|
The Arrivals: The Foundation of the Anti-Christ (pg. 38)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
I don't buy it and it most certainly doesn't mean others shouldn't be subjective. NIST and FEMA should be held accountable for their outrageous explanations just like everyone else. |
Indeed; however, here is the problem... it's not engineers that have reviewed the reports that are questioning the conclusions; rather, it's people who are not properly qualified and examining aspects of the reports or evidence from non-credible sources that are questioning the conclusions. Of course one should be able to defend their position, which they have, which is why those who are qualified to challenge them don't. Incidently, this is also why the truthers are largely ignored. |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Indeed; however, here is the problem... it's not engineers that have reviewed the reports that are questioning the conclusions; rather, it's people who are not properly qualified and examining aspects of the reports or evidence from non-credible sources that are questioning the conclusions. Of course one should be able to defend their position, which they have, which is why those who are qualified to challenge them don't. Incidently, this is also why the truthers are largely ignored. |
Again that's just your opinion. Engineers from all over the world have reviewed the official reports, this is why anti CT's are largely ignored (sometimes) by people like me.
You choose to ignore it painting a picture that anyone questioning the official 9/11 accounts are all one and the same, or in your own words "truthers".
Not the case, you're wrong. |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
There is no doubt certain things in WTC building 7 might have exploded with the office fires which did sustain in certain areas. It's just that these type of explosions and fires do not cause buildings to crumble to the ground in a manner that has only been accomplished in the history of mankind by means of controlled demolition. Explosions were heard by hundreds of people not just Barry Jennings, most of their testimonies if not all were left out of the official reports.
Fire is sporadic and in order for a symmetrical collapse of WTC building 7 to happen the fire would have had to sever the support columns all at exactly the same time. We know controlled demolition can do this and fires cannot. NIST's final report concludes WTC 7 collapsed due to sporadic fires.
Jet fuel burns off rapidly, there was no direct path between WTC building 1 which stood over 350 feet away from WTC building 7. The debris or fires from WTC building 1 would have had to travel that distance and straight through WTC building 6 to get to WTC building 7.
I'm questioning the impossible things the official reports and stories are trying to pass off as believable. They completely omitted and ignored more information then all of their books and reports stacked up together. |
This is why no one takes you seriously... you make alot of pretty far fetched (see unsubstantiated) statements here....
| quote: | | Fire is sporadic and in order for a symmetrical collapse of WTC building 7 to happen the fire would have had to sever the support columns all at exactly the same time. We know controlled demolition can do this and fires cannot. |
first brash claim.... progressive collapse (or progressive failure as we like to call it) requires only one critical event. while engineers strive to design with multiple redundancy, there are always areas where a single critical connection or member failure could cause a progressive failure. to say that a progressive failure can only happen when all of the members fail simultaneously is not only wrong but grossly negligent of basic limit states design practices....
saying that progressive failure of a skyscrapper can only occur under controlled demolition is akin to saying that ejaculation can only occur by masturbation.... which may be true for you, but the rest of us know better...
actually thats kind of like engineering, physics and life in general... you think you understand it, but the rest of us just know better.....
| quote: | | It's just that these type of explosions and fires do not cause buildings to crumble to the ground in a manner that has only been accomplished in the history of mankind by means of controlled demolition. |
Fact: there does not exist any scientific or peer reviewed database of structural failures, unfortunately, while these events are almost always learned from, the changes to building codes and design practices rarely if ever bear any reference to the failure that triggered them. Also, most structural failures were not caught on video tape since most of them were not anticipated. Controlled demolition on the other hand is almost always video tapped, from multiple angles, for insurance purposes. This presents a plethora of examples on youtube for truthers to compare to the 9/11 attacks while presenting little if any video footage of normal building collapse.
Fact: in order to make the statement you have made above, one would assume that you would have some how found every single engineers report from every single building collapse/failure around the globe to come to such a firm and supported conclusion. The reality is that you have not, nor has anyone else in the movement. Why? because this information is incredibly hard to get your hands on unless you were involved in the particular cases.
anyways im bored with picking apart your insanity yet again.... ta ta for now... |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Again that's just your opinion. Engineers from all over the world have reviewed the official reports, this is why anti CT's are largely ignored (sometimes) by people like me.
You choose to ignore it painting a picture that anyone questioning the official 9/11 accounts are all one and the same, or in your own words "truthers".
Not the case, you're wrong. |
Ok i have time for one more....
remember that time you and trancer-x posted that list of "professionals, engineers and architects" who were not only qualified persons but also supported the controlled demolition / space lasers / alien intervention theories?
remember when we systematically showed that all of those individuals were either never licensed to practice engineering/architecture, or had their licenses revoked, or were licensed in a completely unrelated field to structural engineering (see computer systems engineer or electrical engineer, or chemical engineer), or had been stripped of tenure and professorship at their institutions, or had made claims that they had proven cold fusion theory? yeah that was good times dude.... we should do it again..... |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
Ok i have time for one more....
remember that time you and trancer-x posted that list of "professionals, engineers and architects" who were not only qualified persons but also supported the controlled demolition / space lasers / alien intervention theories?
remember when we systematically showed that all of those individuals were either never licensed to practice engineering/architecture, or had their licenses revoked, or were licensed in a completely unrelated field to structural engineering (see computer systems engineer or electrical engineer, or chemical engineer), or had been stripped of tenure and professorship at their institutions, or had made claims that they had proven cold fusion theory? yeah that was good times dude.... we should do it again..... |
Actually I am interested. You do a lot talking for someone who posts his credentials often but never has backed himself with anything substantial. Quote me saying anything about space lasers, alien intervention and what ever else you're imagining up and I will believe you.
It shouldn't be hard either, the search button is located in the top right.
The number of verified architectural and engineering professionals is at 1345, send them an email for the list and verify it.
http://www.ae911truth.org/ |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | | Quote me saying anything about space lasers, alien intervention and what ever else you're imagining up and I will believe you. |
ok ill admit that i stretched it a bit with the space lasers and alien intervention part..... couldn't help myself....
as for the debunking 1345 names..... i don't have the time or the patience to sit there and hold your hand all day. all that information is public domain, the burden of proof is on you..... you can look it up.
ps the reference i was making was to the old 9/11 conspiracy thread in the PDD... you can search it just as easily as i could.... |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
ok ill admit that i stretched it a bit with the space lasers and alien intervention part..... couldn't help myself....
as for the debunking 1345 names..... i don't have the time or the patience to sit there and hold your hand all day. all that information is public domain, the burden of proof is on you..... you can look it up.
ps the reference i was making was to the old 9/11 conspiracy thread in the PDD... you can search it just as easily as i could.... |
It should be easy for you, you claimed there are no relevant persons that are stating the official reports are full of which is not true.
I'm not claiming to be an engineer and never have (not that having certain credentials ever made it any harder to see 9/11 was a ton of bull in the first place).
You have access to a compiled list of verified engineers because you claim to be an engineer, why not check it and back yourself up or just bow out if you're going to make excuses again. |
|
|
| Claude Hughes |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
You have access to a compiled list of verified engineers because you claim to be an engineer, why not check it and back yourself up or just bow out if you're going to make excuses again. |
|
|
|
| Claude Hughes |
I havent really talked much about the events of 9/11 and my views. I came on here primarily to stomp on that troll PKC however, I am on the side of those who believe there is more to 9/11 than what the Bush Administration and all it's affiliates claim. There is nothing that anyone can say to change my views, period.
Nobody other than Moral Hazard answered Richard's question.
Everyone here was so adamant in proving "CD" were not used and based their final conclusion that the US Government (Bush and his clowns) were innocent. The usual suspects haven't shown their faces here to answer that 1 simple question.
Interesting. |
|
|
| basilisk |
Claude, no one cares. Richard's reasonable inquiry is lost in a sea of nonsense that you have gone to great lengths to perpetuate.
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sure, I'll answer. It's pretty clear and widely accepted that warnings of an impending attack, even rather specific warnings, were ignored by the Bush Administration. Why, I can't speculate; however, there was most certainly an apparent lack of action on their part with regard to this intellegence. Is that involvement, no, it's negligence; however, the phrase "are there hands clean" would normally mean they have no culpability, I would disagree with that. Am I willing to make the greater leap that they took no appreciable action in hopes of a pre-text to war presenting itself, no; however, they certainly did use the attacks as a pre-text to a war that Rumsfeld and Cheney were planning since they were acting as consultants prior to GDubs bid for the white house. I think I should be clear here... what I've stated above is a long in' way from "it was an inside job as an excuse for war." |
This is pretty much where I am at.
Perhaps the controlled demolition policy would like to clarify whether it was only WTC 7 that was rigged... or WTC 1 and 2 as well? How about those planes, were they hijacked by the US government? Did a plane hit the Pentagon? I mean, you guys post Youtube videos and point out strange anomalies about dead guys talking about unexplained explosions but I still have no idea what you all think really happened on 9/11 except that it wasn't the "official story"... so, illuminate the rest of us. |
|
|
| Claude Hughes |
| quote: | Originally posted by basilisk
This is pretty much where I am at.
Perhaps the controlled demolition policy would like to clarify whether it was only WTC 7 that was rigged... or WTC 1 and 2 as well? How about those planes, were they hijacked by the US government? Did a plane hit the Pentagon? I mean, you guys post Youtube videos and point out strange anomalies about dead guys talking about unexplained explosions but I still have no idea what you all think really happened on 9/11 except that it wasn't the "official story"... so, illuminate the rest of us. |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
wow...that is a lot of typing to basically say nothing of any value |
|
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
You're clearly confused as always. |
Coming from you, who thinks FEMA is setting up a concentration camp system, big LOL. Loser. :haha: |
|
|
|
|
