WTC 7 (Building 7)

[Mick West]

In my opinion this thread no longer serves any useful purpose. What the rest of you who are posting here do is up to you but I am out of any further discussions that involve these particular persons as it is more than obvious that they have no intention of participating in a rational exchange of ideas. All this debate now serves to do is provide a forum for their foolishness and this attention is obviously what they want and love!

I have actually seen people killed as a result of stupidity, lies and intransigence. I'll not be a part of perpetuating the atmosphere that further supports it.

Once a thread has gone past the first page, it's basically lost to the outside world, so does not really do any damage from spreading bunk. The thread then becomes a very localized exercise in correcting the bunk from one or two individuals. Quite often a futile exercise, but it's good practice, and helps clarify what does and does not work.

Jomper here is taking the approach or avoiding addressing actual evidence, and instead focussing on how stupid or corrupt everyone apparently is.

Hiper is taking the "let's go though everything that's already been debunked" approach.

The mix of the two approaches makes for a rather chaotic thread.

 

[hiper]

NIST decided there was no evidence of unnatural cause.

NIST handpicking what it wanted to investigate.. This is called pseudo-science Jazzy.
All NIST had to do was follow national standards and guidelines. It chose not to.
And the 'conspiracy theorists' are mocked for pointing this out.

 

[F4Jock]

That's the second time you are out of this thread. Why don't you stick around.



Again the planes we controlled remotely.



Maybe the planes did damage the core columns but to fall straight through the massive
structure below... all of a sudden elemental physics does not apply anymore.
And I remember you saying you were a science scholar.

Why do you think that structure was able to stand there for 30 years?
You defending the theory that the top section could fall through the massive core structure below it is with all due respect just asinine.
Sorry I can't think of another word.

Nope. Sorry. In lieu of getting you qualified as a pilot in multi-engined turbine aircraft so you can see and feel why they were not flown remotely, something you or anyone else has not and cannot PROVE, giving you a four-year education in engineering as well as experience in structural design analysis And again educating you as to how the building pancaked on itself I'm leaving you to wallow in your own more-than-aptly-demonstrated obtuseness. (Unlike you, while I had so MANY other more satisfying adjectives in mind I did think of a more forum-appropriate word.)

Thinking. Amazing what one can accomplish by thinking, isn't it? The entire gamut between logic and fantasy is encompassed therein. Unbelievable that Eisenstein, Kaku, Heinlein, Hitler, Manson and Jones all engaged in thinking - with such different results. Might the mere act of "thinking" be insufficient cause to put forth factually unsupportable and possibly dangerous ideas? "I think, therefore I am!" Famous statement. But how about "I think, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm right!" Someone also once said - "Be sure brain is engaged before placing mouth in gear!" There is a problem with that: One's brain, engaged or not, just may not be up to the task of producing rational thoughts, thus what emerges from the mouth is mere drivel.

I do have a parting suggestion: Why don't you contact a building demolition firm and ask if they'll bring you aboard so you can see first hand the massive preparation that goes into a controlled demolition? Maybe if you actually get some experience other than posting your theories you'll be open to other ideas.

 

[Mick West]

NIST handpicking what it wanted to investigate.

NIST investigated how the fire caused the collapse.

If the fire could not have caused the collapse, then they would have found that out in the course of the investigation.

 

[F4Jock]

Once a thread has gone past the first page, it's basically lost to the outside world, so does not really do any damage from spreading bunk. The thread then becomes a very localized exercise in correcting the bunk from one or two individuals. Quite often a futile exercise, but it's good practice, and helps clarify what does and does not work.

Jomper here is taking the approach or avoiding addressing actual evidence, and instead focussing on how stupid or corrupt everyone apparently is.

Hiper is taking the "let's go though everything that's already been debunked" approach.

The mix of the two approaches makes for a rather chaotic thread.

While I understand and appreciate your thesis I have to disagree. First, if a thread interests me I read every post. Second, if there is a chance that a thread may in any way contribute to fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat I think that had to be considered.

 

[hiper]

NIST investigated how the fire caused the collapse.

If the fire could not have caused the collapse, then they would have found that out in the course of the investigation.

Mick don't you understand NIST was on a leash?
How on earth could they come up with explosive residue when the president on day 1 said it were the terrorists with planes?
NIST obviously chose to not test the dust.

 

[jomper]

Jomper here is taking the approach or avoiding addressing actual evidence, and instead focussing on how stupid or corrupt everyone apparently is.

I'm getting a little tired of this constant misrepresentation. I have merely been focusing on how the NIST report fails to meet the basic principles of the scientific method, such as the simple standard of falsification. These are the issues that Jazzy is avoiding by putting words in my mouth or, as it would now appear, elephants in my room. It's funny in a way, but it's tiresome.

 

[Mick West]

I'm getting a little tired of this constant misrepresentation. I have merely been focusing on how the NIST report fails to meet the basic principles of the scientific method, such as the simple standard of falsification.

Well, are there any actual pieces of evidence you'd like to discuss?

 

[Mick West]

Mick don't you understand NIST was on a leash?
How on earth could they come up with explosive residue when the president on day 1 said it were the terrorists with planes?
NIST obviously chose to not test the dust.

But if the collapse could not have been caused by fire, then the investigation would have revealed that, and they could have tested for explosives at that point.

But how much explosives are we talking about here, that you could detect in in the dust? A hundred tons?

 

[hiper]

Second, if there is a chance that a thread may in any way contribute to fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat I think that had to be considered.

Maybe the Germans in the 1930's should have gotten together a little bit more to discus the fanatical path their government was leading them on...
That might have prevented some of the dangerous consequences that were to follow.

We are pointing out that NIST did not follow national standards regarding fire and explosive investigations
and you label this as 'fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat"?

You want to silence people F4Jock and this is never a good thing.
I must thank Mick for his professionalism in managing and allowing this thread.

 

[George B]

While I understand and appreciate your thesis I have to disagree. First, if a thread interests me I read every post. Second, if there is a chance that a thread may in any way contribute to fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat I think that had to be considered.

What do you suggest? Mick . . . should censor any exchange of ideas that the consensus on the Forum may disagree with? Immediately ban anyone who suggests the government is possibly its own worst enemy? Administer a political correctness per-test for anyone Posting on MetaBunk? Anyone under the influence of a conspiracy need not Post here?

 

[Oxymoron]

But if the collapse could not have been caused by fire, then the investigation would have revealed that, and they could have tested for explosives at that point.

And you seriously believe that NIST would go against the government like that in a time of war? This is the fundamental difference between OS supporters and CT supporters, OS supporters base their belief on 'faith in the PTB', CT supporters have no faith in the PTB, (because they are proven liars time after time), therefore we demand better quality of evidence and do not make rash assumptions that 'NIST would do the right thing'.

 

[F4Jock]

Maybe the Germans in the 1930's should have gotten together a little bit more to discus the fanatical path their government was leading them on...
That might have prevented some of the dangerous consequences that were to follow.

We are pointing out that NIST did not follow national standards regarding fire and explosive investigations
and you label this as 'fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat"?

You want to silence people F4Jock and this is never a good thing.
I must thank Mick for his professionalism in managing and allowing this thread.

Which for the nonce serves your self-aggrandizing purposes..

Silence people? Hardly. Down through the ages two things have NEVER been able to be silenced: Stupidity and Truth. I am merely discerning the difference.

I'm not getting into the idiotic and never-ending-asked-and-answered NIST roundel. Get your tail off the couch and into the field as I suggested. Do as I have done and then maybe you'll have a perspective on which to base your comments other than the freedoms granted by the First Amendment.

 

[Oxymoron]

Maybe the Germans in the 1930's should have gotten together a little bit more to discus the fanatical path their government was leading them on...
That might have prevented some of the dangerous consequences that were to follow.

We are pointing out that NIST did not follow national standards regarding fire and explosive investigations
and you label this as 'fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat"?

You want to silence people F4Jock and this is never a good thing.
I must thank Mick for his professionalism in managing and allowing this thread.

Exactly, the people who want to silence other people are the ones that are truly dangerous. "You will be assimilated or exterminated"! Not surprising there are so many CTers around really, is it?

But on the other hand "Resistance is fertile".

 

[Oxymoron]

Which for the nonce serves your self-aggrandizing purposes..

I take it the nonce was just a typo and not meant to be as rude and abusive as the rest?

I no longer care why people say and do stupid things, I just accept that you "can't fix stupid!"

Then why bother yourself engaging with what you think is stupid? Seems pretty stupid in itself, unless you do it for the hell of it.

 

[F4Jock]

I take it the nonce was just a typo and not meant to be as rude and abusive as the rest?


Then why bother yourself engaging with what you think is stupid? Seems pretty stupid in itself, unless you do it for the hell of it.

Bingo! Like Ron White I never tire of watching it. Stupidity that is unknowingly being perpetuated for it's own sake can be entertaining. I do, however, object when it leads to harm.

As for your comment about the nonce, I choose my words carefully. Read into that what you will.

 

[Oxymoron]

Bingo! Like Ron White I never tire of watching it. Stupidity that is unknowingly being perpetuated for it's own sake can be entertaining. I do, however, object when it leads to harm.

As for your comment about the nonce, I choose my words carefully. Read into that what you will.

Fair enough... you declare yourself an ignorant troll. I for one shall not engage further with you and I ask you not to respond to any of my posts If I wanted to interact with wack jobs, I would post on you tube... I don't.

FYI, Mick runs this site because he is interested in CT's... Perhaps you would be better off starting your own site if you find this one too scary and stupid.

 

[Mick West]

And you seriously believe that NIST would go against the government like that in a time of war? This is the fundamental difference between OS supporters and CT supporters, OS supporters base their belief on 'faith in the PTB', CT supporters have no faith in the PTB, (because they are proven liars time after time), therefore we demand better quality of evidence and do not make rash assumptions that 'NIST would do the right thing'.

But if that were the case, then why would NIST not just say that they tested for explosive residue, but found none?

 

[F4Jock]

Fair enough... you declare yourself an ignorant troll. I for one shall not engage further with you and I ask you not to respond to any of my posts If I wanted to interact with wack jobs, I would post on you tube... I don't.

FYI, Mick runs this site because he is interested in CT's... Perhaps you would be better off starting your own site if you find this one too scary and stupid.

Amazing how one can devolve into such unacceptable language.

Just for Mick's edification, I too am interested in CTs and having REAL debate about them. What doesn't interest me is unintelligent, didactic debate that clings to positions unsupported by facts. I characterize that as "Stupidity." You, Mick, apparently have far more patience for attempting to contend with circular logic than I. Don't know whether or not that is a virtue but God bless. I do know one thing: It has no real result in swaying an argument and in the final analysis isn't that what the crux of debate is?

 

[Mick West]

While I understand and appreciate your thesis I have to disagree. First, if a thread interests me I read every post. Second, if there is a chance that a thread may in any way contribute to fanaticism with consequences more dangerous than wearing a tinfoil hat I think that had to be considered.

There's plenty of stuff they could read out there that actually promotes conspiracies. Here at least they would see the points being raised are being answered/debunked. So I feel if they do actually read the entire thread, then they might actually get a better picture of things.

 

[Oxymoron]

But if that were the case, then why would NIST not just say that they tested for explosive residue, but found none?

That is a good point but if they said that, there is the danger of a whistleblower or peer review request on 'actual samples'. So perhaps it is safer simply not to test... no point lieing if you don't have to and if you do have to, keep it as close to the truth as possible.

 

[hiper]

But if the collapse could not have been caused by fire, then the investigation would have revealed that, and they could have tested for explosives at that point.

If high order damage is present the national standards for fire and explosive investigations calls for testing for accelerants & explosive residue. Very simple really.
Even if fire would be the most logical cause of collapse they still would have had to test for accelerants & explosive residue.
Given the magnitude of events there was no reason for them to ignore that basic guideline step.

But how much explosives are we talking about here, that you could detect in in the dust? A hundred tons?

The scientists measured the thermate residue to be 0.05% of the dust.
http://jewknowledge.weebly.com/-scholars-for-911-truth--justice.html

I'm not getting into the idiotic and never-ending-asked-and-answered NIST roundel.

What you call an idiotic roundel I call a gigantic red flag.

the freedoms granted by the First Amendment.

Oh bless big capital for the freedoms they allow us lowly peasants.

 

[JRBids]

The 'US Government has given many people in this country and the World many reasons to doubt their honesty and belief in justice ' is a useless comment to me. Can you give me a government that hasn't?

I was in England in the early 80s when Reagan was president. I was never a fan of Reagan. I went to some of the pubs with friends and many people felt comfortable enough to tell me exactly how they felt about America and Reagan, and I felt they were almost talking about a different country. There is no dearth of people who have a negative opinion about "the other", whether it is another country, color, religion, whatever.

 

[F4Jock]

What you call an idiotic roundel I call a gigantic red flag.

Ah HA! Now we come to the heart of the matter! We see things differently! Not surprising!

Question: Do you think it might be more useful to discuss WHY we see things as we do than to continually debate what we perceive as facts? To me our perceptions are the crux of the matter.

Your feelings?

 

[hiper]

But if that were the case, then why would NIST not just say that they tested for explosive residue, but found none?

There is a good chance they did in fact test the dust... and found thermate residue in it.

What would be their options at that point?

A) make public and go against the government narrative
B) stick to the "there was no evidence to merit a testing of the dust" fig leaf.

 

[Mick West]

There is a good chance they did in fact test the dust... and found thermate residue in it.

What would be their options at that point?

A) make public and go against the government narrative
B) stick to the "there was no evidence to merit a testing of the dust" fig leaf.

Of the far better, if they were in fact covering things up:

C) publish some test results that show there was no thermate residue.

Why not that?

 

[Mick West]

That is a good point but if they said that, there is the danger of a whistleblower or peer review request on 'actual samples'. So perhaps it is safer simply not to test... no point lieing if you don't have to and if you do have to, keep it as close to the truth as possible.

Actual samples? There were thousands of tons of dust from the WTC site. Lots of people stall have some. Not testing the dust does not stop other people from testing the dust.

It seems that after going through the insanely complex planning required to rig the WTC with some kind of exotic explosive, and then somehow getting a plane to fly into it at the exact right point that would not set off any of the explosives, then later setting off the explosives in a way that would convince most engineers it was a progressive collapse, then faking some lab tests would be rather trivial in comparison.

 

[George B]

Of the far better, if they were in fact covering things up:

C) publish some test results that show there was no thermate residue.

Why not that?

Fear the test results might surface . . .

 

[George B]

Actual samples? There were thousands of tons of dust from the WTC site. Lots of people stall have some. Not testing the dust does not stop other people from testing the dust.

It seems that after going through the insanely complex planning required to rig the WTC with some kind of exotic explosive, and then somehow getting a plane to fly into it at the exact right point that would not set off any of the explosives, then later setting off the explosives in a way that would convince most engineers it was a progressive collapse, then faking some lab tests would be rather trivial in comparison.

That is why IMO . . . if the towers at WTC were brought down by forces other than as finally described by NIST . . . the technology is beyond what we normally understand . . . Not thermite . . .

 

[hiper]

Question: Do you think it might be more useful to discuss WHY we see things as we do than to continually debate what we perceive as facts? To me our perceptions are the crux of the matter.

Your feelings?

So you think we perceive facts differently?

I don't see how the fact of the existence of the national standards guide for fire & explosive investigations (nfpa 921) can be perceived in more than one way.
Neither can I see the fact of NIST's evasion of certain basic guidelines as to be perceivable in more than one way.

Of the far better, if they were in fact covering things up:

C) publish some test results that show there was no thermate residue.

Why not that?

And not release their dust sample to be verified by independant scientists I take it.

I think this thread is approaching the root problem as far as I can see :

We can't make NIST test the dust and verify how good a job they did afterward.

We can't make NIST release the 3D model parameters.

We have to take everything on good faith even in the face of all the inconsistencies.

 

[Mick West]

That is why IMO . . . if the towers at WTC were brought down by forces other than as finally described by NIST . . . the technology is beyond what we normally understand . . . Not thermite . . .

So you would not want a test for thermite then?

 

[JRBids]

I rather see a Forum tackling very difficult issues and discussions and exchange of ideas I see no where else . . . one has to break eggs to make an omelet . . .

I see no chance of changing the minds of the truthers here. When they make statements like "The planes were flown by remote control. The exact floor they wanted to hit was of course at a fixed altitude above sea level so flying that exact altitude would be a piece of cake.. just dial in a number on the keyboard really" I know they are left reality far behind.

F4Jock is correct. The truthers are directly responsible for these bombings IMO.

 

[JRBids]

That's the second time you are out of this thread. Why don't you stick around.



Again the planes we controlled remotely.



Maybe the planes did damage the core columns but to fall straight through the massive
structure below... all of a sudden elemental physics does not apply anymore.
And I remember you saying you were a science scholar.

Why do you think that structure was able to stand there for 30 years?
You defending the theory that the top section could fall through the massive core structure below it is with all due respect just asinine.
Sorry I can't think of another word.

SUggesting that the top of the building remaining in place for 30 years means that on 9/11 it could not fall and cause the floors beneath to pancake is just asinine. The building wasn't one "massive" structure, as a cement block.

 

[hiper]

Lots of people stall have some. Not testing the dust does not stop other people from testing the dust.

Mick... NIST as the institution in charge with leaving no stone unturned should have been the first and foremost entity to have tested the dust.

Their refusal to do so is incriminating.

 

[JRBids]

That is why IMO . . . if the towers at WTC were brought down by forces other than as finally described by NIST . . . the technology is beyond what we normally understand . . . Not thermite . . .

or beyond what actually exists. Come on George surely you don't believe the towers were brought down by technology beyond what we understand. We saw planes hit the buildings with our own eyes. We say the buildings buckle and fall after the fires raged.

 

[George B]

I see no chance of changing the minds of the truthers here. When they make statements like "The planes were flown by remote control. The exact floor they wanted to hit was of course at a fixed altitude above sea level so flying that exact altitude would be a piece of cake.. just dial in a number on the keyboard really" I know they are left reality far behind.

F4Jock is correct. The truthers are directly responsible for these bombings IMO.

So ideas are so dangerous . . . if allowed free expression on the Internet or other public media the people or persons debating their merit are guilty of the above mentioned violence . . . ?

 

[JRBids]

I'm getting a little tired of this constant misrepresentation. I have merely been focusing on how the NIST report fails to meet the basic principles of the scientific method, such as the simple standard of falsification. These are the issues that Jazzy is avoiding by putting words in my mouth or, as it would now appear, elephants in my room. It's funny in a way, but it's tiresome.

After reading this to you to jazzy:
"or accept that you're a blustering, arrogant pseudo-scientist who has been indulging in blatant misrepresentation.

Once you've acknowledged that, we can proceed. "

this is indeed the bulk of your argument: insults.

 

[JRBids]

That is a good point but if they said that, there is the danger of a whistleblower or peer review request on 'actual samples'. So perhaps it is safer simply not to test... no point lieing if you don't have to and if you do have to, keep it as close to the truth as possible.

What's stopping other people from testing now, or before?

 

[George B]

or beyond what actually exists. Come on George surely you don't believe the towers were brought down by technology beyond what we understand. We saw planes hit the buildings with our own eyes. We say the buildings buckle and fall after the fires raged.

I didn't say it was even likely . . . I am saying I see no technology (I am aware of ) that could have brought down those towers . . . leaving only the unknown . . . my biggest problem personally are the hot spots . . . everyone acknowledges their existence but I have never seen a thorough scientific analysis or explanation for their existence . . .

 

[JRBids]

Originally Posted by JRBids
I see no chance of changing the minds of the truthers here. When they make statements like "The planes were flown by remote control. The exact floor they wanted to hit was of course at a fixed altitude above sea level so flying that exact altitude would be a piece of cake.. just dial in a number on the keyboard really" I know they are left reality far behind.

F4Jock is correct. The truthers are directly responsible for these bombings IMO.

So ideas are so dangerous . . . if allowed free expression on the Internet or other public media the people or persons debating their merit are guilty of the above mentioned violence . . . ?

No George, ideas are not dangerous. Continually lying, pot stirring, insisting the government killed its own citizens is what is dangerous. When a passenger jet is brought down, people like Gnarly Carly will have blood on their hands.