So Just Fire Brought Down WTC7 In A Perfect Free Fall Collapse ?

reply to post by -PLB-


I haven't read all your back and forths on this thread so if my assumptions are off, I do apologize. So you're an engineer, and am I assuming correct that you believe the NIST report is correct? Second, do you 100% believe the OS?

We know that there are many scientists/engineers/pilots/etc. out there who believe the OS is total crap and like to poke holes right through the story itself. Now are they just wrong or misguided? What makes the NIST report totally accurate in your mind? Do you believe they spent enough time on the report?

Originally posted by -PLB-

It was more of a rethorical question to make you think. Why are all these experts in complete silence while they have all the means to publish. There is no rational explanation.

It was a misleading question. There are many experts that are not in silence, and of course there is a rational explanation for some not putting their jobs on the line, some people don't want to go public, that is understandable, it's not hard to see why.

Saying that you don't agree wont cut it.

Here you go again, making up comments that I did not make! How do you expect to be taken seriously with all these false remarks?

Got "owned"? Is this a game to you? Where is Chandlers widely accepted publication that shows NIST is wrong? Or are you just very susceptible to hit and run media and don't care that much about the actual science?

It's a figure of speech, NIST did get 'owned' by David Chandler, he made them look stupid! I take it you're not familiar with David Chandler's work... Here you go, educate yourself...

9/11 Videos by David Chandler

Do you understand the difference between "metal" and "steel'?

You're just being pedantic! Molten metal is the title of the video, but if you bothered to watch it, the question posed to John Gross in the video was molten steel, and he lied about it, what do you have to say about him lying?

Do you think a NIST lead engineer caught lying is good for the integrity of the NIST report? I think the fact he was caught lying shows what NIST are capable of. So if the lead engineer is lying, then he can't be trusted as lead engineer to the NIST report.

Originally posted by jhn7537
I haven't read all your back and forths on this thread so if my assumptions are off, I do apologize. So you're an engineer, and am I assuming correct that you believe the NIST report is correct? Second, do you 100% believe the OS?

I never believe anything to be 100% correct. I am always open to alternatives. Heck that is the reason I got involved with this whole 911 issue in the first place.

I think NIST is probably mostly correct. I haven't seen a better explanation for the observations yet. For instance, there is no explosives or thermite that can explain the inward bowing. Yet we can clearly see it on video and photo evidence.

So if NIST is incorrect, how do we explain the facts?

We know that there are many scientists/engineers/pilots/etc. out there who believe the OS is total crap and like to poke holes right through the story itself. Now are they just wrong or misguided? What makes the NIST report totally accurate in your mind? Do you believe they spent enough time on the report?

The NIST report is extremely extensive. It covers so many aspects that it really shows the people who worked on it gave it a lot of thought. You will always have people who disagree. For instance, there is Quitniere. He made some publications on the subject, for instance: Link (top result, direct link failed)
Maybe he is correct. Quintiere even made a scale model of a floor to show that NIST is wrong. That is how you do science.

Originally posted by -PLB-

Originally posted by jhn7537
I haven't read all your back and forths on this thread so if my assumptions are off, I do apologize. So you're an engineer, and am I assuming correct that you believe the NIST report is correct? Second, do you 100% believe the OS?

I never believe anything to be 100% correct. I am always open to alternatives. Heck that is the reason I got involved with this whole 911 issue in the first place.

I think NIST is probably mostly correct. I haven't seen a better explanation for the observations yet. For instance, there is no explosives or thermite that can explain the inward bowing. Yet we can clearly see it on video and photo evidence.

So if NIST is incorrect, how do we explain the facts?

We know that there are many scientists/engineers/pilots/etc. out there who believe the OS is total crap and like to poke holes right through the story itself. Now are they just wrong or misguided? What makes the NIST report totally accurate in your mind? Do you believe they spent enough time on the report?

The NIST report is extremely extensive. It covers so many aspects that it really shows the people who worked on it gave it a lot of thought. You will always have people who disagree. For instance, there is Quitniere. He made some publications on the subject, for instance: Link
Maybe he is correct. Quintiere even made a scale model of a floor to show that NIST is wrong. That is how you do science.

edit on 5-6-2013 by -PLB- because: correct link

Well it's good to know you are open to the idea that the NIST report is a fraud.

Yes they sure did take a long time with the report, they had to go back and amend it after David Chandler showed their calculations to be wrong! I personally think they took so long because there was a lot of fudging to do.

The fact John Gross is clearly lying, as I say, just means the NIST report loses all credibility.

But all that aside, to expect people to believe the failure of one column, (column 79) was the cause of the collapse, due to fires, which were nowhere near column 79 is a bit far fetched, especially seeing as no steel framed high rise building had ever collapsed due to fire alone.

David Chandler has made some good videos picking their report apart, I would recommend anyone interested in 9/11 to watch them.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified
It was a misleading question. There are many experts that are not in silence, and of course there is a rational explanation for some not putting their jobs on the line, some people don't want to go public, that is understandable, it's not hard to see why.

Your "many" is still an extremely small fraction of all experts out there.

Here you go again, making up comments that I did not make! How do you expect to be taken seriously with all these false remarks?

So signing a petition or speaking out is not a form of "Saying"? If not, that is what I meant by "saying". We can call it "Grubling" from now on. So:

Grubling that you don't agree wont cut it.

It's a figure of speech, NIST did get 'owned' by David Chandler, he made them look stupid! I take it you're not familiar with David Chandler's work... Here you go, educate yourself...

9/11 Videos by David Chandler

I have seen a couple of Youtubes of him. It was a pain to watch.

You're just being pedantic! Molten metal is the title of the video, but if you bothered to watch it, the question posed to John Gross in the video was molten steel, and he lied about it, what do you have to say about him lying?

Do you think a NIST lead engineer caught lying is good for the integrity of the NIST report? I think the fact he was caught lying shows what NIST are capable of. So if the lead engineer is lying, then he can't be trusted as lead engineer to the NIST report.

Damn, you made me watch. Where is your proof that there was molten steel? (other than anecdotal)

reply to post by DeeKlassified


So what is your explanation for the observed inward bowing?

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

Please do quote where I have called you a liar! I think you'll find you just made that up!

Please quote me were I said you called me a liar lets have a little look!!!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Well YOU accuse people of telling lies

Detail it's all in the DETAIL I said PEOPLE not me , I was referring to my external texts I posted you said the quotes were lies did you not!

reply to post by -PLB-


!500 brave souls who put it on the line to call for an investigation is many .
Why would Cheney be running war Games . Is he qualified ?

reply to post by wmd_2008


You avoid answering only to ridicule the question . Can you not say I don't know . You have a job to do that is easy to see . You have never addressed the points I made about events around the buildings being dropped . How about Silberstein's blunder . "Pull it" He is not a rookie in the business he knows what the phrase Pull it means .

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by DeeKlassified

 

So what is your explanation for the observed inward bowing?

What does inward bowing have to do with anything?

Give me some thorough information on what you are getting at, make your point clearly and concisely, and I'll do my best to answer you..

reply to post by DeeKlassified


Its your position that NIST are fraudulent liars. So I ask you for an alternative explanation for one of their key findings. Or do you agree with NIST on this one?

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

Please do quote where I have called you a liar! I think you'll find you just made that up!

Please quote me were I said you called me a liar lets have a little look!!!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Well YOU accuse people of telling lies

Detail it's all in the DETAIL I said PEOPLE not me , I was referring to my external texts I posted you said the quotes were lies did you not!

I do think there are a lot of lies told about 9/11, and those lies get spread on 9/11 forums by OS'ers.

Here's your full comment, not just a snipped version...

Well YOU accuse people of telling lies/posting disinfo etc but nobody can say anything against you !

Easy to interpret that as you calling me a liar!

I dont call people on here liars, that is against the rules, but I will point out if they are regurgitating a lie, can't have OS'er spreading more disinfo.

reply to post by SimonPeter


You can call it many all day long, its sill a very small fraction. It has no significance outside the truth movement. I think the majority of all structural engineers are not even aware of it.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

* * * * * * * * * * REMINDER * * * * * * * * *

Please take a breath, pause a moment and review this link: 9/11 forum update and information

Please debate the TOPIC, and not each other or your views of other members' personalities. Keep it civil.

thanks

reply to post by -PLB-


What did you expect the investigators to say even if they knew it was an inside job . You don't mess with the big boys like one president did . They had to come up with the official story .

reply to post by SimonPeter


Ask the question, what would you do, choose to be complicit to mass murder by covering it up or to get the evidence out? What would your family do? What would your friends do? Even if you would choose to be complicit to mass murder, you must know someone who is moral and brave enough to speak? Why would it be any different with the people working at NIST, or any of the organizations assisting them?

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

You avoid answering only to ridicule the question . Can you not say I don't know . You have a job to do that is easy to see . You have never addressed the points I made about events around the buildings being dropped . How about Silberstein's blunder . "Pull it" He is not a rookie in the business he knows what the phrase Pull it means .

What points confuse you!

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

I am no expert and can still see the abhorent lies in the official story. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE A DAMM EXPERT! 2 planes does not equal 3 buildings down. It just does not! Repeat it does not a few hundred times man.

1500 architects and engineers are not a trivial number. How many do we need? 3000, 10000, 1000000, 1 million. Please tell me how many we need. I am curious!

Well what about the 100,000's world wide that DON'T think that.

So we don't need experts it seems now all me need is the internet armchair army

Could you decide the best connection to take a load in a structure, could you solve the loads on the members of something like this.



If someone asked you what the best fixing solution would be to hold a cantilever beam on a wall with a tension load of 15kn and shear of 25kn on concrete wall , block/masonry wall.

It's easy to spout of what you said in the post it just shows YOU don't understand the subject.

Some here have MANY years dealing with such problems even discussing them while 20,30,40 floors up on the outside of a building!

reply to post by wmd_2008

Well what about the 100,000's world wide that DON'T think that.

You would not just be making stuff up? Can you prove that 100,000's DON'T think that. Prove it! Go on!

If this is all you have then perhaps you may want to look at it from the other side. The other side has real stuff to play with.

P