It finally happened!

[Unsecured Coins]

I finally got a truther to admit that the penthouse collapse happened on WTC 7. In his rush to show me that the towers and Building 7 "collapsed the same way" he spurted out:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/powers05/yes.jpg

Although, after I pointed this out to him, he went straight into the madrid fires.

Oh well. he'll learn. Thanks to Gravy and 911myths for the help

[fourtoe]

wow he used 'global collapse' and everything.

[Unsecured Coins]

in fairness, he also denied John Norman's statement about damage.

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

No way he can get out of that one.
We always make sure of what we write before hitting the "post" button.

[Unsecured Coins]

No way he can get out of that one.
We always make sure of what we write before hitting the "post" button.

he hasn't replied since. :D

[Justin39640]

he hasn't replied since. :D

to be fair its only been 17 minutes lol ;)

[AJM8125]

Plenty of time to change into a sock, not enough time to clean it up.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Although, after I pointed this out to him, he went straight into the madrid fires.

Truthers are so predictable it's ridiculous.

[Pardalis]

Aw jeez, I thought this thread was about how Dylan Avery had finally got laid. :(

[AJM8125]

Aw jeez, I thought this thread was about how Dylan Avery had finally got laid. :(

Bermas is with AJ now. There went his best shot. Oh well, looooove will find a way...

[ref]

Gage also admitted the penthouse collapse a while back in the Washington AIA Convention. He did it while trying to recruit architects to his gang.

Concrete thoroughly mixed in the air, melted steel at the base of the building. The penthouse falling first indicating core columns are cut, have to be cut to bring all of that down. They have to be cut within a fraction of a second of each other on given floor, floor by floor. And yet we are told that 8-10 small fires were responsible for this catastrophic destruction, just like a classic controlled demolition.

http://www.ae911truth.org/info/74

How many falsehoods can you find in that quote? :D

[alienentity]

Don't you guys know the PH collapsed into WTC7 at freefall speed? Just like any controlled demolition, right? Hehe.

[bill smith]

What's the problem ? Everybody knows the penthouse collapsed frst. That was the first event. Several sconds later after a long pause in which nothing happened the second event took place which was he 6.5-second collapse of the main building. It's this second event that the Movement for Truth find interesting.

[fourtoe]

What's the problem ? Everybody knows the penthouse collapsed frst. That was the first event. Several sconds later after a long pause in which nothing happened the second event took place which was he 6.5-second collapse of the main building. It's this second event that the Movement for truth find interesting.

Is this a sign of a classic CD? I was also under the impression that the penthouse was quite large.

I also think it is incorrect to say there was a long pause where nothing happened because you can see the building bowing at the top before the rest of it came down.

[bill smith]

Is this a sign of a classic CD? I was also under the impression that the penthouse was quite large.

I also think it is incorrect to say there was a long pause where nothing happened because you can see the building bowing at the top before the rest of it came down.

This was not a classic CD. It was a CD masquerading very poorly as somebodies idea of how a natural collapse might look. They did the best they could with the limited options available to them.

As you say, the penthouse was large and supported by the largest column in the building. The more than 300-ton column 79. It's amazing that this huge column was first affected when all the much lighter columns around it appear not to have been.

'Bowing at the top' ? Maybe you had better tell NIST. Can we see the video please ?

[fourtoe]

'Bowing at the top' ? Maybe you had better tell NIST. Can we see the video please ?


I think I used the wrong wording, my bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
when looking at this video look at the top of the building, it curves down in the center before the 'second event' occurred.

Hopefully that clears it up.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Several sconds later after a long pause in which nothing happened


Absolutely false.

You've just had thousands of tons of structure break loose and collapse downward inside a building.... there isn't "nothing" happening... all hell is breaking loose inside that building. It's tearing itself apart from the inside out.

Watch this video:

PK_iBYSqEsc

At the 21 second mark, you will see the East Mechanical Penthouse has collapsed and six, seven, eight floors down, there are a number of windows breaking directly underneath where the EMP was.

The penthouse collapse was clearly a part of a chain of major failures. Anyone with eyes can see this. To claim "then nothing happened" is absurd.

[bill smith]

I think I used the wrong wording, my bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
when looking at this video look at the top of the building, it curves down in the center before the 'second event' occurred.

Hopefully that clears it up.

Yes, I think maybe you did use the wrong wording. You bad.That was the classic 'kink' that is cmmon to most controlled demolitons. ny 'curving' or 'bowing' ran out from that initial visible event.

[bill smith]

Absolutely false.

You've just had thousands of tons of structure break loose and collapse downward inside a building.... there isn't "nothing" happening... all hell is breaking loose inside that building. It's tearing itself apart from the inside out.

Watch this video:

PK_iBYSqEsc

At the 21 second mark, you will see the East Mechanical Penthouse has collapsed and six, seven, eight floors down, there are a number of windows breaking directly underneath where the EMP was.

The penthouse collapse was clearly a part of a chain of major failures. Anyone with eyes can see this. To claim "then nothing happened" is absurd.

Nah, if yu remove the structural support from any part of the shell it falls instantly. There is no delay. Gravity is a constant. If the shell doesn't show it then it isn't happening.

[fourtoe]

Yes, I think maybe you did use the wrong wording. You bad.That was the classic 'kink' that is cmmon to most controlled demolitons. ny 'curving' or 'bowing' ran out from that initial visible event.

Eh, well SoT explained it 100 times better anyways. Basically it is incorrect to say that there was a pause where nothing happened.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

If the shell doesn't show it then it isn't happening.

This is classic twooferism. If it can't be shown in a youtube video, then it didn't happen.

In the real world, thousands of tons of mass tearing through the largest office building fire in history wreaks havoc, causing massive amounts of collateral damage to a structure already pushed to the brink.

In twoofer youtube land, the East Mechanical Penthouse collapses... then nothing happens.... and then the rest of the building collapses with the twoofers ignorantly proclaiming "without warning".

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Eh, well SoT explained it 100 times better anyways. Basically it is incorrect to say that there was a pause where nothing happened.

I had help from the dedicated qualified professionals at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. ;)

[bill smith]

This is classic twooferism. If it can't be shown in a youtube video, then it didn't happen.

In the real world, thousands of tons of mass tearing through the largest office building fire in history wreaks havoc, causing massive amounts of collateral damage to a structure already pushed to the brink.

In twoofer youtube land, the East Mechanical Penthouse collapses... then nothing happens.... and then the rest of the building collapses with the twoofers ignorantly proclaiming "without warning".

Under the Newtonian Laws of motion this was TWO distinct and seperate events. Sorry about that.

[fourtoe]

I had help from the dedicated qualified professionals at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. ;)

Yeah that was a good, short video. It debunked a lot of things in under 4 minutes.

BS- I think that it could also be said that it was just one event. And are you disagreeing with the fact that the building on the inside was going all to hell still?

[bill smith]

Yeah that was a good, short video. It debunked a lot of things in under 4 minutes.

BS- I think that it could also be said that it was just one event. And are you disagreeing with the fact that the building on the inside was going all to hell still?

Nothing enough to affect the central structure or we would have seen it. Smaller local failures inside the building cannot in any way account for a total symmetrical global collapse seconds later.Are you seriously going to tell me that you think it can ? Cross your heart and hope to die ?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Smaller local failures inside the building cannot in any way account for a total symmetrical global collapse seconds later.

Yes they can. It's called progressive collapse, sometimes also called cascade failure.

it's when one failure leads to another then another and then another. Until an entire system comes down.


Are you seriously going to tell me that you think it can ? Cross your heart and hope to die ?

Yes... I'll even pinky swear to it.

[Dave Rogers]

Under the Newtonian Laws of motion this was TWO distinct and seperate events. Sorry about that.

Remind me which bit of Newton's Laws defines what constitutes a "distinct and separate event". Or are you just making stuff up again about an area where you've entirely ignorant?

Dave

[BigAl]

Nothing enough to affect the central structure or we would have seen it. Smaller local failures inside the building cannot in any way account for a total symmetrical global collapse seconds later.Are you seriously going to tell me that you think it can ? Cross your heart and hope to die ?

Bill is now on ignore.

[Ragnarok]

Anyone want to explain why the first "squibs" that were seen occurred at the opposite end to the penthouse?

[dtugg]

Anyone want to explain why the first "squibs" that were seen occurred at the opposite end to the penthouse?

Silent bombs, of course.

[jhunter1163]

*snickers at tags*

[twinstead]

Bill reminds me of when my 6 year old who steadfastly insisted that the moon was made of cheese to an astronomer friend of mine. Man, she was SO sure....but, of course she's 6. Bill actually KNOWS the moon isn't made of cheese, but he's arguing that it is anyway.

[funk de fino]

Anyone want to explain why the first "squibs" that were seen occurred at the opposite end to the penthouse?

Source?

[Ragnarok]

Source?

You've seen the most common footage of 7's collapse, I take it. I'm talking about the 8-10 floor rectangle that appears about halfway down the right side of the building... at the moment it is collapsing. Has this already been explained somewhere?

[240-185]

Don't EVER quote Bill Smith again! :mad:
What would be the purpose of putting him on ignore?

[Justin39640]

You've seen the most common footage of 7's collapse, I take it. I'm talking about the 8-10 floor rectangle that appears about halfway down the right side of the building... at the moment it is collapsing. Has this already been explained somewhere?

thats windows popping as the building loses its shape
squibs from explosives happen prior to collapse not during

[bill smith]

Don't EVER quote Bill Smith again! :mad:
What would be the purpose of putting him on ignore?

Raising your shields will never protect you from the Truth. This is not Star Trek.

[MarkyX]

What's the problem ? Everybody knows the penthouse collapsed frst. That was the first event. Several sconds later after a long pause in which nothing happened the second event took place which was he 6.5-second collapse of the main building. It's this second event that the Movement for Truth find interesting.

So the Penthouse getting destroyed had absolutely nothing to do with WTC7 being collapsed.

Stundie?

[funk de fino]

You've seen the most common footage of 7's collapse, I take it. I'm talking about the 8-10 floor rectangle that appears about halfway down the right side of the building... at the moment it is collapsing. Has this already been explained somewhere?

Thats your source?

[tuc0]

Raising your shields will never protect you from the Truth. This is not Star Trek.

Leaving the internet is more than enough to protect you from the Truth.

It's a good thing truth has nothing in common with Truth. One of many reasons why your sad movement will never accomplish more than spamming poorly constructed arguments on discussion forums and youtube. The real world has moved on and no amount of whining will change that.

[nicepants]

Under the Newtonian Laws of motion this was TWO distinct and seperate events.

And I suppose when 2 cars collide and the collision forces one of the cars into another car those are two distinct and separate events too right?

[Grizzly Bear]

Is this a sign of a classic CD? I was also under the impression that the penthouse was quite large.

I also think it is incorrect to say there was a long pause where nothing happened because you can see the building bowing at the top before the rest of it came down.

Actually when you look at complete videos of the penthouse collapse and then the global collapse, you can see a progression of window breakage or movement following the penthouse's failure. There weren't too many other external effects until the outer walls began to failure since up until that point the failures were internal.

[alienentity]

Without quoting any of the endless deflections and denials of bill smith, I simply offer:

WOTNT (Waste Of Time; Not Teachable)

A troll by any reasonable standard.

[alienentity]

And, as I've mentioned previously, A&E Truth advertisments claim that both towers fell at 'near freefall speed' and WTC7 fell 'in 6.5 seconds' in 'the exact manner of a controlled demolition'.

These phony claims form the basis for the entire truther narrative; their falsity compels 9/11 truth defenders to engage in deflection, obstruction and denial - as well as hostility toward those with real expertise on the subjects. There is no other way for them to operate unless they abandon the narrative.

bill smith's M.O. is what I call 'intellectual vandalism'.

[bill smith]

And, as I've mentioned previously, A&E Truth advertisments claim that both towers fell at 'near freefall speed' and WTC7 fell 'in 6.5 seconds' in 'the exact manner of a controlled demolition'.

These phony claims form the basis for the entire truther narrative; their falsity compels 9/11 truth defenders to engage in deflection, obstruction and denial - as well as hostility toward those with real expertise on the subjects. There is no other way for them to operate unless they abandon the narrative.

bill smith's M.O. is what I call 'intellectual vandalism'.

Maybe I have audio of Shyam Sunder, leader of the NIST investigtion into the collapse of WTC7 saying that WTC7 resembled a controlled demolition.

I can't be certain but do you think that is possible ?

[beachnut]

Maybe I have audio of Shyam Sunder, leader of the NIST investigtion into the collapse of WTC7 saying that WTC7 resembled a controlled demolition.

I can't be certain but do you think that is possible ?
What are you missing? Did JFK know?
Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation.
John F. Kennedy
When will you develop an ability to recognize the delusions you spread.

Why would a gravity collapse look like a CD? Oops, the primary energy source to destroy the building is gravity, the kinetic energy release of falling mass. Got physics?

The only thing missing in your delusion is blast effects, noises of actual explosives going off, and the evidence that CD leaves behind.

[bill smith]

Guess I'll have me a martini and just watch AE twisting in the wind. lol

[FineWine]

Maybe I have audio of Shyam Sunder, leader of the NIST investigtion into the collapse of WTC7 saying that WTC7 resembled a controlled demolition.

I can't be certain but do you think that is possible ?


Maybe I have audio of a weatherman saying that a clap of thunder sounded like a bomb. It's still NOT a bomb.

Incidentally, tell us more about your Sunder quote.

What's that? You say you have to run?

Bye, Bill.

[Justin39640]

Guess I'll have me a martini and just watch AE twisting in the wind. lol

maybe you should lay off those before heading for the keyboard

[alienentity]

Is that so, bill? Are you alleging Shyam Sunder thinks that WTC7 looked like a controlled demolition? Please find us a quote for that.

Here's what Dr Sunder said about 7: 'During his summary of the findings of NIST’s WTC 7 investigation (see August 21, 2008), lead investigator Shyam Sunder said, “We did not find any evidence that explosives were used to bring the building down.”'

Evidence means any evidence, including visual, audio or otherwise.

bye bye bill. Another one bites the dust.

[alienentity]

“Blast from the smallest charge capable of failing a critical column… would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile if unobstructed by surrounding buildings.… This sound level is consistent with standing next to a jet plane engine and more than ten times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert. There were no witness reports of such a loud noise, nor was such a noise heard on the audio tracks of video recordings of the WTC 7 collapse.” [National Institute of Standards and Technology, 8/2008, pp. 44-45

For the hard of learning, that means it wasn't at all like a controlled demolition. Get it? I didn't think so...

[Minadin]

Gage also admitted the penthouse collapse a while back in the Washington AIA Convention. He did it while trying to recruit architects to his gang.



http://www.ae911truth.org/info/74

How many falsehoods can you find in that quote? :D

Eight.

[bill smith]

I notice an attempt to manufacture a new strawman. You will even see it on this short thread.

Let's get it straight girls. Nobody denies that the Penthouse actually fell. That's on video and would be undeniable anyway. So let's have no more talk about Richard Gage and others 'admitting' that the Penthouse collapsed.Mmmkay ?

[dtugg]

Why do you liars say that WTC7 took 6.5 seconds to collapse if you acknowledge the penthouse?

[alienentity]

Why do you liars say that WTC7 took 6.5 seconds to collapse if you acknowledge the penthouse?

Exactly. They continually misrepresent the collapse. The PH collapse is a big problem for CD theorists - it just doesn't fit a CD scenario.

No simultaneous collapse = no CD. It's really that simple.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I notice an attempt to manufacture a new strawman. You will even see it on this short thread.

Let's get it straight girls. Nobody denies that the Penthouse actually fell. That's on video and would be undeniable anyway. So let's have no more talk about Richard Gage and others 'admitting' that the Penthouse collapsed.Mmmkay ?

It's not that truthers deliberately and specifically deny the existence of the East Mechanical Penthouse. It's that they ignore the EMPs collapse so that they can lop off two thirds of the actual collapse time, reducing it from its actual length of 16+ seconds to less than 7 seconds.

[bill smith]

It's not that truthers deliberately and specifically deny the existence of the East Mechanical Penthouse. It's that they ignore the EMPs collapse so that they can lop off two thirds of the actual collapse time, reducing it from its actual length of 16+ seconds to less than 7 seconds.

I don't actually think it matters all that much. People can see it for themselves and never fail to be impressed by how swiftly the building falls. They never think 'but if you take the Pentouse falling several seconds earlier then it actually took much longer than it appeared'

The 'eye buys' just as in any supermarket. The picture tells the tale. That will never change in the case of WTC7.

[Minadin]

Yeah, but you don't think that because you have no ability to critically analyze the event.

[alienentity]

I don't actually think it matters all that much. People can see it for themselves and never fail to be impressed by how swiftly the building falls. They never think 'but if you take the Pentouse falling several seconds earlier then it actually took much longer than it appeared'

The 'eye buys' just as in any supermarket. The picture tells the tale. That will never change in the case of WTC7.

Precisely. That category of people who are incapable of examining the event in detail, or comprehending the engineering complexities, will never understand how it happened.

They will be forced to ignore the mountain of contradictory information - the complete absence of necessary explosions at the time of collapse, for example - to maintain their false beliefs, and avoid the inevitable cognitive dissonance.

Once again, no simultaneous collapse = no CD

No explosive shockwaves, flashes etc = no CD

no amount of further investigation by any competent body will change these simple truths, nor resurrect CD as the dominant conclusion. bill has chosen the wrong answer, using fatally flawed reasoning, data and methods.

If he doesn't change his position away from CD, he will continue to be dead wrong. So will his fellow 9/11 cultists.

[alienentity]

bill, where's the quote from Dr. Sunder? I already found one, very easily, which shows his position. Here it is again in case you were too cowardly to read it last time:


“We did not find any evidence that explosives were used to bring the building down.”
Dr. Shyam Sunder of NIST

[twinstead]

Well OF COURSE Dr. Sunder said that. He's from NIST. He's in on it ;)

[bill smith]

bill, where's the quote from Dr. Sunder? I already found one, very easily, which shows his position. Here it is again in case you were too cowardly to read it last time:


“We did not find any evidence that explosives were used to bring the building down.”
Dr. Shyam Sunder of NIST

I don't remember saying I had a link ? I do remember you twisting in the wind about it when you thought maybe I did though.

[alienentity]

I don't remember saying I had a link ? I do remember you twisting in the wind about it when you thought maybe I did though.

You've still got nothing bill. That hasn't changed. Link, quote, clip, parchment, scroll, whatever, you haven't got it.

Where is it bill? He's even backing away from his noncommittal position now.....how unusual. (sarcasm)

You are a terrible bore.

[bill smith]

You've still got nothing bill. That hasn't changed. Link, quote, clip, parchment, scroll, whatever, you haven't got it.

Where is it bill? He's even backing away from his noncommittal position now.....how unusual. (sarcasm)

You are a terrible bore.

Would you believe that Sunder said that there may well have been molten steel in the rubble ?

[Audible Click]

Would you believe that Sunder aid that there may well have been molten steel in the rubble ?

:confused:

[bill smith]

:confused:

I think he also said that the presence of a few particles of thermite does not mean that the building was brought down that way.

[bill smith]

You've still got nothing bill. That hasn't changed. Link, quote, clip, parchment, scroll, whatever, you haven't got it.

Where is it bill? He's even backing away from his noncommittal position now.....how unusual. (sarcasm)

You are a terrible bore.

Would you believe that Sunder said that the molten steel in the rubble may have been because the fires were shielded and the temperateure mounted and mounted until the steel melted ?

[beachnut]

Would you believe that Sunder said that the mlten steel in the rubble may have been because the fires were shielded and the temperateure mounted and mounted until the steel melted ?
Why not report yourself for being off topic to save us time reporting your spamming posts of dirt dumb delusions?

[bill smith]

Why not report yourself for being off topic to save us time reporting your spamming posts of dirt dumb delusions?

I never spam and I always have a reason. (mostly)

[bill smith]

Why not report yourself for being off topic to save us time reporting your spamming posts of dirt dumb delusions?

Oh all right then....I'll put you out of your misery.
http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3

[alienentity]

Maybe I have audio of Shyam Sunder, leader of the NIST investigtion into the collapse of WTC7 saying that WTC7 resembled a controlled demolition.

I can't be certain but do you think that is possible ?

This was bill's original question. I asked bill to provide a quote or link where Sunder says this. For some reason (unknown) it took him a while to provide a source for it.

Recall that I originally called out A&E Truth for stating that building 7 collapsed 'in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition'. I characterized this statement as false or misleading.
You can hear the advertisement in this interview with Niels Harrit, and elsewhere on interviews thru Visibility 9/11.
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/visibility911/visibility911_dr_harrit.mp3?nvb=20090812223520&nva=20090813224520&t=0f2cae5172fb20838ed14

Here's what Shyam Sunder actually said in the interview (link eventually provided by bill smith)

'the manner in which building 7 collapsed was similar in some features to a controlled demolition'

Nowhere does Sunder say anything like A&E Truth, which uses the wording 'exact manner'.

Nor does Sunder make the erroneous claim, as A&E Truth does, that building 7 was brought down by 'explosive controlled demolition' in '6.5 seconds'.

That's the distinction which makes A&E Truth deceptive liars, and Dr. Sunder a professional investigator.

Ironically, A&E Truth is calling for a 'real investigation'......but it doesn't seem like they would recognize a real one since they can't even get the basic facts correct.

Thanks for playing bill. Another fail for you.

[alienentity]

A dog is 'similar in some features' to a cat. Therefore, in bill smith/trutherland, a dog must be a cat.

A&E Truth would put it 'A dog is exactly like a cat. They are the same'.

That's pretty much a summary of the cognitive abilities of 9/11 truthers. Sadly, nothing new.

[bill smith]

This was bill's original question. I asked bill to provide a quote or link where Sunder says this. For some reason (unknown) it took him a while to provide a source for it.

Recall that I originally called out A&E Truth for stating that building 7 collapsed 'in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition'. I characterized this statement as false or misleading.
You can hear the advertisement in this interview with Niels Harrit, and elsewhere on interviews thru Visibility 9/11.
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/visibility911/visibility911_dr_harrit.mp3?nvb=20090812223520&nva=20090813224520&t=0f2cae5172fb20838ed14

Here's what Shyam Sunder actually said in the interview (link eventually provided by bill smith)

'the manner in which building 7 collapsed was similar in some features to a controlled demolition'

Nowhere does Sunder say anything like A&E Truth, which uses the wording 'exact manner'.

Nor does Sunder make the erroneous claim, as A&E Truth does, that building 7 was brought down by 'explosive controlled demolition' in '6.5 seconds'.

That's the distinction which makes A&E Truth deceptive liars, and Dr. Sunder a professional investigator.

Ironically, A&E Truth is calling for a 'real investigation'......but it doesn't seem like they would recognize a real one since they can't even get the basic facts correct.

Thanks for playing bill. Another fail for you.

Not really AE....when you think about it here are not many diferent ways to visually resemble a controlled demolition. Only the one as far as I can see. So that would be pretty close to exact really.

[alienentity]

Not really AE....when you think about it here are not many diferent ways to visually resemble a controlled demolition. Only the one as far as I can see. So that would be pretty close to exact really.

bill, don't make the mistake of appointing yourself to a higher position in knowledge and expertise to someone like Dr. Sunder. That is beyond arrogant and borders on insane.


That's why we're discussing the false claims of an unqualified architect, versus the professional, competent observations of Dr. Sunder and his whole organization of professionals. Sunder had teams of experts who were hired to investigate areas in which they were trained.

That's why their opinions and observations count, and yours don't.

I doubt this means anything to you. That's ok. You're a 9/11 cultist, that's your M.O.

[alienentity]

“We did not find any evidence that explosives were used to bring the building down.”
Dr. Shyam Sunder of NIST

bill continues to assert that Dr. Sunder is saying the same thing as A&E Truth; but of course this is nonsense. In fact Sunder says nothing of the sort. That's why I have copied the quote again.

Without explosives, there is no explosive demolition. There is no CD.
If you listen to the Sunder interview, or read the NIST report, THAT is in fact what they say, and what they mean. No explosives, no CD.

[alienentity]

I just wish your level of humility matched your lack of ability. Unfortunately the opposite appears to be the case.

[bill smith]

bill, don't make the mistake of appointing yourself to a higher position in knowledge and expertise to someone like Dr. Sunder. That is beyond arrogant and borders on insane.


That's why we're discussing the false claims of an unqualified architect, versus the professional, competent observations of Dr. Sunder and his whole organization of professionals. Sunder had teams of experts who were hired to investigate areas in which they were trained.

That's why their opinions and observations count, and yours don't.

I doubt this means anything to you. That's ok. You're a 9/11 cultist, that's your M.O.

You know my position on Sunder. Read your pwn signature text. He is one of the Lost.

[alienentity]

Yeah, I get that you hate competent investigators, and prefer the incompetent ones.

Got it.:p

[bill smith]

Yeah, I get that you hate competent investigators, and prefer the incompetent ones.

Got it.:p

what about the melting steel ? Did you find him convincing ?And what was that Thermite remark ?

[alienentity]

What did he say about melted steel? Can you quote him? Please do. In as much detail as you can handle.

You might learn something.

[bill smith]

What did he say about melted steel? Can you quote him? Please do. In as much detail as you can handle.

You might learn something.
Ir's late now and I can't be bothered. Here's the whole 28-minute interview again if others want to check iit out. It's worth it folks.
http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3

[beachnut]

Ir's late now and I can't be bothered. Here's the whole 28-minute interview again if others want to check iit out. It's worth it folks.
http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3
Is zero research effort is your standard? You spam delusions and will not bet be bothered doing rational research and complete work?

You fail to back up your failed ideas because of what?

You can't be bothered with the death of 3,000 people so you make up lies and spread them but can't be bothered to prove you point. Guess 3,000 people are not worth it for you to try to understand 911 and you prefer to apologize for terrorists and blame other people for 911.

You post lies and run away.

[FineWine]

Not really AE....when you think about it here are not many diferent ways to visually resemble a controlled demolition. Only the one as far as I can see. So that would be pretty close to exact really.


You've had a bad day, Bill--a very, very bad day.

It's not going to get any better.

[alienentity]

Yes, of course. He can't follow up on his own line of questioning, nor on the details of Sunder's comments or their real meaning.

That would be asking too much.

However, I can and will follow up, even briefly. Dr. Sunder makes the following statement about molten steel:

'There's no evidence that there was molten steel in the building when it was standing'.

He elaborates, regarding the steel recovered from the areas around the plane impacts:

'we did not see any evidence of any molten steel on those particular elements that we had'

Pretty much sums it up. Since NIST were charged with determining the cause of collapse, (isn't that the relevant point?) they did not then delve into the temperature of the smoldering rubble - that is another matter altogether.

The fact is that there was no direct evidence of thermite-level temperatures in the towers before they collapsed. And of course there never will be.

The anecdotal reports of molten steel in the debris piles remain just that - anecdotes. Why would NIST waste time on this aspect? It's certainly an interesting topic, but not one that Sunder was directly concerned with.

[bill smith]

Yes, of course. He can't follow up on his own line of questioning, nor on the details of Sunder's comments or their real meaning.

That would be asking too much.

However, I can and will follow up, even briefly. Dr. Sunder makes the following statement about molten steel:

'There's no evidence that there was molten steel in the building when it was standing'.

He elaborates, regarding the steel recovered from the areas around the plane impacts:

'we did not see any evidence of any molten steel on those particular elements that we had'

Pretty much sums it up. Since NIST were charged with determining the cause of collapse, (isn't that the relevant point?) they did not then delve into the temperature of the smoldering rubble - that is another matter altogether.

The fact is that there was no direct evidence of thermite-level temperatures in the towers before they collapsed. And of course there never will be.

The anecdotal reports of molten steel in the debris piles remain just that - anecdotes. Why would NIST waste time on this aspect? It's certainly an interesting topic, but not one that Sunder was directly concerned with.

If anybody is curious about whether AE is being a little ecomomical with the actualité of what Shyam Sunder said in the interview here is your chance to compare the original audio with AE's interpretation of it. Is his report complete and accurate ? A fair and balanced representation ?

Link removed, and can be found here: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4998956&postcount=81

[Sword_Of_Truth]

If anybody is curious about whether AE is being a little ecomomical with the actualité of what Shyam Sunder said...

Not at all curious. I've read several of AEs posts and found him to be proficient with the subject matter. I see no reason to delve further into his arguments and will take them at face value.


The eye buys, as they say in the supermarkets.

[bill smith]

If anybody is curious about whether AE is being a little ecomomical with the actualité of what Shyam Sunder said in the interview here is your chance to compare the original audio with AE's interpretation of it. Is his report complete and accurate ? A fair and balanced representation ?

Link removed, and can be found here: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4998956&postcount=81

Hmmm? So can I take it that if I just direct people to the location of the link as you have just done that that is okay then ? I imagine that anything else would be form of censorship. please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Justin39640]

Hmmm? So can I take it that if I just direct people to the location of the link as you have just done that that is okay then ? I imagine that anything else would be form of censorship. please correct me if I'm wrong.

no youre spamming your link
just direct people to the first post where you linked it
you can use the hyperlink tool when you post
(looks like a globe with 2 chain links in front of it)
type a word then highlight it, then click the hyperlink a box pops up and enter the link to your 1st post where you linked it

its pretty easy

[bill smith]

no youre spamming your link
just direct people to the first post where you linked it
you can use the hyperlink tool when you post
(looks like a globe with 2 chain links in front of it)
type a word then highlight it, then click the hyperlink a box pops up and enter the link to your 1st post where you linked it

its pretty easy

Great Justin. Thanks a lot. Good tip.

[bill smith]

no youre spamming your link
just direct people to the first post where you linked it
you can use the hyperlink tool when you post
(looks like a globe with 2 chain links in front of it)
type a word then highlight it, then click the hyperlink a box pops up and enter the link to your 1st post where you linked it

its pretty easy

How do I enter a link to a specific post ? I can do it for a whole page.

[HyJinX]

With the little button on the lower right of each post. The button that says "link".

[bill smith]

Testing hyperlink.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4998576#post4998576

[Justin39640]

With the little button on the lower right of each post. The button that says "link".

and if you notice the post # in the top right corner of each post is actually a link
it brings you to the "show single post page" and you can copy the address there too
also you can right click that link and hit "copy link address" and post it

[bill smith]

Testing hyperlink 2

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4998576&postcount=70

[bill smith]

and if you notice the post # in the top right corner of each post is actually a link
it brings you to the "show single post page" and you can copy the address there too
also you can right click that link and hit "copy link address" and post it

Muchas gracias Senor.

[beachnut]

Ir's late now and I can't be bothered. Here's the whole 28-minute interview again if others want to check iit out. It's worth it folks.
http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3
You posted a failed interviewer with nut case ideas who spews lies. Why can't you see the lies in the interview? Is it lack of research or lack of knowledge?

[alienentity]

I need to further clarify the quote I took from the Shyam Sunder interview (http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3). I made an error last night in attributing the words 'similar in some features to a controlled demolition' to Dr. Sunder's actual opinion about how WTC7 collapsed. That is not the case.

Here is verbatim what he said 'Third, we wanted to look at hypothetical blast events because there was some suggestion - we had not seen any evidence of it - that the manner in which tower 7, building 7 seemed to collapse was similar in some features to a controlled demolition.

Clearly Dr. Sunder refers to the suggestion, but distances himself from it. Assuming 'we' refers to the investigating persons from NIST, including Dr. Sunder, it must be stated that this was never Dr. Sunder's stated opinion.

I was incorrect, and of course, so was bill smith. bill smith had originally attributed those words as the opinion of Dr. Sunder, which of course is an error.

Sorry for the confusion. However, the upside is that it further supports my complaint that A&E Truth is grossly misrepresenting the collapse by calling it 'in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition'.

Contrary to what bill smith has tried to claim, the NIST position, and Dr. Sunder's, is not in any way similar to that of A&E Truth in that regard.

[bill smith]

I need to further clarify the quote I took from the Shyam Sunder interview (http://noliesradio.org/archives/Nist%20Dr%20Sunder%20Interview_080821_widmusic-web.mp3). I made an error last night in attributing the words 'similar in some features to a controlled demolition' to Dr. Sunder's actual opinion about how WTC7 collapsed. That is not the case.

Here is verbatim what he said 'Third, we wanted to look at hypothetical blast events because there was some suggestion - we had not seen any evidence of it - that the manner in which tower 7, building 7 seemed to collapse was similar in some features to a controlled demolition.

Clearly Dr. Sunder refers to the suggestion, but distances himself from it. Assuming 'we' refers to the investigating persons from NIST, including Dr. Sunder, it must be stated that this was never Dr. Sunder's stated opinion.

I was incorrect, and of course, so was bill smith. bill smith had originally attributed those words as the opinion of Dr. Sunder, which of course is an error.

Sorry for the confusion. However, the upside is that it further supports my complaint that A&E Truth is grossly misrepresenting the collapse by calling it 'in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition'.

Contrary to what bill smith has tried to claim, the NIST position, and Dr. Sunder's, is not in any way similar to that of A&E Truth in that regard.

Pretty tortured reasoning if you ask me. I wondered myself what he meant by ' seemed to collapse '. What do you think AE- could it still be there somewhere ?

[alienentity]

Pretty tortured reasoning if you ask me. I wondered myself what he meant by ' seemed to collapse '. What do you think AE- could it still be there somewhere ?

Nobody asked you. We're telling, not asking (think BrickTop from the movie Snatch). You evidently don't posses the reading skills, nor the comprehension skills for an adult conversation on the subject.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=5001854#post5001854