The 9-11 Passenger List

Originally posted by exponent
They used photographic, videographic and firefighter eyewitness accounts to construct their model of damage, they had a large amount of information on building construction and quite a lot of videos of fire and collapse.

You mean the same evidence that other agencies like the ones i have posted had but you refuse to accept thier reports?



[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
You mean the same evidence that other agencies like the ones i have posted had but you refuse to accept thier reports?

Which reports are you referring to? The only one I am aware of is the FEMA report which was superseded by NIST. You have not presented any report I am aware of which states WTC7 could not have collapsed due to fire damage.

Originally posted by exponent
The only one I am aware of is the FEMA report which was superseded by NIST.

How does the NIST report supercede the FEMA report when FEMA did a proper and full investigation and NIST did not?

I have posted the FEMA report and the report from the engineers.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
How does the NIST report supercede the FEMA report when FEMA did a proper and full investigation and NIST did not?

I have posted the FEMA report and the report from the engineers.

FEMAs report was not "full" by any means, their conclusion was by their own admission unlikely and they did not investigate building performance to any great depth.

It's quite sad that you have now resorted to making this claim, have you actually read NISTs report on WTC7?

Originally posted by exponent
It's quite sad that you have now resorted to making this claim, have you actually read NISTs report on WTC7?

Its very sad that the only report you depend on is the NIST report that has been questioned by many experts and several other agencies disagree with it.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Because the other reports have not been released yet.

I'm curious why you always seem to forget that, ULTIMA1?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Its very sad that the only report you depend on is the NIST report that has been questioned by many experts and several other agencies disagree with it.

Have you actually read the report? Could you tell me (for example) the effect WTC1 debris impact had on the structure according to them?

Seriously ULTIMA this is just going in circles, you've attempted to make several points and then abandoned them in multiple threads. Why don't you challenge me to a moderated debate? I am more than game.

Originally posted by gavron
I'm curious why you always seem to forget that, ULTIMA1?

I am curious why you keep trolling?

Originally posted by exponent
you've attempted to make several points and then abandoned them in multiple threads.

Usullay becasue people refuse to have an adult discussion with evidence.

Most believers as soon as evidence is shown either try to change subject or just ingnore it.



[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1



Its an honest question, Roger.

Seems in all these seperate threads, you complain that there is no information in the reports...reports you know have not been released. Then when forum readers say they are in the FBI reports, only THEN You say "those havent been released yet".

You only seem to post what fits your wild conspiracy theory, with plenty of links to your conspiracy websites.

Why is that? WHat happened to your finding the truth?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Usullay becasue people refuse to have an adult discussion with evidence.

Most believers as soon as evidence is shown either try to change subject or just ingnore it.

I have done neither, I have clearly shown where you are wrong and you have failed to provide a significant rebuttal to pretty much every point. For example in this thread you have requested the law which states NIST is an official agency for investigating WTC collapses. I provided that law, and you have failed to provide any reason that this is inaccurate or incorrect.

I am not interested in any sort of handwaving arguments, I am interested in facts, and I am growing tired of the constant circles these arguments run in. I have mentioned this several times, please challenge me to a moderated debate on whatever topic you like. Lets take this to a third party opinion.

Originally posted by gavron
Seems in all these seperate threads, you complain that there is no information in the reports...

You mean the reports that have not been released but yet beleivers keep stating they have the information from?

Originally posted by exponent
For example in this thread you have requested the law which states NIST is an official agency for investigating WTC collapses. I provided that law, and you have failed to provide any reason that this is inaccurate or incorrect..

As stated the law does not give NIST the authority that the FBI or NTSB has. Also it was signed a year after the attacks.

I will state 1 more time for the record.

NIST is not an official investigating agency for 9/11. The FBI and NTSB are the offical agencies.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I will state 1 more time for the record.

NIST is not an official investigating agency for 9/11. The FBI and NTSB are the offical agencies.

Just because you can repeat yourself does not make it correct ULTIMA. I am happy that we have proven beyond considerable doubt that NIST was an official agency, sanctioned by law to investigate the collapses and endowed with authority to investigate as they saw fit.

This is the end of our debate unless you are willing to make it more formal.

Originally posted by exponent
I am happy that we have proven beyond considerable doubt that NIST was an official agency, sanctioned by law to investigate the collapses and endowed with authority to investigate as they saw fit.

You mean sanctioned by a law a year later

Oh what about Section 4 and the authority (or lack there of) they have about evidence

[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]