August 21st: NIST report states WTC-7 "Did not collapse from explosives" , page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 17 times


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:14 PM by Pootie
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to
post by Pootie



Pootie...

Stop the hand waving and read the report. It will explain all of that to you.





No hand waving... from the report... ONE column:

The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.


OK.. maybe TWO charges would be necessary to replicate this chain of events then?



reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:24 PM by dunwichwitch
reply to post by ThroatYogurt




You've got me wrong, my friend. I am not now and never was a truther.

I seek the truth.... but sometimes even I'll admit that a lie is more comfortable, like watching TV and taking comfort in its plastic fakery for some reason... instead of using my brain.

Although I must ask why you would think genuine truth seekers in the "Truth Movement" would revel in this sort of thing. I mean... if you don't forget about this stuff every once in a while and just enjoy life (EDIT: or at least become preoccupied with it), you're liable to have a few mental breakdowns in a row... because the hits just keep on coming. The lies just keep on being stripped away, and comfort is less and less accessible. Why would I seriously want this? Do you know how many times I've tried to forget a glaringly obvious lie with the farthest reaching implications imaginable? Do you lose sleep at night over this? Cuz sometimes, I do... when I'm no too busy trying to cover up my horrible discomfort by burying myself in my own selfishness and denial.

I've read enough on the subject. For a while, I attempted to debunk building 7, but found that all of the data in the world flung at me at once couldn't cover my eyes to what I saw.

I'm not saying that all involved in the NIST studies were Nazis or government shills, but that doesn't mean they weren't biased. What scientist trying to do his country a service while also trying to keep his funding and reputation wouldn't be biased, even if they themselves would probably not think so?
It's the unfortunate downfall of American Philosophy. We could do no wrong, unless the government admits it. Then, it's okay and we can forgive and forget, yet we're perfectly fine writing it off as a one time thing and ignoring all the other "one time things" that have happened and everything else bubbling up just under the surface because of this selfish delusion we're all locked into. What would that do to our everyday lives if we really admitted that this is all a falsehood? That veil of illusion is a very thin, but very provocative surface (like a silky fine mesh), and once the veil is removed, you can't go back to being under the veil without knowing that there EXISTS a veil and that it is brighter and clearer to see without it.

I don't blame the people of NIST as a collective. I blame the oversight of superiors, I blame economic narrow mindedness ingrained in us from a very early age, and I blame American Pride/Ignorance/Apathy/Bias.

Simple stuff.



[edit on 21-8-2008 by dunwichwitch]


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:31 PM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by badmedia



Not a straw man, but nice try. It's an analogy. Also, it's a spot-on observation.
Both positions are equally implausible.


Analogy

Straw Man Argument

[edit on 21-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:36 PM by Pootie
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to
post by badmedia



Not a straw man, but nice try. It's an analogy. Also, it's a spot-on observation.
Both positions are equally implausible.


Analogy

Straw Man Argument

[edit on 21-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]


I see pure derailment is still commonplace here.



reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:40 PM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Pootie



As you just engaged in. If it's a "paid dis-info agents'" attempt at derailment.......why add to it?

Stop wasting time! Stop responding to what is so obviously a 'derailment' and get on with bringing the perpetrators of mass murder to justice! Bring your superior knowledge of physics, as compared to the collective of NIST, to a sympathetic D.A. and get the murders prosecuted!

I am curious, when you go to the doctor for help, do you attempt to second guess him/her as an equal? Or, do you defer to their education, experience and on the job learning(s)?

I ask because you seem to have no problem engaging in conversation, conjecture and suppositions based on nothing but your opinion. If a doctor were to diagnosis you with pancriatitis, are you going to call him/her a ‘government shill’ and dismiss their educated opinion? Or, do you defer to their knowledge?

Of course you defer. But when it comes to the NIST, they are all “in on it”.

That’s the point.

[edit on 21-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 03:55 PM by Pootie
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Stop wasting time! Stop responding to what is so obviously a 'derailment' and get on with bring the perpetrators of mass murder to justice! Bringing your superior knowledge of physics, as compared to the collective of NIST, to a sympathetic D.A. and get the murders prosecuted!


Give me access to the evidence and I will ensure this happens. Remember that the gov. is still withholding thousands of photos, videos and all of the remaining physical evidence in their possession and no one outside of the NIST is examining it or allowed access to it.

I deleted the rest of your post from the block quote as it serves no purpose.

This "report" totally contradicts the "preliminary" report we have been arguing against for many years. Every user on here that stood behind the diesel that we told you years ago was recovered and a a non-factor should walk away at this point. Every user that stood behind the initial NIST damage estimates, even in the face of photo-analysis that proved them grossly inaccurate should walk away. All of those posters have been proven wrong if you believe this report. Heck, the NIST threw out their entire preliminary report and gave us this now?

Many years ago I helped with this in a tiny, tiny way. It was more accurate than the NIST prelim report then and it still is today.

www.studyof911.com...

It may even be part of the reason they backed off the "falling debris damaging columns and trusses" theory.

"Our" opinion and analysis has NOT changed since the first report was released... the NIST's has and so has that of the NIST worshipers on here.


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:00 PM by Griff
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar



If I were a doctor myself, yes, I'd second guess it. Because doctors are always right, correct?

If I were an engineer (as Pootie and I are), yes, I'd second guess NIST. Because engineers are always right too, correct?


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:03 PM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Pootie


I believe your opinion is as valid as anyone else’s. What I don’t agree with is your assertions of fact, which are really, in my opinion only, assertions of opinion.

Facts have evidence. CT's live in voids and are based on nebulous 'theories'.

I don't want our dialog to devolve into an even worse place - honestly.


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:05 PM by badmedia
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to
post by badmedia



Not a straw man, but nice try. It's an analogy. Also, it's a spot-on observation.
Both positions are equally implausible.


Analogy

Straw Man Argument

[edit on 21-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]


Honestly not interested in getting into a personal attack/argument here. But the bottom line is you needed to add tons of things that aren't even close to what I think or believe in an attempt to discredit me and what I said. I posted my opinion on the subject, and you simply made baseless attacks at me.

You can play semantics or whatever else you want about it. I don't really care.


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:07 PM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Griff



Griff!



One doctor? Absolutely fallible. A group of doctors forming, say.......a oncology team? No.

If NIST is wrong, there are a whole lot of people wrong. Massively so. Possible? Of course, I concede that. Likely? Negative.

The fallacy is that the work we are discussing came from one or two people. It came from a larger whole known as the NIST. Hence, my team of doctors analogy.



reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:08 PM by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by dunwichwitch



Read the report and tell me what they got wrong. I will write to them myself telling them where they are in error.

Thanks!

wtc.nist.gov...


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:11 PM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by badmedia



I care! I don't want to personally insult you. I concede your specific point. That is, you did not say a lot of what I asserted. My apologies.

My mistake was coalescing the 'typical' CT position with your specific ideas. 110% my mistake.

It's true what I said , generally (JFK = 9-11) but, it was NOT true that was your point. I hope that makes sense.

I admit when I am wrong. I was wrong.


reply posted on 21-8-2008 @ 04:15 PM by Griff
reply to post by ThroatYogurt



Page 4. Disclaimer # 4.

"NIST could not verify the actual (or as-built) construction"

That was easy.

If they couldn't verify the construction, how did they do a structural analysis?

Guess?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 12 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags