Final WTC7 Report Released

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby barracuda » Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:56 pm

erosoplier wrote:I find it very hard to believe that gravity alone could gnaw away at the corner of wtc7 so as to produce the difference between those two photos.

Your statement here cuts to the core of why these arguments are fruitless, and why CD theory resembles a hobby and a religious belief. What you believe has little bearing on the factual reality of what happened. Try typing your statement with the caps lock on, and you'll see what I mean. The building sustained damage to that corner. It is obviously damaged in both pictures, and damage was reported by eyewitnesses. But you find it hard to believe. What do you believe? That Larry Silverstien used a rock hammer there? Or that the pictures and the witnesses to the damage were "faked"?

c2w? didn't at any point dismiss the entire effort to investigate how the buildings fell, even though she herself doesn't favour investigating 9/11 from the CD angle.

I don't dismiss it either. I'm all for some puting together some congressional hearings. Knock yourself out. It will likely happen in ten years or so, just like with JFK. And let me know who your favorite Ripper suspects are while you are at it, and your opinion on the grassy knoll. Because I'm interested. I really am.

Who benefits? Of course it's the perps who benefit, but the people doing the acts which benefit the perps are, I would argue, the ones who think CD is a waste of time, yet spend energy actually knobbling efforts to discuss CD wherever and whenever it is being discussed.

You have your hobbies, I have mine. Yours would seem involve searchng for the culprits and their mechanisms which caused three buildings to fail. Mine is listening to your CD arguments and analysing them as to whether or not they satisfy me. As yet, I still don't know what happened. If that makes me a "knobbler", so be it. I'm actually happy for folks like Hugh and ischar who have such an unwavering firmament on which to stand, grandly surveying fools like me below, unable to see what any child could see by looking at photos. My hobby seems to somehow hamper the progress of yours in your view? Sorry. We are both, believe it or not, interested in similar outcomes.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:11 pm

barracuda wrote: We are both, believe it or not, interested in similar outcomes.


Image

Indeed.
Giustizia mosse il mio alto fattore:
fecemi la divina podestate,
la somma sapienza e 'l primo amore.

:: ::
S.H.C.R.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:33 pm

barracuda wrote:
erosoplier wrote:I find it very hard to believe that gravity alone could gnaw away at the corner of wtc7 so as to produce the difference between those two photos.

Your statement here cuts to the core of why these arguments are fruitless, and why CD theory resembles a hobby and a religious belief. What you believe has little bearing on the factual reality of what happened. Try typing your statement with the caps lock on, and you'll see what I mean. The building sustained damage to that corner. It is obviously damaged in both pictures, and damage was reported by eyewitnesses. But you find it hard to believe. What do you believe? That Larry Silverstien used a rock hammer there? Or that the pictures and the witnesses to the damage were "faked"?


I suspect, at this point in time, that that picture and some of the witnesses to the damage may have been faked.

This is more likely than gravity being the cause of the damage in that picture, by my estimation, taking into account the woefully inadequate and amateurish standard of debate that has gone on thus far about this entire 9/11 issue, including this specific issue. Internet, shminternet.

I'd be interested to hear the opinion of some architects and engineers (visa-versa actually) on this photo.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:41 pm

erosoplier wrote: the woefully inadequate and amateurish standard of debate that has gone on thus far about this entire 9/11 issue


Agreed.

OP ED wrote:Indeed.


Image

Yes indeedlie-doodley!
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:46 pm

So when one side of a card table is damaged...the whole thing comes straight down at free-fall speed?

No.

Neither can WTC7 without being blown up with controlled demolition.

Quit talking about the talkers and talk about the physics. K?
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:55 pm

Has anybody actually read the website Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?

Guess not. Obviously not. Do it. Now.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:01 pm

I've read quite a bit of it, actually. Boring as hell, and highly non-committal. Like most physics. And further I can type PROVEN in upper-case! Here's some CD proofs that fall outside the A&E charter somewhat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFVi4qbN2jM


http://www.freewebs.com/democraatus/page05.htm


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0kWya_oVC8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBuH8NNIBys


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cknkJIous8


http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...234396051243299

Have you watched them all? Maybe. Maybe not. Do it. Now. Instantly.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:13 pm

barracuda wrote:I've read quite a bit of it, actually. Boring as hell, and highly non-committal. Like most physics.

:shock: "Non-commital...like most physics"???!!
WTF?

Oh, so they don't use physics to build cities and launch satellites and perform medical operations and....

ding. I don't trust the judgement of people who don't place any confidence in laws of physics and can't even read citations of the same.

M'k. I'll drag the evidence over to this board. Hope it isn't too - wah! - "boring."

http://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7.php

Image
"Shortly after the core columns under the East Penthouse of WTC 7 collapsed, the rest of the building collapsed mostly into its footprint in about 7 seconds — near free-fall speed."

Image
"Taken from the FEMA report, Fig. 5-26, this photographic evidence begs to question why WTC 7 imploded when WTC 6 and WTC 5 were closer to the Twin Towers and more heavily damaged by falling debris, yet, their structures remain."

Image
"The official FEMA report states: "The collapse of WTC 7 had a small debris field as the facade was pulled downward, suggesting an internal failure and implosion...
Demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it." "

These office fires were not enough to heat a column weighing 15,000 pounds per floor to 1000° F.

Image

Image
East: about 2:30pm
[floors 11 and 12 - Arrows point to
north east
generator room]

Image
North: about 3:00pm
[floors 7 and 12]

Image
North: 4:48pm
[8 and 13 - fire on floor 12 had burned out in east end]

The NIST hypothesis offers NO explanation for the collapse of half the core columns.
The sudden and complete destruction of World Trade Center 7 was not included in the 911 Commission Report.
---------------------------------------------------------

Image
AE911Truth.org info card front:
The Case for Explosive Demolition of the WTC Towers

Image
AE911Truth.org info card back:
The Case for Explosive Demolition of the WTC Towers

Image
No steel framed high-rise building has ever collapsed due to fire - due to the high temperatures that would be required to weaken structural steel past it's critical safety margin - even though very large, very hot, and very long-lasting fires have ravaged many steel-structure high-rise buildings. These buildings are all in use today:

• Caracas, Venezuela, Oct, 2004, 56 story building,
burned for 17 hours over 26 floors
• Los Angeles, May 1988, 1st Interstate Bank, 62 stories,
burned for 3.5 hours over 5 floors
• Philadelphia, Feb, 1991, Meridian Plaza, 38 stories,
burned for 18 hours over 8 floors
• New York, Aug, 1970, New York Plaza, 50 stories,
burned for six hours

Image
Previously molten metal was found "flowing like lava" by the FDNY in the basements of all 3 WTC High-rises. Hydrocarbon fires can burn at a maximum temperature of 1,800°F which is about 1,000° short of the beginning melting temperature of steel. Where did the molten metal come from? Why do FEMA and NIST deny its existence?

Image
The 4- to 20-ton steel columns & beams were broken apart at bolted and welded connections and ejected laterally up to 500 feet.

Image
The architectural drawings of the WTC North Tower have been leaked from an individual associated with the Silverstein-Weidlinger Report. They reveal that the large box columns of the core maintain their 30"x16" and 52"x22" dimensions at least up through the 66th floor. They also indicate that most of the core columns would be easily accessed from the elevator shafts in order to plant explosives. We know that the elevators were being modernized by Ace Elevator during the 9 months prior to 9/11.

Image
This is the World Trade Center exploding.

Image
This is an acknowledged explosion.
Can you tell the difference?

Image
Which 20 story building will fall to the ground first? Until 9/11/01 most physicists would have agreed that the one that didn't have to crush though 100,000 tons of steel would fall first — at free-fall speed. On 9/11, the example on the left "collapsed" at virtually free-fall speed! But this could only have been accomplished by removing the columns ahead of the fall — with explosives.

Image
Numerous Squibs (mis-timed explosions) can be seen seen 20 to 40 floors ahead of the advancing "collapse". NIST claims that they are "puffs of air" created from the pancaking floors above. But there are no pancaking floors above, they are not air but pulverized building materials, they occur precisely at the center of the building in an "open office plan", and finally, the 160 to 200 feet per second speed of this debris suggests they could only have been propelled by explosives.

Image
The debris was equally distributed across a 1,400 ft. diameter. There are no "pancakes" stacked up at the bottom of either tower!

Image
The FEMA report notes:
"The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.... Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation." NIST dropped this like a hot potato. These are all tell tell signs of the use of thermate (sulphur + thermite) incendiary cutter charges."

Image
It takes thousands of degrees to bend steel like this without buckling. Thermate cutter charges create over 4,500°F. Fires — even with jet fuel — create only 1,700°F maximum.

Image
Physics professor Steven Jones finds, in this previously molten sample from the WTC, the chemical traces of Thermate — including Fluorine, Manganese, Sulphur, Potassium, etc.

Image
Steven Jones, PhD physicist discovers previously molten iron spheres in the WTC dust which blanketed lower Manhattan. Sizes are up to 1/16" diameter. The findings are corroborated by EPA but not explained. Molten iron is the byproduct of Thermite. It contains the chemical signature of thermate.

Image
The Smoking Gun: Microspheres carry signature of Thermate!

Image
The concrete and other building contents were pulverized to a thick ground hugging pyroclastic dust — much of which was <100 microns — the width of a human hair. The gravitational potential of the building at 100,000KWH does not account for the concrete pulverization or the rapid expansion of the dust clouds.

Image
This is all that is left of the concrete floors, gypsum wall board, steel decking, office furniture, office machinery, filing cabinets. The toxic dust averages 4" deep — throughout lower Manhattan.

[two video clips]
Controlled demolitions can be performed in a variety of ways.
Above are two examples of top-down controlled demolition.

barracuda wrote:..... Here's some CD proofs that fall outside the A&E charter somewhat.

.....

Have you watched them all? Maybe. Maybe not. Do it. Now. Instantly.


What are those clips? Atleast tell us that.
Last edited by Hugh Manatee Wins on Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:31 pm

Grist for the mill.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:58 pm

barracuda wrote:Grist for the mill.


Grind away. :P

The proofs are plural. The buildings were blown to smithereens.

The cover-up of this fact is the most potentially culture-shifting revelation since JFK was murdered. Ain't nothin' boring about that.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:09 am

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:I don't trust the judgement of people who don't place any confidence in laws of physics and can't even read citations of the same.

Yeah, that's right Hugh, I don't believe in physics. Blerg. You got me. Ding! From now on, it's CD OR BUST.

And to have you say that you don't trust my judgement is just hurtful. Hurtful. All I'm saying is I DON'T KNOW. And I'm not sure that I trust the judgement of those who say they do.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:18 am

Your A&E info-spam raises question, all of which I am aware of, but doesn't offer the finality and dogma of your suppositions. If the case for CD rests on that tiny dust mote, then we're lost.

HughManateeWins wrote:Ain't nothin' boring about that.

Re-reading your A&E documentation, I think I can conclusively say that this is at least one statement of yours which is incontrovertably mistaken. CAUSE THAT POST IS BORING.

But thanks for the death-porn. Right back atcha.

Image
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:18 am

thegovernmentflu wrote:On another WTC7-related topic, is everyone here familiar with the claim that there was an audible "10... 9..." countdown prior to the collapse?

Maybe I'm missing something, but that claim strikes me as unbelievably ridiculous. I listen to Alex Jones fairly regularly for entertainment, and he finds this "fact" important enough to edit into the radio trailer for Truth Rising.

Is it just me, or is this the 911 equivalent of the guy who supposedly shot a poison dart out of his umbrella at JFK?


As much as I like what Alex Jones does(aside from destroying the dreams of Mexican immigrants, ha) he seems to get a bit too excited about every bozo who comes on and claims some new "eye witness" to 9/11

Remember the "I saw a black global hawk hit the Pentagon", or "I was in Centcom, I swear there was a standdown?"

Most of these turn out to be hoaxes by people who want their 5 minutes of conspiratainment fringe fame

Nordic wrote:
On another WTC7-related topic, is everyone here familiar with the claim that there was an audible "10... 9..." countdown prior to the collapse?


I hadn't heard anything about that, but REMEMBER:

The BBC went live, saying that the building had collapsed BEFORE it collapsed.

Now that's just fucking weird.

Somebody sent out a press release a LITTLE bit early.


Yeah that's what happened. :)

Wait...why did WTC7 "have to fall"? I'm still trying to figure out how that fits into the scheme of things
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:22 am

barracuda wrote:
Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:I don't trust the judgement of people who don't place any confidence in laws of physics and can't even read citations of the same.

Yeah, that's right Hugh, I don't believe in physics. Blerg. You got me. Ding! From now on, it's CD OR BUST.

And to have you say that you don't trust my judgement is just hurtful. Hurtful. All I'm saying is I DON'T KNOW. And I'm not sure that I trust the judgement of those who say they do.


I don't meant to (just) be hurtful.
But you've got to acknowledge physics.
And that there IS such thing as proof, not just opinion.

If you still don't know, what part of the Architects and Engineers presentation of evidence do you shrug off and find merely "boring?"

I think I dragged enough over to make the case and then some.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:22 am

thegovernmentflu wrote:I just thought of how to explain my thought process behind my earlier theory.

I would be curious to find out how most people found out about WTC 7. Personally, I didn't know about it until I started to check out 911 Truth stuff a few years ago. Even if I had seen it before, I probably wouldn't have given its collapse any thought. But for me, the clincher was in some of the specious reasoning provided by the authorities and the constant mention of "unlikely scenarios" that must have occurred in the collapse. This kind of carefully chosen and stilted language set off alarm bells in my head, so I figured that there must be something to the controlled demolition theories. Would it be all that hard for the establishment to deliberately include shady language like this to bait the critical thinkers?

Think about it; the average sheep will a) never read the NIST report or b) read it and never spot the inconsistencies that are glaring to the average critical thinker. So clearly the inconsistencies mean literally nothing to the average person. Keeping this in mind, what's to stop the establishment from baiting conspiracy theorists with predetermined fishy statements that lead to an investigative dead-end?

I think another example of this sort of possible manipulation is Fox News and their post-911 piece about Israeli involvement in 911 that was "pulled at the last minute" from the network. A certain segment of the alternative media lends huge credence to that pulled report, because some of the less educated(but well meaning) Alex Jones followers automatically think "Fox News didn't want me to see this, therefore it must be true!"

Again, I'm not saying that any of this is necessarily true. But would it be all that impractical to pull off if the powers that be decided to implement it? Maybe I'm a bit naive, but I really don't think that it would be all that difficult to do this. It's just elementary reverse psychology. Surely these think tanks comprised of top psychiatrists and psychologists could devise something far more convoluted than this hypothetical propaganda technique.

You can already see reverse psychology being used as a means of psychological manipulation and control all throughout the school system. It's considered a given to many teachers that they have to sort of mess with the kids' heads in order to control their behavior.


Look how they refuse to release the tapes showing a plane, playing this weird parlor trick game of releasing only footage that doesnt really show anything. It's a honeypot, and all the Rumsfeld "missile Freudian slips" ain't going to make me go there.

Though, I think this DOES illustrate how bizarre the whole pentagon debacle really is:

Image
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests