse] defies reason.”

This again talks about the book that was written but so many people decide to call bunk without showing where it is wrong in explanation and continuing to profess theories with no evidence, not even a blasting cap.

NIST

this year the information will be released by NIST concerning the WTC7. Maybe Rosie will pick up a book and stop reading left controlled WTC conspiracy sites, but I sincerly doubt it.

`````````````````
Fixed title spelling

[edit on 2/4/07 by masqua]

Common sense works everytime!

HAHAHAHA.

Seriously. NIST is looking for explosives in WTC7 because it could have not collapse due to fire. Even less in a pancake at the speed of free-fall. And the popular mechanic BS was debunked long ago, and the guy who wrote this is the brother of a big name in the NSA... yeah sure we'll believe his BS.

Nothing has been debunked, nad the Popular Mechanics and Nova both explained it in great detail, amazingly without thermite, reptilians or laser beams. She is a media whore, and wanted more attention than Anna Nicole.

Originally posted by Vitchilo

Common sense works everytime!

HAHAHAHA.

Seriously. NIST is looking for explosives in WTC7 because it could have not collapse due to fire. Even less in a pancake at the speed of free-fall. And the popular mechanic BS was debunked long ago, and the guy who wrote this is the brother of a big name in the NSA... yeah sure we'll believe his BS.

Really ? When did NIST reject the pancake theroy ?

Originally posted by esdad71
Nothing has been debunked, nad the Popular Mechanics and Nova both explained it in great detail, amazingly without thermite, reptilians or laser beams.

Since when is Popular Mechanics a certified investigating agency? What certifications and qualifications do they to do anything dealing with 911 ? Their would be more things wrong with thier investgation then the official story.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by esdad71
Nothing has been debunked, nad the Popular Mechanics and Nova both explained it in great detail, amazingly without thermite, reptilians or laser beams.

Since when is Popular Mechanics a certified investigating agency? What certifications and qualifications do they to do anything dealing with 911 ? Their would be more things wrong with thier investgation then the official story.

So what is your issue with the "offical" story ?

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
So what is your issue with the "offical" story ?

Well the main issue is the fact that it is missing or left out a lot of information.

Like what? I am curious as to what you have an issue with.

Maybe you could be specific and we could discuss this issue.

Popular Mechanics provided a good story and many answers, but I feel that it was the NOVA special that explained it best.

Here is a link to the original Pop Mech article.

link ot article

it was a cover story in 2005. This is a list of the people they used.

Air Crash Analysis
Cleveland Center regional air traffic control

Bill Crowley special agent, FBI

Ron Dokell president, Demolition Consultants

Richard Gazarik staff writer, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Yates Gladwell pilot, VF Corp.

Michael K. Hynes, Ed.D.,
ATP, CFI, A&P/IA president, Hynes Aviation Services; expert, aviation crashes

Ed Jacoby Jr. director,
New York State Emergency Management Office (Ret.); chairman, New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission (Ret.)

Johnstown-Cambria County Airport Authority

Cindi Lash staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Matthew McCormick manager, survival factors division, National Transportation Safety Board (Ret.)

Wallace Miller coroner, Somerset County, PA

Robert Nagan meteorological technician, Climate Services Branch, National Climatic Data Center

Dave Newell director, aviation and travel, VF Corp.

James O’Toole politics editor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pennsylvania State Police Public Information Office

Jeff Pillets senior writer,
The Record, Hackensack, NJ

Jeff Rienbold director, Flight 93 National Memorial, National Park Service

Dennis Roddy staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Master Sgt. David Somdahl public affairs officer,
119th Wing, North Dakota
Air National Guard

Mark Stahl photographer; eyewitness, United Airlines Flight 93 crash scene

Air Defense
Lt. Col. Skip Aldous (Ret.) squadron commander,
U.S. Air Force

Tech. Sgt. Laura Bosco public affairs officer,
Tyndall Air Force Base

Boston Center regional air traffic control

Laura Brown spokeswoman,
Federal Aviation Administration

Todd Curtis, Ph.D. founder, Airsafe.com; president, Airsafe.com Foundation

Keith Halloway public affairs officer, National Transportation Safety Board

Ted Lopatkiewicz director, public affairs, National Transportation Safety Board

Maj. Douglas Martin public affairs officer,
North American Aerospace Defense Command

Lt. Herbert McConnell public affairs officer,
Andrews AFB

Michael Perini public affairs officer, North American Aerospace Defense Command

John Pike director, GlobalSecurity.org

Hank Price spokesman, Federal
Aviation Administration

Warren Robak RAND Corp.

Bill Shumann spokesman,
Federal Aviation Administration

Louis Walsh public affairs officer, Eglin AFB

Chris Yates aviation security editor, analyst, Jane’s Transport

Aviation
Fred E.C. Culick, Ph.D., S.B., S.M. professor of aeronautics, California Institute of Technology

Robert Everdeen public affairs, Northrop Grumman

Clint Oster professor of public and environmental affairs, Indiana University; aviation safety expert

Capt. Bill Scott (Ret. USAF) Rocky Mountain bureau chief, Aviation Week
Bill Uher News Media Office, NASA Langley Research Center

Col. Ed Walby (Ret. USAF)
director, business development, HALE Systems Enterprise, Unmanned Systems, Northrop Grumman

Image Analysis
William F. Baker member, FEMA Probe Team; partner, Skidmore, Owings, Merrill

W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. senior vice president, CTL Group; director,
FEMA Probe Team

Bill Daly senior vice president, Control Risks Group

Steve Douglass image analysis consultant, Aviation Week

Thomas R. Edwards, Ph.D. founder, TREC; video forensics expert.

Ronald Greeley, Ph.D. professor of geology, Arizona State University

Rob Howard freelance photographer; WTC eyewitness

Robert L. Parker, Ph.D. professor of geophysics,
University of California, San Diego

Structural Engineering / Building Collapse
Farid Alfawakhiri, Ph.D. senior engineer, American Institute of Steel Construction

David Biggs, P.E. structural engineer, Ryan-Biggs Associates; member, ASCE team for FEMA report

Robert Clarke structural engineer, Controlled Demolitions Group Ltd.

Glenn Corbett technical editor, Fire Engineering; member, NIST advisory committee

Vincent Dunn deputy fire chief (Ret.), FDNY; author, The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety

John Fisher, Ph.D. professor of civil engineering, Lehigh University; professor emeritus, Center for Advanced Technology; member, FEMA Probe Team

Ken Hays executive vice president, Masonry Arts

Christoph Hoffmann, Ph.D. professor of computer science, Purdue University; project director, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University

Allyn E. Kilsheimer, P.E.
CEO, KCE Structural Engineers PC; chief structural engineer, Phoenix project; expert in blast recovery, concrete structures, emergency response

Won-Young Kim, Ph.D. seismologist, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University

William Koplitz photo desk manager, FEMA

John Labriola freelance photographer, WTC survivor

Arthur Lerner-Lam, Ph.D. seismologist; director,
Earth Institute, Center for Hazards and Risk Research, Columbia University

James Quintiere, Ph.D. professor of engineering, University of Maryland member, NIST advisory committee

Steve Riskus freelance photographer; eyewitness, Pentagon crash

Van Romero, Ph.D. vice president, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology

Christine Shaffer spokesperson, Viracon

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., S.E. Kettelhut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering, Purdue University; member, Pentagon Building Performance Report; project conception, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University

Shyam Sunder, Sc.D.
acting deputy director, lead investigator, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Mary Tobin science writer, media relations, Earth Institute, Columbia University

Forman Williams, Ph.D. professor of engineering, physics, combustion, University of California,
San Diego; member, advisory committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology


Do you mean to tell me that they are all on a the CIA payroll and lied ot cover something up. Steve Jones has a degree and some ideas, this is a list of scholars and industry professionals.

Rosie is a *snip* and everyone knows it. I would no sooner believe anything that *snip* says than I would Baghdad Bob....

*Mod Edit - Circumvention of Censors*

[edit on 3/31/07 by niteboy82]
Mod Note: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors
Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette

[edit on 31-3-2007 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
Like what? I am curious as to what you have an issue with.

Maybe you could be specific and we could discuss this issue.

Oh gee, where to start.. I have been researching and posting information for over a year on here and other forums. The biggest thing is thier are no FBI and NTSB crime scene reports on any of the crime scenes on 911.

1. Evidence shows that the planes impacts on the towers did not casue them to collapse.

2. Evidence shows the fires in the towers did not burn long enough or get hot enough to weaken the steel.

3. We have no official report on what caused building 7 to collapse.

4. We have no video, photo or official reports on what hit the Pentagon.

5. Flight data recorder from the Pentagon shows a different path then what the official story tells.

I have a lot more evidence , where would you like to begin the debate.

Originally posted by esdad71
Popular Mechanics provided a good story and many answers

Well they are not qualified to do an investigation.

Also no matter how many people added in thier 2 cents worth the only investigation that matters is the 1 from the FBI and the NTSB

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

The biggest thing is thier are no FBI and NTSB crime scene reports on any of the crime scenes on 911.

Starting with the above, please provide absolute proof of :

1. Evidence shows that the planes impacts on the towers did not casue them to collapse.

Thanks in advance,
Lex

ULTIMA, what are your qualifications or psychic ability do you use to cast away all of those people? Baghdad Bob....LMAO?....

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Stateofgrace
Like what? I am curious as to what you have an issue with.

Maybe you could be specific and we could discuss this issue.

Oh gee, where to start.. I have been researching and posting information for over a year on here and other forums. The biggest thing is thier are no FBI and NTSB crime scene reports on any of the crime scenes on 911.

1. Evidence shows that the planes impacts on the towers did not casue them to collapse.

2. Evidence shows the fires in the towers did not burn long enough or get hot enough to weaken the steel.

3. We have no official report on what caused building 7 to collapse.

4. We have no video, photo or official reports on what hit the Pentagon.

5. Flight data recorder from the Pentagon shows a different path then what the official story tells.

I have a lot more evidence , where would you like to begin the debate.

1. Evidence?

2 Evidence?

3. NIST will release a final report this year.

4. Nonsense, the are many reports and eye witness statements that confirm flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

5. Incorrect. The FDR shows the exact path that flight 77 took, straight into the Pentagon. This is verified by all the physical evidence.

I would like to debate right here, proceed.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Since when is Popular Mechanics a certified investigating agency?

Since when is Rosie O'Donnel a certified investigating agency?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I would listen to Popular Mechanics before I'd listen to Rosie.

ULTIMA1..
Oh gee, where to start.. I have been researching and posting information for over a year on here and other forums. The biggest thing is thier are no FBI and NTSB crime scene reports on any of the crime scenes on 911.

here is the explanation as to why you cannot find the documents.

www.ntsb.gov...



and according to this, contact the FBI


www.ntsb.gov...

You mean it took you a year to not find this?


[edit on 31-3-2007 by esdad71]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Oh gee, where to start.. I have been researching and posting information for over a year on here and other forums.

Well; that's your first mistake. ATS and "other forums" are not legitimate sources for information like this.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
1. Evidence shows that the planes impacts on the towers did not casue them to collapse.

You're quite right!!! It was the subsequent fire that caused the buildings to weaken and collapse

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
2. Evidence shows the fires in the towers did not burn long enough or get hot enough to weaken the steel.

Are you planning on presenting this conclusive evidence or are you waiting for someone (like me) to ask for it?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
3. We have no official report on what caused building 7 to collapse.

So; there's no official report and you, therefore, conclude that its collapse was caused by something other than the effect of collateral damage. I don't understand the logic of your argument.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
4. We have no video, photo or official reports on what hit the Pentagon.

I personally don't know whether there are "official reports" on this but let's assume there isn't. What do you believe happened to the missing airplane and all those missing people? If it crashed elsewhere; then where? Where are the wirnesses to that crash site?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
5. Flight data recorder from the Pentagon shows a different path then what the official story tells.

Post your source. What path does it show?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have a lot more evidence , where would you like to begin the debate.

First; you'll need to bolster your credibility before any meaningful debate can take place. I understand, however, the frustration of repeatedly posting information in different threads. If you've posted information/evidence elewhere, feel free to link to those threads--just to save you time.

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Freedom_for_sum]

If fire wont melt steel, what will ice? This statement by the queen of blah is so uotrages that it baffles the mind!!

Different materials burn at different degrees, your hosehold campfir wood burns at a different temperature than steel!

This is so obsurd, Hey rosie go throw a metal pipe at the sun, then come back an hour later and see if its still their!!

My god what an idiot, how in the world do we make any of the formations with any metal we have?? we molded/melted them some how right!

But not just with fire!!! OMFG

Originally posted by redseal
If fire wont melt steel, what will ice? This statement by the queen of blah is so uotrages that it baffles the mind!!

LOL you do know that fire comes in many varieties, you know hot and hotter and really hot, and don't forget really really hot, right?

So, now we've established that, the WTC fires were hot. To soften steel enough for it to globally collapse the fire would have to be really really really really hot.



Edit: BTW popular mechanics is part of the Hearst Corporation, the largest distributer of newspapers and magazines in the world, thus would be part of the Bilderberg Group, and you know the implications of that?
Not trustworthy! Not even remotely. Sniff hard, can you smell it?

[edit on 31/3/2007 by ANOK]