Dylan Avery - Earth-Shattering News Coming Soon (again)

[Galileo]

Curses, foiled again. :rolleyes:

Drudgewired;

Curses, again, eh, ironic?

You have Galileo confused with "Good Lookin" Pope Formosus.

The photos you represented as those of Galileo, were really photographs of Pope Formosus taken at the Cadaver Synod.

The Cadaver Synod.
http://www.neatorama.com/2006/12/18/the-cadaver-synod/

It's hard to pick whether Gravy is better represented by Pope Stephen or Formosus....

:jaw-dropp

[Drudgewire]

You have Galileo confused with "Good Lookin" Pope Formosus.
You seem to have both confused with someone physically capable of answering questions hundreds of years after they died so I guess we're even. ;)

[Mince]

Last edited by OldSchool : Yesterday at 12:53 PM. Reason: miss spelling


Ahhhhh yes...Miss Spelling.


http://images.askmen.com/galleries/actress/tori-spelling/pictures/tori-spelling-picture-1.jpg


<deep longing sigh>



ETA: Emphasis added; and nothing like misspelling misspelling.

[SpitfireIX]

This is probably true.

Gravy: I want to make sure I understand the position of Mr. Galilei. You believe every available piece of video evidence leads to the conclusion that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition?


Galileo: http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/skull4.jpg


Gravy: I don't understand, you were so vocal about this in print. Is there any part of your position you'd like to rectify?


Galileo: http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/skull4.jpg



Gravy: Well, all things considered... you still come across as a better spokesman for the truth movement than anyone else I've come across.


Maybe we could get Sylvia Browne to help us talk to Galileo. :rolleyes:

[Galileo]

"But it looks so much like a controlled demolition!"

Galileo, things aren't always what they seem at first glance... I'll just leave it at that.

Pardon me, Pardalis, WTC 7 just doesn't LOOK like a controlled demolition, it has all the scientific characteristics of a controlled demolition.

Hundreds of architects and engineers have determined that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition:

"As your own eyes witness — WTC Building #7 (a 47 story high-rise not hit by an airplane) exhibits all the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of “collapse”

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse (heard by hundreds of firemen and media reporters)

3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance

4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, at the upper 7 floors seen in the network videos

5. “Collapses” into its own footprint – with the steel skeleton broken up for shipment

6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

7. Tons of molten Metal found by CDI (Demolition Contractor) in basement (no other possible source than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)

8. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.

9. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

10. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional

11. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”."

http://www.ae911truth.org/

:crowded:

And now the testimony of Barry Jennings has proven that there was at least one early explosion inside WTC 7 as well.

[chipmunk stew]

When are you going to accept my challenge to a televised debate?

I coached Fetzer before his debate with you,
The only person I know who has been pestering Gravy for a televised debate who is also a Fetzer protege is Ace Baker. Are you an Ace Baker sock?

[Parsman]

"Hundreds of architects and engineers have determined that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition:"

Hundreds? OK Go on name 10 more than Jowenko. That is 10 qualified, practising Structural Engineers. People who might know what they are talking about. On you go, Galileo

[Mince]

10. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional


Ah yes, Danny Jowenko.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI

So then, we're agreed that WTC 1 and 2 were not a controlled demolition? Of course that leaves us with the conundrum of why the government purposefully demolished WTC 7 but not WTC 1 and 2.

But really, it's all irrelevant. Even if you could prove it was a controlled demolition (even if it was a controlled demolition), where do you go from there? All of your investigation and you couldn't give one name of someone who was directly involved. Not one.

[Galileo]

The only person I know who has been pestering Gravy for a televised debate who is also a Fetzer protege is Ace Baker. Are you an Ace Baker sock?

Nope, I am not Ace Baker.

Ace Baker, from what I have seen, believes in "no planes" theories.

But he does have a kick-ass song played to the tune of "Have We Forgotton".

Gravy wouldn't stand a ghost of a chance of beating me in a debate!

[chipmunk stew]

Nope, I am not Ace Baker.

Ace Baker, from what I have seen, believes in "no planes" theories.

But he does have a kick-ass song played to the tune of "Have We Forgotton".

Gravy wouldn't stand a ghost of a chance of beating me in a debate!
Mind confirming this prior challenge, then?

[beachnut]

Pardon me, Pardalis, WTC 7 just doesn't LOOK like a controlled demolition, it has all the scientific characteristics of a controlled demolition.

Hundreds of architects and engineers have determined that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition:

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

And now the testimony of Barry Jennings has proven that there was at least one early explosion inside WTC 7 as well.
This is total junk. These guys do not have anything new, they just started this year. Yes these idiots are over 5 years late, and they start a web site of junk with no new ideas on 9/11. That means with the web sites posted here you can debunk everything they have. You are not doing very good at truth for 9/11, still not a single fact.

[T.A.M.]

Galileo:

David Shayler, A 9/11 CTist (among others) has recently been telling everyone he is Jesus Christ, as well as the reincarnation of Galileo, and other famous people.

Are you really David Shayler?

TAM:)

[Pardalis]

Pardon me, Pardalis, WTC 7 just doesn't LOOK like a controlled demolition, it has all the scientific characteristics of a controlled demolition.

Nope.

[Stellafane]

...Gravy wouldn't stand a ghost of a chance of beating me in a debate!

Gravy?!? HA! I could demolish you in a debate, and I'm a nobody. And do you want to know why? Too bad, I'll tell you anyway: because I'm reasonably intelligent, cogent, sane, and right! Try 'em sometime.

[beachnut]

Nope, I am not Ace Baker.

Ace Baker, from what I have seen, believes in "no planes" theories.

But he does have a kick-ass song played to the tune of "Have We Forgotton".

Gravy wouldn't stand a ghost of a chance of beating me in a debate!
You are already beat. You post previously debunked tripe.

[Parsman]

Hundreds of architects and engineers have determined that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition:



10 too many Galileo? OK lets make it 8... :cool:

[Galileo]

This is total junk. These guys do not have anything new, they just started this year. Yes these idiots are over 5 years late, and they start a web site of junk with no new ideas on 9/11. That means with the web sites posted here you can debunk everything they have. You are not doing very good at truth for 9/11, still not a single fact.

message to BeachNUT and your fellow Archie DeBunkers....

Barry Jennings heard and felt an explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell before either of the Twin Towers collapsed.

The stairwell was in the north half of WTC 7, away from where the debris hit.

Core columns # 74 and # 75 would have blocked the advance of any debris flying (FROM GRAVITY) 400 feet towards the WTC 7 stariwell.

Barry Jennings said so on TV right after it happened.

Please put that in your pipe and smoke it, this place reminds me of a self-help group or an AA meeting.

I am DEBUNK PROOF!

[Galileo]

Galileo:

David Shayler, A 9/11 CTist (among others) has recently been telling everyone he is Jesus Christ, as well as the reincarnation of Galileo, and other famous people.

Are you really David Shayler?

TAM:)

No, I'm not Jesus Christ, but my grandfather claims we are related to Adam, Eve, and "Lucy".

You can address me as the 'Son of Man'.

[T.A.M.]

me too...we must be distant cousins, you and I...but that also makes us both distantly related to Vlad the Impaler, Hitler, Gengis Khan, etc...

TAM:)

[JimBenArm]

>snip<

I am DEBUNK PROOF!
Of course you are! You cling to unfalsifiable beliefs, ignore evidence that goes against your beliefs, and hold to positions that defy logic.

It's impossible to debunk someone who believes in fantasy!

My beliefs are totally debunkable. All you have to do is show facts that counter what I believe. Unfortunately, all you have done is post belief and supposition. So, even though it's possible to do, you, my friend, have failed to do so.

Please, try again!

[Mince]

10. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional

So, Galileo, why did the government intentionally destroy WTC 7, but not WTC 1 and 2?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI


In order for the government to fabricate a story about WTC 7's collapse, they certainly needed it damaged in some way. Don't you think it was wonderful serendipity, then, when WTC 2, upon its collapse, magically damaged WTC 7? Or do you think the government remote controlled WTC 2's debris into WTC 7? Why did they shoot down flight 93 instead of letting it hit WTC 7?

[Viper Daimao]

message to BeachNUT and your fellow Archie DeBunkers....

Barry Jennings heard and felt an explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell before either of the Twin Towers collapsed.

The stairwell was in the north half of WTC 7, away from where the debris hit.

Core columns # 74 and # 75 would have blocked the advance of any debris flying (FROM GRAVITY) 400 feet towards the WTC 7 stariwell.

Barry Jennings said so on TV right after it happened.

Please put that in your pipe and smoke it, this place reminds me of a self-help group or an AA meeting.

I am DEBUNK PROOF!

First off, I'd wonder how he knows it was before the collapse. Second, don't you think perhaps this sound her heard was debris from the planes hitting the building, or possibly fire igniting the diesel tanks in the building? Third, the building still didn't collapse for what? 6-8 hours after Mr. Jennings heard these explosions? What kind of controlled demo is that?

[Galileo]

Gravy?!? HA! I could demolish you in a debate, and I'm a nobody. And do you want to know why? Too bad, I'll tell you anyway: because I'm reasonably intelligent, cogent, sane, and right! Try 'em sometime.

Stellafane;

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.

We can get you to do PR for the Debate, will then get better TV ratings.

Also, if the masses believe your tripe, the Las Vegas odds may swing towards Gravy, and I can make more money in my gambling investments.

Gravy has still not come out and explained how the explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell was caused by WTC 1 debris, nor reconciled Jennings' testimony with the convoluted JREF timeline.

Gravy's a beaten man, running for cover....

[stateofgrace]

7. Tons of molten Metal found by CDI (Demolition Contractor) in basement (no other possible source than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)

8. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.

9. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples


So Thermite was used? Oh wait.......

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse (heard by hundreds of firemen and media reporters)


And explosives at ground level? oh wait............


4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, at the upper 7 floors seen in the network videos



And explosives were also used along side the thermite higher up in the building? Are you sure you are not just making this up ?
5. “Collapses” into its own footprint – with the steel skeleton broken up for shipment



Did it, are you sure, you wouldn't just make this up would you ?

10. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional


he also says the Towers were not CD's, is he correct here ?

11. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY


Are you accusing the NYPD and FDNY of covering it up? Or are you saying the media are also in on it?

Stop posting debunked rubbish, start taking responsibility for yourself and start to think before you post anything.

[Mince]

Barry Jennings heard and felt an explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell before either of the Twin Towers collapsed.

And of course all people never lie or are mistaken or forget after 5.5 years or fabricate things looking for a 9/11 popularity/money grab.

[Pardalis]

me too...we must be distant cousins, you and I...but that also makes us both distantly related to Vlad the Impaler, Hitler, Gengis Khan, etc...

TAM:)

I knew it! That affable demeanor was just a disguise!

[beachnut]

No, I'm not Jesus Christ, but my grandfather claims we are related to Adam, Eve, and "Lucy".

You can address me as the 'Son of Man'.
You have posted no facts yet to support your ideas on 9/11. You are not related to anyone important, and can never prove it; please stop making up junk about your lineage. Do you think 9/11 truth will ever have a fact to support any conclusion they have?

Sign up here, they need more people who do not need facts or logical thinking http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/

[chipmunk stew]

I am DEBUNK PROOF!
Why do woos always think this is a good thing?

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.
I have little doubt of that.

Gravy's a beaten man, running for cover....
I'd still like to see confirmation of your challenge.

[Dr Adequate]

You are not related to anyone important ... He's related to everyone who ever lived. Distantly.

[Galileo]

First off, I'd wonder how he knows it was before the collapse. Second, don't you think perhaps this sound her heard was debris from the planes hitting the building, or possibly fire igniting the diesel tanks in the building? Third, the building still didn't collapse for what? 6-8 hours after Mr. Jennings heard these explosions? What kind of controlled demo is that?

Hey Viper "Diaper Dandy" Daimao;

Jennings didn't 'know' the explosion was before the Twin Towers collapsed at the time of the explosion, because the Towers hadn't collapsed yet.

After the explosion, he went up to the 8th floor, looked out the window, and saw the Twin Towers.

Later, he saw the firemen running from the collapse of WTC 2, and then later WTC1. [he didn't know they were running from the collapses just yet]

Only after he was rescused from the building, and saw the 2 towers down, did he "know" that the explosion was before the towers collapsed.

Jennings went to WTC 7 after the first plane hit WTC 1.

And are you suggesting that when FL175 hit the SOUTH TOWER, that caused an explosion just below the 6th floor of the stairwell of WTC 7?

Are you kidding me!

Please go back and read my initial post, and then we'll see if you can contribute something intelligent to this forum:

Galileo: Not So Fast, Speedy Gonzalez!
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2812561&postcount=212

Thank you in advance.

[A-Train]

So then, we're agreed that WTC 1 and 2 were not a controlled demolition? Of course that leaves us with the conundrum of why the government purposefully demolished WTC 7 but not WTC 1 and 2.

The government? Who said anything about the government doing it? Galileo has not been arguing that the government destroyed the building(s)-- at least not on this thread. He is only contending that WTC-7 was brought down by controlled demolition, not by fire and structural damage as per the official story.



But really, it's all irrelevant. Even if you could prove it was a controlled demolition (even if it was a controlled demolition), where do you go from there? All of your investigation and you couldn't give one name of someone who was directly involved. Not one.

What's your point here? Are you really saying that if the buildings were brought down by CD, but we can't figure out who exactly did it, that we should simply shrug our shoulders and continue blaming an obviously innocent party for the crime? And proceed with several bloody wars that were based on that incorrect assessment?

[stateofgrace]

Hey Viper "Diaper Dandy" Daimao;

Jennings didn't 'know' the explosion was before the Twin Towers collapsed at the time of the explosion, because the Towers hadn't collapsed yet.

After the explosion, he went up to the 8th floor, looked out the window, and saw the Twin Towers.

Later, he saw the firemen running from the collapse of WTC 2, and then later WTC1. [he didn't know they were running from the collapses just yet]

Only after he was rescused from the building, and saw the 2 towers down, did he "know" that the explosion was before the towers collapsed.

Jennings went to WTC 7 after the first plane hit WTC 1.

And are you suggesting that when FL175 hit the SOUTH TOWER, that caused an explosion just below the 6th floor of the stairwell of WTC 7?

Are you kidding me!

Please go back and read my initial post, and then we'll see if you can contribute something intelligent to this forum:

Galileo: Not So Fast, Speedy Gonzalez!
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2812561&postcount=212

Thank you in advance.

Did I misread this? Are you suggesting that explosives were set off inside WTC 7 some six hours before it collapsed?

[Galileo]

Of course you are! You cling to unfalsifiable beliefs, ignore evidence that goes against your beliefs, and hold to positions that defy logic.

It's impossible to debunk someone who believes in fantasy!

My beliefs are totally debunkable. All you have to do is show facts that counter what I believe. Unfortunately, all you have done is post belief and supposition. So, even though it's possible to do, you, my friend, have failed to do so.

Please, try again!

The testimony of Barry Jennings IS falsifiable.

But you'd have a better chance falsifying Goldbach's Conjecture, than falsifying Barry Jennings.

Goldbach's conjecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach's_conjecture

I suggest you go and read up on your Karl Popper before you venture into this forum again.

Karl Popper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

[Galileo]

Did I misread this? Are you suggesting that explosives were set off inside WTC 7 some six hours before it collapsed?

more than six hours.

The explosion occurred before the South Tower collapsed.

Please go back and study Barry Jenning's timeline.

Sometimes I feel like I've jumped into the snakepit!

[Pardalis]

more than six hours.


I don't think this will help you.

[stateofgrace]

more than six hours.

The explosion occurred before the South Tower collapsed.

Please go back and study Barry Jenning's timeline.

Sometimes I feel like I've jumped into the snakepit!

Oh I see, so the thermite was used later? About the same time the worlds media, the FDNY and the NYPD were involved?

The squibs,were they caused by explosives or thermite btw?

Oh before I forget these explosions that took place long before WTC 7 collapsed, was the building fully occupied at the time?

[Drudgewire]

Galileo has not been arguing that the government destroyed the building(s)-- at least not on this thread.
He's saying it was a controlled demolition in a building that housed banks and Government offices. Is his theory the bomb fairies planted them?

"At least not in this thread." :D

[~enigma~]

1. Rapid onset of “collapse” Really? WTC7 collapsed at 17:20 (5:20 PM). Last time I checked the fire was burning unfought for 7 hours. That was sudden?
3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance Symmetrical? You really must be joking. Did you ever look at a photo of the debris pile? Apparently not or you would notice the north wall on top of the pile which certainly puts an end to you symmetric stupidity.
5. “Collapses” into its own footprint – with the steel skeleton broken up for shipment Righhhht....footprint apparently was across the street from where WTC7 stood.
6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds Can you please post the definition of pyroclastic cloud. Then can you tell me what the death toll was from the cloud.
8. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD. That is not true at all. The constituents of ThermIte were found but those are all common construction materials. The Barium in TherMate was not found
10. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professionalOne demolition expert that views a video without being told of the 7 hour long unfought fire does not mean expert corroboration. it means an expert thought it was a CD based on incomplete information AND a computer video that intentionally left the collapse of the penthouse off. Speaking of the penthouse collapse. That was about 15-16 seconds before the building collapse. That is another nail in your sudden collapse stupidity.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations 7 hours isn't slow enough for you, what do you want, a few hundred hours?
2. Asymmetrical collapseWait a sec...you said symmetrical before...I checked, it's up there in #3. We all know it was asymmetrical.
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel Yes, how does that prove CD? Can't a fire weaken steel? If not, why do they fireproof steel?
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”."This old piece of tripe proves that you are a big fat NOTHING.
And now the testimony of Barry Jennings has proven that there was at least one early explosion inside WTC 7 as well.In fires there are explosions. I would like you to show me a fire in an office building where there were NO explosions of any kind. Do that and then you can claim Barry Jennings testimony about an explosion means anything.

Considering what conclusion #4 leads me to (about you being a big fat nothing), this will be my last detailed response to you and any further response to you will be following my signature...fair enough?

[Galileo]

And of course all people never lie or are mistaken or forget after 5.5 years or fabricate things looking for a 9/11 popularity/money grab.

Barry Jennings made consistent statements on TV on the day of 9/11, right after he was pulled out of the rubble. He is also a Housing Authority official. You are uninformed on this topic. It's NIST that is lying or mistaken.

A link to what Jennings said on September 11, 2001, can be found in my initial posting in this thread, or found by a google search.

Please note that we do have all of the network footage made by Jennings that day, only the portions actually aired.

That network footage would be very helpful to NIST (wonder if they have it?).

[~enigma~]

Barry Jennings heard and felt an explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell before either of the Twin Towers collapsed.[quote]And where exactly was the window in this staircase that Jennings saw WTC 1 and 2 standing?

[quote]I am DEBUNK PROOF!
So you are unfalsafiable? That means you are faith based and not based in science. I was right, you are an idiot.

[~enigma~]

Stellafane;

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.

We can get you to do PR for the Debate, will then get better TV ratings.

Also, if the masses believe your tripe, the Las Vegas odds may swing towards Gravy, and I can make more money in my gambling investments.

Gravy has still not come out and explained how the explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell was caused by WTC 1 debris, nor reconciled Jennings' testimony with the convoluted JREF timeline.

Gravy's a beaten man, running for cover....
No, Gravy won't debate you or at least he shouldn't because your an idiot and it is not nice to take advantage of those with mental deficiencies.

[Galileo]

He's saying it was a controlled demolition in a building that housed banks and Government offices. Is his theory the bomb fairies planted them?

"At least not in this thread." :D

The factual issue of whether WTC 7's collapse was from explosives is separate from the issue of who put the explosives in WTC 7.

So Drudgewire, I ask you, who do YOU think put the explosives below the 6th floor of the WTC 7 stairwell?

Perhaps the same person who disabled the WTC 7 alarm system at 6:47 A.M. on the morning of 9/11?

[Drudgewire]

So Drudgewire, I ask you, who do YOU think put the explosives below the 6th floor of the WTC 7 stairwell?

Perhaps the same person who disabled the WTC 7 alarm system at 6:47 A.M. on the morning of 9/11?
I'm going with that damned smiley sun. Anyone shifty enough to put two scoops of raisins in every box of Kellogg's Raisin Bran certainly has the means. :p

[Brainster]

Stellafane;

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.

True enough. Now all we have to debate is who's unarmed.

Gravy has still not come out and explained how the explosion in the WTC 7 stairwell was caused by WTC 1 debris, nor reconciled Jennings' testimony with the convoluted JREF timeline.

Perhaps because like Mineta's testimony, it can't be reconciled. It's an outlier.

[Galileo]

Oh I see, so the thermite was used later? About the same time the worlds media, the FDNY and the NYPD were involved?

The squibs,were they caused by explosives or thermite btw?

Oh before I forget these explosions that took place long before WTC 7 collapsed, was the building fully occupied at the time?

What's your point?

Are you talking about WTC 7 or the Seattle Kingdome?

[Pardalis]

Galileo, why did the explosives go off 6 to 7 hours before the collapse?

[beachnut]

What's your point?

Are you talking about WTC 7 or the Seattle Kingdome?
You need to keep up. You have lost the debate again. You should get some facts on 9/11 before posting some of the lies about 9/11.

[Drudgewire]

Galileo, why did the explosives go off 6 to 7 hours before the collapse?
That's how controlled demolitions work. You've never seen them on TV when they do the countdown... then when they get to zero they say "OK guys, T minus six hours to collapse?"

Clearly you know nothing about demolitions... or string theory. ;)

[Galileo]

True enough. Now all we have to debate is who's unarmed.



Perhaps because like Mineta's testimony, it can't be reconciled. It's an outlier.

This reminds me of when I defeated an entire Fraternity in college all by myself shooting quarters into beer cups.

I am DAVID. You are GOLIATH.

Mineta's testimony is consistent with statements made by:

Dick Cheney (twice)
Richard Clarke
Condalizza Rice
Norman Mineta (he made additional statements to a Truth Squad last month)
a White House Photographer (can't remember his name)

But at least you can dig up something that opposes Mineta.

With Barry Jennings, his statements are consistent with EVERTHING on the record.

Including Mike Hess, who was with him at the time.

Jennings is not an outlier, no matter how much you wish it to be.

I suggest prayer.

[Galileo]

Galileo, why did the explosives go off 6 to 7 hours before the collapse?

I don't know.

What I do is collect the evidence first [WHAT], then figure out my theory later [WHY].

Why do you think the explosive went off 8 hours before the collapse?

[chipmunk stew]

With Barry Jennings, his statements are consistent with EVERTHING on the record.

Including Mike Hess, who was with him at the time.

Jennings is not an outlier, no matter how much you wish it to be.
Really? What other evidence and accounts are available to suggest an explosion in WTC7 before the collapse of the towers?

[uk_dave]

I suggest prayer.


Why? Is something happening?

Let me check the news...... hmmmm Bush & Brown (still in power I see).... flooding..... actor in court on child porn charge..... nope, nothing about 911.

I guess I'll give the prayer a miss (don't want to disturb the old fella with something we seem to be taking care of perfectly well ourselves :D)

[chipmunk stew]

I don't know.

What I do is collect the evidence first [WHAT], then figure out my theory later [WHY].

Why do you think the explosive went off 8 hours before the collapse?
That's interesting. Aside from Jennings' account, what evidence do you have that there was an explosion in WTC7 before the twin towers collapsed?

[uk_dave]

Why do you think the explosive went off 8 hours before the collapse?

A premature explosion? It happens sometimes......

[beachnut]

I don't know.

What I do is collect the evidence first [WHAT], then figure out my theory later [WHY].

Why do you think the explosive went off 8 hours before the collapse?
No, a college grad would state a thesis first and then proceed to support it. Sorry, you missed out on college. You must of flunked out pitching quarters on the corner with Willie and the pdohs.

Why was there a large noise, like an explosion but not, 8 hours earlier? A large piece of the WTC towers made big bang, a big impression, a damaging blow on WTC7. Do I win!! do i, do i, do eye!?

[Drudgewire]

A premature explosion? It happens sometimes......
Stupid NWO bomb. Should have tried thinking about baseball statistics or naked Rosie O'Donnell.

[Galileo]

Really? What other evidence and accounts are available to suggest an explosion before the collapse of the towers?

NIST says that WTC 7 failed at almost exactly the same point where Barry Jennings described the explosion, the 5th floor, right below the stairwell.

That's known as physical evidence.

[Galileo]

No, a college grad would state a thesis first and then proceed to support it. Sorry, you missed out on college. You must of flunked out pitching quarters on the corner with Willie and the pdohs.

We're agreed then.

Why don't you write up a thesis that Osama bin Laden and the boogeyman planted bombs inside WTC 7, and then find some "evidence" to support your theory.

Here, I'll help you....

Osama and the boogeyman hate America, that proves they planted the bombs.

[stateofgrace]

What's your point?

Are you talking about WTC 7 or the Seattle Kingdome?

I'm sorry I am just asking questions, I take it that is ok? Questions that you have failed to answer. The answers you provide will then be read and further questions will follow based on your answers. This is providing you are not making things up, in which case you will try to avoid answering my question, oh wait.

Now sunbeam, you have said you are undebunkable, you have said that WTC 7 was demolished by cd. So why are you avoiding my questions? Please remember you are trying to sell your theories to Joe Public, me. Avoiding questions when they are asked means you are ill prepared and ill informed. So, please try answering my questions again.


Oh I see, so the thermite was used later? About the same time the worlds media, the FDNY and the NYPD were involved?

The squibs,were they caused by explosives or thermite btw?

Oh before I forget these explosions that took place long before WTC 7 collapsed, was the building fully occupied at the time?



Do not avoid them; do not dismiss them, back up your theory with something other than school yard insults and school kid antics.

[Drudgewire]

Why don't you write up a thesis that Osama bin Laden and the boogeyman planted bombs inside WTC 7, and then find some "evidence" to support your theory.
Step 1: Use Galileo's or ANYBODY's real physical evidence that there was a bomb in WTC 7.

D'oh! http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/doh.gif

[beachnut]

NIST says that WTC 7 failed at almost exactly the same point where Barry Jennings described the explosion, the 5th floor, right below the stairwell.

That's known as physical evidence.
When did Barry, the super smoking gun, say this happen? Time?

[Galileo]

When did Barry, the super smoking gun, say this happen? Time?

I heard you were talking about being related to the some brothers. You know that is inbreeding, and you should go to the doc and be checked for those pesky inbreeding diseases, some of them affect critically thinking and rational thought. See, the problem with making up stupid ideas about trivial testimony which does not really support explosives, but just big noises, is you are no where at the end of your failure. Whereas you explain up front why WTC7 is part of a goal of some CT you have or you know what happen you end up with something in the end. You have nothing to debate, the explosion you site is a noise, not explosives. You need more facts. You may want to think about having thesis first so you can guide your research and know when you have met a goal, unlike the Vietnam war with no real goal just the nebulous domino theory. Why are you unable to guide your research, are you having problems with logical thought. You should back up and research better before declaring you will defeat anyone at debate for which you have come unprepared and unarmed for battle.

Before I jumped into this thread, the gang here seemed agreed upon the notion that Barry Jennings was mistaken about his timeline.

Now it seems like some are implying that Jennings is a liar.

Which is it?

According to the timeline provided by Barry Jennings, the explosion occurred after 8:46 and before 9:59, perhaps at around 9:03.

[beachnut]

We're agreed then.

Why don't you write up a thesis that Osama bin Laden and the boogeyman planted bombs inside WTC 7, and then find some "evidence" to support your theory.

Here, I'll help you....

Osama and the boogeyman hate America, that proves they planted the bombs.
No way you were in college for long, you are kidding. Did you flunked out pitching quarters on the corner with Willie and the pdohs?

Thesis, OBL planted bombs in WTC7. - I will show with data that OBL planted bombs in the WTC7.

Conclusion - after 27 years of research (yep, i have researched OBL for a long time) I was unable to find any data or facts to support my thesis. OBL did not plant bombs in WTC7 on 9/11.

That was easy, and I have done real research over 27 years on OBL. Did you know he was helping kill Russians in Afgan land a long time ago.

Done. I have done a bad job, and hope it does not reflect poorly on my school where I did not pitch quarters and flunk out with pdoh. Thus earing a BSEE and MSEE before the dean could figure out my failures.

Next - BTW, I left out the fantasy stuff. Fiction only works for 9/11 truth when it fools, fools.

[Galileo]

I'm sorry I am just asking questions, I take it that is ok? Questions that you have failed to answer. The answers you provide will then be read and further questions will follow based on your answers. This is providing you are not making things up, in which case you will try to avoid answering my question, oh wait.

Now sunbeam, you have said you are undebunkable, you have said that WTC 7 was demolished by cd. So why are you avoiding my questions? Please remember you are trying to sell your theories to Joe Public, me. Avoiding questions when they are asked means you are ill prepared and ill informed. So, please try answering my questions again.



Do not avoid them; do not dismiss them, back up your theory with something other than school yard insults and school kid antics.

I don't know what explosives were used in WTC 7.

[Drudgewire]

I don't know what explosives were used in WTC 7.
See the problem with calling this "physical evidence" then?

What am I saying? Of course you don't. :rolleyes:

[beachnut]

Before I jumped into this thread, the gang here seemed agreed upon the notion that Barry Jennings was mistaken about his timeline.

Now it seems like some are implying that Jennings is a liar.

Which is it?

According to the timeline provided by Barry Jennings, the explosion occurred after 8:46 and before 9:59, perhaps at around 9:03.
Well pdoh was it 8:46, or 959, or 9:03. Gee, is he a liar. Can he get a real time straight, or is this a 6 year old memory clouded by time. Wow, I bet he heard the impact of an aircraft into the WTC tower which was in energy the equal to 2200 pounds of TNT, I bet that sounds like an explosion. And that takes care of that. I guess he did hear a big sound. He said he did, and gee your time line makes the only big explosion sound the impact of a terrorist aircraft. Wow. Solved by a real engineer and pilot. You see, a real explosion kills people and blows up stuff. The shock wave alone blows out things in your body and it looks like people are bleeding from their ears and eyes and such. Since there was no real explosives going off in WTC7, we have no bodies, or people with damage from a real explosion, which we would have, and since this guy did not exhibit damage from a blast, he heard a large sound.

Case closed, the smoking gun was paper bag being popped. Weak stuff comes from the truther camp, wake up and think for yourself. You should have stayed in school and got a read degree, or worked on your rationally thinking and research skills. You just solved the whole thing but do not even know it. Now since you have no thesis, you have no conclusion to share with the world, no goal. You ramble aimlessly with truther woo spewing all directions. Next time have a goal, without one you never show progress, just failure.

[Viper Daimao]

Before I jumped into this thread, the gang here seemed agreed upon the notion that Barry Jennings was mistaken about his timeline.

Now it seems like some are implying that Jennings is a liar.

Which is it?

According to the timeline provided by Barry Jennings, the explosion occurred after 8:46 and before 9:59, perhaps at around 9:03.

We don't know. We have Jennings interview from years ago, and now we have DA saying they have a new Jennings interview which they won't release until their movie comes out eventually, maybe. So until we have both to compare it to, or specific quotes with conflicting claims, we don't know.

We are saying setting off a bomb so a building will collapse 8-9 hours later doesn't make as much sense as the sound being debris of some sort hitting the building.


BTW, thank you for calling me childish names.

[beachnut]

See the problem with calling this "physical evidence" then?

What am I saying? Of course you don't. :rolleyes:
You must remember, he was pitching quarters when he should have been studying.

He is confusing physical evidence with statements and hearsay. He would love DRG. He has convinced me the guy heard and felt the impact of a jet hitting the WTC towers.

[Galileo]

First off, I'd wonder how he knows it was before the collapse. Second, don't you think perhaps this sound her heard was debris from the planes hitting the building, or possibly fire igniting the diesel tanks in the building? Third, the building still didn't collapse for what? 6-8 hours after Mr. Jennings heard these explosions? What kind of controlled demo is that?

Between 11:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.:

"No diesel smells reported from the exterioir, stairwells, or lobby areas."

Source (page L-22):

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

[CurtC]

1. Rapid onset of “collapse”It's not typical for controlled demolitions to take down a structure on the roof of a building, then wait six seconds, then drop the rest of the building. That's not very rapid. Also, they usually don't set off the explosives eight hours ahead of collapse time. What's up with that???

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse (heard by hundreds of firemen and media reporters)Maybe they were hearing sounds from that mechanical structure on the roof that collapsed six seconds earlier and was likely rumbling down through the middle of the building?

4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, at the upper 7 floors seen in the network videosDo you even know what a "squib" is? And the debris seen hanging out the upper windows could not have been smoke, since it's obviously still attached to the building as it falls.

6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust cloudsWell, you don't know what "pyroclastic" means either.

11. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNYEither this fact works against you, or you are saying that the FDNY was in on it. Are you really saying that?

According to the timeline provided by Barry Jennings, the explosion occurred after 8:46 and before 9:59, perhaps at around 9:03.I don't know for sure, but that timeline would be pretty consistent with WTC7 being hit by debris from the UAL175 crash.

Didn't we have someone on this board who was in WTC7 that morning, who verified that a piece from 175 hit the building?

[chipmunk stew]

NIST says that WTC 7 failed at almost exactly the same point where Barry Jennings described the explosion, the 5th floor, right below the stairwell.

That's known as physical evidence.
Careful, Gallagher. That is dangerously close to a circular argument...

Putting that aside: I asked for supporting evidence for Jennings' timeline, and you offered supporting evidence for his location. His location is not in question. Aside from Mr. Jennings' account, what evidence do you have suggesting that there was an explosion inside WTC7 before the towers collapsed?

[Galileo]

See the problem with calling this "physical evidence" then?

What am I saying? Of course you don't. :rolleyes:

According to NIST;

"it appears that the initiating collapse event may have occurred on Floors 5 through 13."

"a horizontal collapse mechanism occurred between Floors 5 and 7"

Source (page L-33):
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

Look on page 29.

It has a heading 'Possible Locations of Collapse Mechanisms'

It includes columns 76 & 77, and trusses 1 & 2.

This is very close to where Jennings was.

Barry Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor.

Hmmm??

[Drudgewire]

According to NIST;

"it appears that the initiating collapse event may have occurred on Floors 5 through 13."

"a horizontal collapse mechanism occurred between Floors 5 and 7"

Source (page L-33):
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

Look on page 29.

It has a heading 'Possible Locations of Collapse Mechanisms'

It includes columns 76 & 77, and trusses 1 & 2.

This is very close to where Jennings was.

Barry Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor.

Hmmm??
Gotcha. I see anything resembling physical evidence of an explosive device there.

Oh wait...

[Pardalis]

So a "bomb" went off and the building collapsed 8 hours later. The "bomb" was used to structurally damage the building.

So what happened at 5pm to WTC7 really was a collapse.

[Slayhamlet]

NIST says that WTC 7 failed at almost exactly the same point where Barry Jennings described the explosion, the 5th floor, right below the stairwell.

That's known as physical evidence.

That's documentary evidence, genius. When are the superlative genes of your illustrious bloodline going to manifest themselves in a single intelligent thought?

[beachnut]

According to NIST;

"it appears that the initiating collapse event may have occurred on Floors 5 through 13."

"a horizontal collapse mechanism occurred between Floors 5 and 7"

Source (page L-33):
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

Look on page 29.

It has a heading 'Possible Locations of Collapse Mechanisms'

It includes columns 76 & 77, and trusses 1 & 2.

This is very close to where Jennings was.

Barry Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor.

Hmmm??
A blast big enough to destroy the structure would kill Barry. Did Barry die in a blast? A real CD uses many, if not hundreds of small blast right on the steel supports. An open blast, one bomb, would have to be real big to destroy steel columns it was not right next to. Therefore the blast would have killed all people in the area, including Barry. Barry is not dead, therefore there was no bomb. Why have your genes let you down?

[Pardalis]

Galileo, are you there?

If you insist that what Jennings heard was an explosion, and you agree with the NIST preliminary assessment that the collapse started from the same location, therefore you must conclude that the building collapsed due to the damage this device caused. Therefore, it is not a controlled demolition, but a structural collapse.

Right?

[Galileo]

UPDATE!

I just received an email from one of my fans, my fanclub is called 'Galileo's Minions'.

The email says;

"Galileo's middle finger!!

"Drudgewired"!!

You're kickin ass, dude.

I take full credit for getting you on that board.

Keep sticking it to Gravy.

He'll never debate you, though.

He's a lock artist.

Explanation: In a pool hall, a lock artist is a guy who's pretty good at pool, but only wants to make money. So he simply refuses to play anyone unless he knows for sure he'll win. He doesn't care about the spirit of competition or any of that. Lock artists are basically losers.

Gravy will only debate people he is sure to defeat, e.g. Fetzer, Avery, etc.

He won't go near you."

Is that true, JREFers, is Gravy really a lock artist??

[beachnut]

UPDATE!

I just received an email from one of my fans, my fanclub is called 'Galileo's Minions'.

The email says;

"Galileo's middle finger!!

"Drudgewired"!!

You're kickin ass, dude.

I take full credit for getting you on that board.

Keep sticking it to Gravy.

He'll never debate you, though.

He's a lock artist.

Explanation: In a pool hall, a lock artist is a guy who's pretty good at pool, but only wants to make money. So he simply refuses to play anyone unless he knows for sure he'll win. He doesn't care about the spirit of competition or any of that. Lock artists are basically losers.

Gravy will only debate people he is sure to defeat, e.g. Fetzer, Avery, etc.

He won't go near you."

Is that true, JREFers, is Gravy really a lock artist??
You sound like another great debater, pdoh. I think you have Gravy, you have so many proven facts, and evidence which shows...

Wow, you will win in a lot of mediocre minds of woo. But this post, your post, proves you are a fact less member of 9/11 truth. You will declare victory and leave. You have got everything wrong so far. What else can you mess up more than the rest have already done? I have to think the only lock around here is the one your logical thinking is stuck behind.

Your friend is mentally deficient or mentally ill. Which is it?

[Drudgewire]

Explanation: In a pool hall, a lock artist is a guy who's pretty good at pool, but only wants to make money. So he simply refuses to play anyone unless he knows for sure he'll win. He doesn't care about the spirit of competition or any of that. Lock artists are basically losers.
What do you call a guy who challenges everybody in the building without any idea how to play pool, then after he's had all his money taken announces he's the only person in the hall who understands the game?

[Pardalis]

Earth calling Galileo.

[~enigma~]

Hmm...ignores me and spouts the exact same arguments as our old moron pdope. Number 3 in 72 hours and you haven't been banned as a sock yet. Guess the mods are tired, afterall they are human but I suspect you will not be hear much longer sockboy.

[Pardalis]

So Galileo, are you going to respond anytime soon?

[Galileo]

Galileo, are you there?

If you insist that what Jennings heard was an explosion, and you agree with the NIST preliminary assessment that the collapse started from the same location, therefore you must conclude that the building collapsed due to the damage this device caused. Therefore, it is not a controlled demolition, but a structural collapse.

Right?

So you are saying that Barry Jennings invented the explosion, and it just happened to occur right at the same location that NIST says WTC 7 failed?

I'm not going to play any word games here.

NIST says that right near where Jennings said he was, was the critical location. The explosion Jennings heard and felt was early prep work, before the real controlled demolition at 5:20 p.m.

Jennings goes on the say that the lobby looked like King Kong had gone through and stepped on it. This could have been from the same explosion or another one, we don't know.

The lobby is near where the critical area is, as well, but not as close. But internal debris had more room to fly through the air in the lobby.

There wasn't any damage to the lobby area visible from the street, that '20-foot hole' or whatever it is that you like to crow about was more towards the SW corner and the witness misspoke. There are witnesses who saw no visible damage to the lobby from the outside, but Jennings saw the damage from the inside, so the damage was closer to the critical area.

It looks like you guys have abandoned the "Barry was mixed up on his timeline" thesis.

This is the most decisive victory by an outnumbered crusader since 1805 when Napoleon won the Battle of Austerlitz!

[Drudgewire]

I'm not going to play any word games here.
Perhaps "Candyland" would be more your speed. :p

[Pardalis]

NIST says that right near where Jennings said he was, was the critical location. The explosion Jennings heard and felt was early prep work, before the real controlled demolition at 5:20 p.m.

How is that supposed to work?

a) Why the need for this explosion if they are going to demolish the building in a controlled demolition 8 hours later? What did the first explosion accomplish?

b) Inversely, why the need for a controlled demolition if the explosion Jennings heard is the cause of the collapse?

Did you think this through?

[beachnut]

He did it, declares victory and leaves. Waiting for the standard pdoh meltdown. (and the leaving part)

Barry heard a sound, he did not witness an explosion. Please work on your thinking you have just lost again, in the debate of logical statements. NIST says what? Remember a big explosion would kill Barry and others, but debris from the WTC towers would not unless it hit them. Try not to get upset but you lost again.

[Dave_46]

<snip>

I am DAVID. You are GOLIATH.

<snip>

No.

I am David.

You are ... funny.

Dave

[rwguinn]

No.

I am David.

You are ... funny.

Dave
"Ha Ha" or "Peculiar"?

[Galileo]

How is that supposed to work?

a) Why the need for this explosion if they are going to demolish the building in a controlled demolition 8 hours later? What did the first explosion accomplish?

b) Inversely, why the need for a controlled demolition if the explosion Jennings heard is the cause of the collapse?

Did you think this through?

You are a good man, Pardalis.

a) The initial explosion[s] (prep work) weakens the structure. Then the Engineers running the demolition monitor the situation. They have some way of checking the stresses in the structure after the weight loads are re-distributed. When the final demolition goes down, it is much easier to do.

Remember all the reports of explosions all over the place in the Twin Towers? This is prep work as well. But WTC 7 was evacuated, so we don't have as many witnesses in WTC 7. WTC 7 was also ignored by the media, and the more media attention an event is given, the more witnesses surface.

b) The explosion Jennings heard was not the FINAL cause of the collapse, but an INITIAL cause. The strongest part of the building was weakened first. Remember, WTC 7 was more of an implosion than the Twin Towers. There are no reports of huge steel beams flying 400 feet horizontally from WTC 7.

OK, let's take a POLL.

How many people here want me to debate your leader, Gravy???

Let's count the votes, everyone has 3 days to weigh in!

[Galileo]

He did it, declares victory and leaves. Waiting for the standard pdoh meltdown.

Barry heard a sound, he did not witness an explosioin. Please work on your thinking you have just lost again, in the debate of logical statements. NIST says what? Rember a big explosion would kill Barry and others, but debris from the WTC towers would not unles it hit them. Try not to get upset but you lost again.

Well, I know I'm doing good. I've never seen this forum move even an inch in response to 9/11 Truth.

But today, you've moved about a foot (except Beachnut), not bad.

After you guys move 10 yards, that is a first down, and I will be proud of you.

:D

[Pardalis]

a) The initial explosion[s] (prep work) weakens the structure. Then the Engineers running the demolition monitor the situation. They have some way of checking the stresses in the structure after the weight loads are re-distributed. When the final demolition goes down, it is much easier to do.

Pure BS.

Where do you get that "prep" shtick? Your ass?

How come this first explosion didn't set off the controlled demolition charges? Why didn't the building collapse then? Show me how you've come to this conclusion besides making it up?

b) The explosion Jennings heard was not the FINAL cause of the collapse, but an INITIAL cause.

Pure BS.

What's the difference between initial and final causes? What made WTC7 collapse? Show me all the causes.

[DGM]

Jennings goes on the say that the lobby looked like King Kong had gone through and stepped on it.

So your going to take the word of a man that says an over-sized ape destroyed the lobby? That is what he says. Are you prepared to call him a lier.

[Galileo]

He did it, declares victory and leaves. Waiting for the standard pdoh meltdown. (and the leaving part)

Barry heard a sound, he did not witness an explosion. Please work on your thinking you have just lost again, in the debate of logical statements. NIST says what? Remember a big explosion would kill Barry and others, but debris from the WTC towers would not unless it hit them. Try not to get upset but you lost again.

So now who has fled the forum?

Remember, someone put a bomb by Hitler's foot that blew up, and he didn't get killed.

[negativ]

How many people here want me to debate your leader, Gravy???Zero. Nobody can withstand the blistering, volcanic torrents of Truth you'd emit.

[Galileo]

Pure BS.

Where do you get that "prep" shtick? Your ass?

How come this first explosion didn't set off the controlled demolition charges? Why didn't the building collapse then? Show me how you've come to this conclusion besides making it up?



Pure BS.

What's the difference between initial and final causes? What made WTC7 collapse? Show me all the causes.

a) The first explosive that went off was placed in a strategic location.

b) If you are wondering about the difference between material, formal, efficient, and final causes, I suggest you brush up on your Aristotle. St. Anselm and Thomas Aquinas can be fruitful as well.

The Four Causes
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/4causes.htm

When will you answer my question....

Did Jennings invent the explosion, was he mixed up on his timeline, am I correct, or something else?

You're still a good man, Pardalis.

[Pardalis]

a) The first explosive that went off was placed in a strategic location.

How do you know?

b) If you are wondering about the difference between material, formal, efficient, and final causes, I suggest you brush up on your Aristotle. St. Anselm and Thomas Aquinas can be fruitful as well.
Give me structural engineering sources that make you assert what you've said. I don't care about your philosophical BS.

Did Jennings invent the explosion, was he mixed up on his timeline, am I correct, or something else?
Something else.

[chipmunk stew]

Still waiting for evidence supporting Jennings' timeline, Galilea.

[chipmunk stew]

UPDATE!

I just received an email from one of my fans, my fanclub is called 'Galileo's Minions'.

The email says;

"Galileo's middle finger!!

"Drudgewired"!!

You're kickin ass, dude.

I take full credit for getting you on that board.

Keep sticking it to Gravy.

He'll never debate you, though.

He's a lock artist.

Explanation: In a pool hall, a lock artist is a guy who's pretty good at pool, but only wants to make money. So he simply refuses to play anyone unless he knows for sure he'll win. He doesn't care about the spirit of competition or any of that. Lock artists are basically losers.

Gravy will only debate people he is sure to defeat, e.g. Fetzer, Avery, etc.

He won't go near you."

Is that true, JREFers, is Gravy really a lock artist??
Still waiting for confirmation of your challenge to Gravy, too...

[Viper Daimao]

Lot's of things sound like explosions that aren't bombs. People reported the bodies of those who jumped from the WTC1&2 hitting the ground sounded like explosions. There are many other plausible explanations for the sound heard, why do you dismiss them all out of hand?

[Oxigen]

Galileo, thought you might find this interesting. More explosions at wtc7!

trismccall.net/jersey_city_journal.html

[QUOTE]
November 24, 2003
I said I'd talk a little bit more about WTC7, and for better or for worse, I'm as good as my word. After this, it's back to rock and roll posts, but I'm also adjusting to the new World Trade Center station, and actively making it a central feature of my life here in Jersey City. And I can't do that without exorcising a few demons. So bear with me.
World Trade Center 7 was, like most downtown Manhattan buildings, quite literally in the shadow of the Twin Towers. That said, it was around fifty stories tall and was, by any estimation, a skyscraper. It didn't sit on the same megablock as the Towers (as far as I know, it was the only building in the World Trade Center complex that didn't); you had to cross Vesey Street to reach it. Another building -- World Trade Center 6 -- stood in between the North Tower and Building Seven. Building Six was nowhere near as large as Building Seven, but it wasn't any Quonset hut, either.
Like the Twin Towers, WTC7 was a steel-framed building. It was connected to the rest of the complex by a walkway that arched over the street -- cast your mind back to the way Vesey used to be, and I'm sure you'll remember what that looked like. From our vantage point atop the palisade, we could see the top stories of the trapezoidal structure peeking out between the skyscrapers of Battery Park City.
On September 11, 2001, we watched the skyline from the terrace at the hi-vue. We saw the ball of flame from the South Tower impact and the huge expanding cloud of black smoke from the burning upper stories of Buildings One and Two. With brief interruptions, starting at 8:45 AM, we were out on the terrace all day that day. I've noticed that certain news agencies have been slippery with the timeline, but I had both a wall clock (set to the TV) and the computer clock in the room we were standing in, so nobody's going to tell me my timeline is incorrect. The South Tower fell at 9:58 A.M.
The collapse further confused an already chaotic picture, but at no point was it unclear what was going on. The residue -- almost entirely white powder -- seemed surprisingly discrete, and it wasn't hard to follow its billowing contours. Readily acknowledging that I was almost entirely out of my head with horror at the time, I'm still unwilling to discount my empirical experience. Just before the fall of the North Tower, we saw a large explosion coming from the street-level area around World Trade Center 7. I remember thinking that it looked distinctly like a bomb had been detonated underneath the city, and, of course, that's exactly what I thought had occurred.
I went back into the living room to see if anything had been reported on the news about WTC7. Consequently, I missed the start of the fall of the North Tower, but that's not what I'm getting at here. At no point that morning did CNN or MSNBC have anything to say about the detonation I'd witnessed, and to this day, I still haven't heard any discussion of the undeniable event that took place either beneath or at Vesey Street during the half-hour interim between the collapse of the Towers.After the fall of the North Tower, I watched WTC7 from across the river. It didn't seem to be smoking, but then again, my vantage obscured its south side. At about a quarter after four, the news did in fact report that World Trade Center 7 was burning. I was relieved to hear somebody acknowledge that the building existed, and I expected to hear some kind of report about the explosion I saw.
None ever came. Instead, the fires at WTC7 were blamed on falling debris from the North Tower. This sounds logical until you actually start to think about it. In order for the (mostly) cold detritus of the North Tower to start a blaze in Building Seven, it would have to clear both Vesey Street and the very substantial WTC6 and break down the front wall. Well, okay, maybe that's not impossible. But if it had happened that way, you couldn't have predicted what came next.
At 5:20 P.M., WTC7 collapsed. I watched it happen from across the river, and no revisionism is going to screw with my recollection here -- the building came down straight and flat, as if supports beneath it had been cut. I'm no physics student, but you don't have to be one to realize that a burning building would never have fallen that way. Fires just don't burn symmetrically. South side fires, caused by contact with burning material from the North Tower, would have prompted a collapse across Vesey Street, in the direction of Ground Zero. Bear in mind, again, that this was a major skyscraper -- more than forty floors. For WTC7 to have pancaked as it did, it would have had to have been experiencing structural weakness at all sides.
The unnerving media silence about Building Seven was later broken by a tentative explanation that, again, makes no sense. According to FEMA, huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the basement may have caught fire, substantially weakening the steel. (This official story, by the way, is mostly guesswork -- there's no proof at all that the diesel fuel was in any way involved). Although they knew of the existence of the diesel fuel, firefighters opted against entering WTC7 and putting out the blaze. Strange, huh? Remember, the North Tower collapsed at 10:30. The city had seven hours to react to the fires that had, ostensibly, been caused by its fall. It's worth remembering that no steel-framed building has ever collapsed due to fire, diesel or otherwise.
I don't know what happened at WTC7, but everything I witnessed suggests strongly that the official line is dead wrong. No plane slammed into the skyscraper, and when it fell, it fell exactly as it would have if it had been demolished by contractors. The debris fell in a straight cone, directly onto the foundation of the building. Media silence about the collapse has been frightening in its totality; WTC7 is almost never discussed, and on the few occasions when it is, the FEMA line has been repeated more or less unquestioned. More bothersome to me is that the strange explosion I saw coming from Building Seven between the Tower collapses has never, to my knowledge, even been acknowledged by the city or the government.
I'm not the sort of person who kicks at the teeth of the official story; for the most part, that's a thankless task. But sometimes, the official story is so obviously incorrect that it absolutely needs to be challenged. That almost nobody has stood up to make that challenge continues to mystify me.

[stateofgrace]

I don't know what explosives were used in WTC 7.

This not what I asked you about, before you start any more victory celebrations you may wish to read the questions you were asked and actually answer them

These are the questions I asked you, you have failed twice to answer them, third time lucky maybe

Oh I see, so the thermite was used later? About the same time the worlds media, the FDNY and the NYPD were involved?

The squibs,were they caused by explosives or thermite btw?

Oh before I forget these explosions that took place long before WTC 7 collapsed, was the building fully occupied at the time?

Take your time, try to come up with some answer that makes you look all smart and clever. I know you can do this, after all you are undebunkable.

But since you have now mentioned explosives, the unknown type as you call them, are you now saying it was explosives that brought down WTC 7 and not thermite?

[Galileo]

Galileo, thought you might find this interesting. More explosions at wtc7!

trismccall.net/jersey_city_journal.html

[QUOTE]
November 24, 2003
I said I'd talk a little bit more about WTC7, and for better or for worse, I'm as good as my word. After this, it's back to rock and roll posts, but I'm also adjusting to the new World Trade Center station, and actively making it a central feature of my life here in Jersey City. And I can't do that without exorcising a few demons. So bear with me.
World Trade Center 7 was, like most downtown Manhattan buildings, quite literally in the shadow of the Twin Towers. That said, it was around fifty stories tall and was, by any estimation, a skyscraper. It didn't sit on the same megablock as the Towers (as far as I know, it was the only building in the World Trade Center complex that didn't); you had to cross Vesey Street to reach it. Another building -- World Trade Center 6 -- stood in between the North Tower and Building Seven. Building Six was nowhere near as large as Building Seven, but it wasn't any Quonset hut, either.
Like the Twin Towers, WTC7 was a steel-framed building. It was connected to the rest of the complex by a walkway that arched over the street -- cast your mind back to the way Vesey used to be, and I'm sure you'll remember what that looked like. From our vantage point atop the palisade, we could see the top stories of the trapezoidal structure peeking out between the skyscrapers of Battery Park City.
On September 11, 2001, we watched the skyline from the terrace at the hi-vue. We saw the ball of flame from the South Tower impact and the huge expanding cloud of black smoke from the burning upper stories of Buildings One and Two. With brief interruptions, starting at 8:45 AM, we were out on the terrace all day that day. I've noticed that certain news agencies have been slippery with the timeline, but I had both a wall clock (set to the TV) and the computer clock in the room we were standing in, so nobody's going to tell me my timeline is incorrect. The South Tower fell at 9:58 A.M.
The collapse further confused an already chaotic picture, but at no point was it unclear what was going on. The residue -- almost entirely white powder -- seemed surprisingly discrete, and it wasn't hard to follow its billowing contours. Readily acknowledging that I was almost entirely out of my head with horror at the time, I'm still unwilling to discount my empirical experience. Just before the fall of the North Tower, we saw a large explosion coming from the street-level area around World Trade Center 7. I remember thinking that it looked distinctly like a bomb had been detonated underneath the city, and, of course, that's exactly what I thought had occurred.
I went back into the living room to see if anything had been reported on the news about WTC7. Consequently, I missed the start of the fall of the North Tower, but that's not what I'm getting at here. At no point that morning did CNN or MSNBC have anything to say about the detonation I'd witnessed, and to this day, I still haven't heard any discussion of the undeniable event that took place either beneath or at Vesey Street during the half-hour interim between the collapse of the Towers.After the fall of the North Tower, I watched WTC7 from across the river. It didn't seem to be smoking, but then again, my vantage obscured its south side. At about a quarter after four, the news did in fact report that World Trade Center 7 was burning. I was relieved to hear somebody acknowledge that the building existed, and I expected to hear some kind of report about the explosion I saw.
None ever came. Instead, the fires at WTC7 were blamed on falling debris from the North Tower. This sounds logical until you actually start to think about it. In order for the (mostly) cold detritus of the North Tower to start a blaze in Building Seven, it would have to clear both Vesey Street and the very substantial WTC6 and break down the front wall. Well, okay, maybe that's not impossible. But if it had happened that way, you couldn't have predicted what came next.
At 5:20 P.M., WTC7 collapsed. I watched it happen from across the river, and no revisionism is going to screw with my recollection here -- the building came down straight and flat, as if supports beneath it had been cut. I'm no physics student, but you don't have to be one to realize that a burning building would never have fallen that way. Fires just don't burn symmetrically. South side fires, caused by contact with burning material from the North Tower, would have prompted a collapse across Vesey Street, in the direction of Ground Zero. Bear in mind, again, that this was a major skyscraper -- more than forty floors. For WTC7 to have pancaked as it did, it would have had to have been experiencing structural weakness at all sides.
The unnerving media silence about Building Seven was later broken by a tentative explanation that, again, makes no sense. According to FEMA, huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the basement may have caught fire, substantially weakening the steel. (This official story, by the way, is mostly guesswork -- there's no proof at all that the diesel fuel was in any way involved). Although they knew of the existence of the diesel fuel, firefighters opted against entering WTC7 and putting out the blaze. Strange, huh? Remember, the North Tower collapsed at 10:30. The city had seven hours to react to the fires that had, ostensibly, been caused by its fall. It's worth remembering that no steel-framed building has ever collapsed due to fire, diesel or otherwise.
I don't know what happened at WTC7, but everything I witnessed suggests strongly that the official line is dead wrong. No plane slammed into the skyscraper, and when it fell, it fell exactly as it would have if it had been demolished by contractors. The debris fell in a straight cone, directly onto the foundation of the building. Media silence about the collapse has been frightening in its totality; WTC7 is almost never discussed, and on the few occasions when it is, the FEMA line has been repeated more or less unquestioned. More bothersome to me is that the strange explosion I saw coming from Building Seven between the Tower collapses has never, to my knowledge, even been acknowledged by the city or the government.
I'm not the sort of person who kicks at the teeth of the official story; for the most part, that's a thankless task. But sometimes, the official story is so obviously incorrect that it absolutely needs to be challenged. That almost nobody has stood up to make that challenge continues to mystify me.

Interesting.

Sort of like Houdini.

The WTC 7 prep work was going on when we were looking the other way.

Thank you.

[Gravy]

Oxigen, the long quote you just posted is B.S. Please don't insult us with such garbage.

[Pardalis]

Please describe "prep" work, Galileo. What is that? What does it consist of? Where did you learn about it?

[Galileo]

This not what I asked you about, before you start any more victory celebrations you may wish to read the questions you were asked and actually answer them

These are the questions I asked you, you have failed twice to answer them, third time lucky maybe



Take your time, try to come up with some answer that makes you look all smart and clever. I know you can do this, after all you are undebunkable.

But since you have now mentioned explosives, the unknown type as you call them, are you now saying it was explosives that brought down WTC 7 and not thermite?


I don't know what explosives were used in WTC 7 anymore than I know what explosives were used in the Seattle Kingdome.

If an investigation were done, in compliance with the requests of the 9/11 Families, we might find out some day.

On the other hand, since "no steel was recovered from WTC 7", we may never know what explosives were used.

Source (page iii):

http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-3.pdf

[Oxigen]

Gravy:
How do you know it is a hoax?

[~enigma~]

On the other hand, since "no steel was recovered from WTC 7", we may never know what explosives were used.Did you forget your idiotic and wrong assumption that Steven Jones found traces of thermAte? Where did he find it? In mid air.....moron

[~enigma~]

If an investigation were done, in compliance with the requests of the 9/11 Families
I had a family member die on 9/11 so I am a 9/11 family. I am not asking for a new investigation to find out what explosives were used and i doubt you can show me a family member that is saying that, so why are you such a lying piece of trash?

[Galileo]

How do you know?

Give me structural engineering sources that make you assert what you've said. I don't care about your philosophical BS.

Something else.

a) because it went off in a critical location, and didn't start a chain reaction.

b) I do care about philosophy. It's not BS.

'prep work' is short for 'preparation work'.

I learned about prep work in a secret government program that I can't tell you about for national security reasons. It's sort of like mixing and sprinkling before you throw the pot roast into the oven.

What do these questions have to do with Barry Jennings testimony?

[Pardalis]

a) because it went off in a critical location, and didn't start a chain reaction.

translation: you made it up.

b) I do care about philosophy. It's not BS.

It has nothing to do with this.
'prep work' is short for 'preparation work'.


Yes, I figured as much.

I learned about prep work in a secret government program that I can't tell you about for national security reasons. It's sort of like mixing and sprinkling before you throw the pot roast into the oven.

translation: you don't have a clue of what you're talking about.

[stateofgrace]

I don't know what explosives were used in WTC 7 anymore than I know what explosives were used in the Seattle Kingdome.

Source (page iii):

http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-3.pdf

Let me clarify this for you sunbeam. Thermite burns, it is an incendiary device, it makes NO noise, it does not blow windows out of the side of buildings, it does not cause squibs. Explosive charges go boom, they make lots of noise and blow thing out.

Now this as been clarified, for the last time of asking will you answer my questions?


Oh I see, so the thermite was used later? About the same time the worlds media, the FDNY and the NYPD were involved?

The squibs,were they caused by explosives or thermite btw?

Oh before I forget these explosions that took place long before WTC 7 collapsed, was the building fully occupied at the time?
.

Was it thermite as you have claimed that brought down WTC 7 or explosives as you have claimed that brought down WTC 7?

If an investigation were done, in compliance with the requests of the 9/11 Families, we might find out some day.


Excuse me? the familes request ? The families believe WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition ?

On the other hand, since "no steel was recovered from WTC 7", we may never know what explosives were used.


Really ?


As shown in Figure D-4, the engineers searched through unsorted piles of steel for pieces from WTC 1 and WTC 2 impact areas and from WTC 5 and WTC 7. They also checked for pieces of steel exposed to fire. Specifically, the engineers looked for the following types of steel members:

Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were exposed to fire and/or impacted by the aircraft.
Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were above the impact zone.
Badly burnt pieces from WTC 7.
Connections from WTC 1, 2, and 7, such as seat connections, single shear plates, and column splices.
Bolts from WTC 1, 2, and 7 that were exposed to fire, fractured, and/or that appeared undamaged.
Floor trusses, including stiffeners, seats, and other components.
Any piece that, in the engineer's professional opinion, might be useful for evaluation. When there was any doubt about a particular piece, the piece was kept while more information was gathered. A conservative approach was taken to avoid having important pieces processed in salvage yard operations.Figure D-17 Seat connection in fire-damaged W14 column from WTC 7.

Pieces have been identified that are from WTC 1, 2, 5, and 7. Documentary photographs and videos have been taken and coupons collected.



http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/WTC_apndxD.htm

[Galileo]

Did you forget your idiotic and wrong assumption that Steven Jones found traces of thermAte? Where did he find it? In mid air.....moron

Steven Jones found the thermAte residue from dust collected at a 9/11 memorial, not from steel.

Am sorry to hear that you lost a family member on 9/11.

The Coalition for 9/11 families and the Familty Steering Committee both are asking for new 9/11 investigations.

[~enigma~]

Steven Jones found the thermAte residue from dust collected at a 9/11 memorial, not from steel.
He found ThermIte constituents which are common building materials. Barium was not found.
Am sorry to hear that you lost a family member on 9/11.Thank you
The Coalition for 9/11 families and the Familty Steering Committee both are asking for new 9/11 investigations.Because they want to know what explosives were used? I'm sorry but you are a damn liar.

[twinstead]

the residue that Jones found is not 'thermate residue', could run the gambit from suspicious thermate residue to things one could expect to find in the WTC dust, except he found no barium, which is an important element in thermate.

Jones is the one who declared his results 'thermate residue'. Most experts disagree, Greening being one that comes to mind.

IMO, anybody who seriously is interested in the truth of 911 would be well cautioned not to hitch his wagon to Steven Jones.

[Oxigen]

Enigma:
There are a lot of 9/11 families looking for a new investigation. Don't go looking for types of explosives - the warnings given by numerous agencies is enough. Why were they ignored. And I do offer my condolences if you were personally affected.

[chipmunk stew]

a) because it went off in a critical location, and didn't start a chain reaction.

What "went off"? You have not even corroborated Jennings' timeline with any evidence. Your argument that the explosion he experienced could only have been a bomb has rested entirely on his timeline.

[stateofgrace]

The Coalition for 9/11 families and the Familty Steering Committee both are asking for new 9/11 investigations.

http://www.coalitionof911families.org/

I cannot see it on their opening page, could you offer a link?

I see this

WTC United Family Group, through its programs and services, provides emotional support to individuals affected by the events of September 11, 2001, protects the legacy and memory of the victims of the attacks, ensures an authentic perpetuation of the historic events and promotes civic participation within our community and the general public.


and this


Founded in September 2001, the World Trade Center United Family Group, also known as the September 11th Education Trust, is a nonprofit organization comprised of September 11th families, survivors, rescue workers, and others impacted by the tragedy from throughout the United States. Our organization, built on the principles of trust and shared experience, will meet the ongoing and evolving needs of the community. Together, we will perpetuate the memory of the victims who were murdered on September 11, 2001, and harness the memory of that day and its aftermath to educate and inspire current and future generations. Our organization will serve as a living tribute to the thousands of innocent men, women and children murdered on that historic day


Where do they say WTC 7 was demolished? Where do they say Al Qaeda did not carry out this attack?

I'm sorry but what exactly do the coalition of the 911 families what reinvestigating?

[~enigma~]

Enigma:
There are a lot of 9/11 families looking for a new investigation. Don't go looking for types of explosives - the warnings given by numerous agencies is enough. Why were they ignored. And I do offer my condolences if you were personally affected.I understand some families want a new investigation and I have no problem with their wanting one, I just see no need for one. When Galilmoron claims they want one to find out what explosives were used he is a liar.

[Galileo]

http://www.coalitionof911families.org/

I cannot see it on their opening page, could you offer a link?

I see this



and this


Where do they say WTC 7 was demolished? Where do they say Al Qaeda did not carry out this attack?

I'm sorry but what exactly do the coalition of the 911 families what reinvestigating?


Representative Of Largest 9/11 Families Group Says Government Complicit In Attack
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/080706governmentcomplicit.htm

Unanswered Questions - Family Steering Committee
http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

Bill Doyle, Bob McIlvaine, Dr. Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Architect Richard Gage File Petition with NIST
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/04/911-family-members-file-petition-with.html

[Galileo]

What "went off"? You have not even corroborated Jennings' timeline with any evidence. Your argument that the explosion he experienced could only have been a bomb has rested entirely on his timeline.

YOU said back on page 2 that it was from debris damage from WTC 1.

It's not.

It's not jet fuel falling down the elevator shafts either.

Barry Jennings said an explosion blew the floor out from under him. Explosions are caused by explosives.

And this happened just a couple hours after someone truned off the WTC 7 fire alarms.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

If you think Barry Jennings is a liar, just say it.

[Oxigen]

Enigma:
Thank you for responding in a civilised manner. I think the debunkers maybe don't realise that a lot of people who question what happened on 9/11 do so because of the awful way in which people lost their lives that day and wonder how it may have been prevented.

[Galileo]

What "went off"? You have not even corroborated Jennings' timeline with any evidence. Your argument that the explosion he experienced could only have been a bomb has rested entirely on his timeline.

That's dead wrong, as I also proved [on page 6] that neither stairwell in WTC 7 was in the area of debris damage.

So Barry's timeline doesn't even matter.

But Barry's timeline says it's before either tower fell, because he said he went back up to the 8th floor after the explosion and saw both towers standing when he looked out the window.

And the explosion JUST HAPPENED to occur in almost the exact location where NIST says WTC 7 suffered a critical failure later at 5:20 p.m.

It seems like we've gone over this before?

[Galileo]

translation: you made it up.



It has nothing to do with this.


Yes, I figured as much.



translation: you don't have a clue of what you're talking about.

The explosion heard and felt by Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor. This was a strategic location for a bomb, because NIST has determined that a structural failure here can take the whole building down.

[Redtail]

Barry Jennings said an explosion blew the floor out from under him. Explosions are caused by explosives.

Are all explosions CD charges?

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Even if it's a drake?

[WildCat]

The explosion heard and felt by Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor. This was a strategic location for a bomb, because NIST has determined that a structural failure here can take the whole building down.
And exactly how long after this "bomb" which was "strategically located" went off did WTC 7 collapse?

[T.A.M.]

The Representitive of the Families you mention above, is not speaking on behalf of the families when he makes that statement. The man believes all the Woo, and is speaking his own opinion. I challenge you to find one quote from him where he says, "I have spoken with the families, and the majority of them support my position on this matter."

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

error...corrected


TAM:)

[chipmunk stew]

That's dead wrong, as I also proved [on page 6] that neither stairwell in WTC 7 was in the area of debris damage.

So Barry's timeline doesn't even matter.

But Barry's timeline says it's before either tower fell, because he said he went back up to the 8th floor after the explosion and saw both towers standing when he looked out the window.
Please post Barry's quote on this verbatim and in context.

And the explosion JUST HAPPENED to occur in almost the exact location where NIST says WTC 7 suffered a critical failure later at 5:20 p.m.

It seems like we've gone over this before?
Of course Jennings' timeline matters. If the explosion he experienced coincided with a known explosive event, then we can postulate that the event may have some relation to the explosion. If it did not, then we are forced to seek a different hypothesis. Unfortunately for the veracity of his account, there is no evidence to support his claim that there was an explosion in WTC7 before the towers collapsed.

Based on the lack of corroborating evidence, I believe Jennings is wrong and that his experience was the result of a known event.

[Galileo]

And exactly how long after this "bomb" which was "strategically located" went off did WTC 7 collapse?

Holy cats, I see we have some new blood, welcome WildCat.

I don't believe you are from the NWO.

[PS - did you know that George Herbert Walker Bush's famous NWO speech just happened to occur on September 11, 1991?]

Barry Jennings heard and felt an explosion when in the 6th floor stairwell about 8 hours before WTC 7 came down.

According to NIST diagrams, the stairwell was not in a location affected by WTC 1 or 2 debris. [the stairwell was in the north half WTC 7, but the debris hit the south face]

Since the alarm system had been turned off at 6:47 a.m., we don't know the exact time of the explosion, but Jennings said he went back up to the 8th floor and looked out the window and saw the twin Towers still standing.

This explosion occurred about the time Rudy Giuliani was heading towards the WTC. Giuliani didn't go to his command center on the 23rd floor of WTC 7 because it was too dangerous, which seems logical if a bomb had just gone off.

Jennings later saw the firemen run from the WTC 2 collapse, and then from the WTC 1 collapse, then was rescued and did TV interviews on the street.

He was with Mike Hess, the NYC Corporation Counsel the whole time.

The explosion described by Jennings was in a location that NIST has determined to be a critical area of WTC 7. According to NIST, a failure in this area could bring down WTC 7.

The explosion heard and felt by Jennings did not take down WTC 7, but based on all the destruction described by Jennings, certainly weakened it.

NIST misrepresented Jennings testimony in their report, and this must be corrected.

According to the most recent NIST press release, their draft report will be ready for public comment by the end of the year.

If NIST has not fixed their error by that time, members of the public can file requests for correction at that time.

[T.A.M.]

Gal:

Does this sound like a group who believes the Woo?


When the Commission concluded its investigation, it issued a report containing 41 recommendations for improving our nation's security. The report did not answer all of our questions, but its in-depth analysis of intelligence, foreign policy, security and other failures and subsequent recommendations for improvement were reforms we could endorse. The FSC then focused our efforts on ensuring that those recommendations would be implemented. Congress responded by holding hearings and drafting legislation. After a rigorous battle, a bill incorporating many of the 9/11 Commission recommendations passed both Houses of Congress and was signed into law on December 17, 2004.

http://www.911independentcommission.org/011105fscfinal.html

Note the date of this statement is after the last update of the "unanswered questions".

TAM:)

[Galileo]

Please post Barry's quote on this verbatim and in context.


Of course Jennings' timeline matters. If the explosion he experienced coincided with a known explosive event, then we can postulate that the event may have some relation to the explosion. If it did not, then we are forced to seek a different hypothesis. Unfortunately for the veracity of his account, there is no evidence to support his claim that there was an explosion in WTC7 before the towers collapsed.

Based on the lack of corroborating evidence, I believe Jennings is wrong and that his experience was the result of a known event.

It might have coincided with the impact of FL175 into the South Tower.

If so, fewer people would have been likely to notice the WTC 7 explosion.

The explosion was far inside the building, away from all the windows.

[Galileo]

Gal:

Does this sound like a group who believes the Woo?



http://www.911independentcommission.org/011105fscfinal.html

Note the date of this statement is after the last update of the "unanswered questions".

TAM:)

Great!

Can you get me the list of all the answers of the unanswered questions?

The 9/11 Commission had only touched upon 30% of the questions.

[stateofgrace]

Representative Of Largest 9/11 Families Group Says Government Complicit In Attack
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/080706governmentcomplicit.htm

Unanswered Questions - Family Steering Committee
http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

Bill Doyle, Bob McIlvaine, Dr. Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Architect Richard Gage File Petition with NIST
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/04/911-family-members-file-petition-with.html

Thank you for the links, very interesting. Here is the FINAL Statement of the Family Steering Committee

Dated: January 11, 2005.


The signing of legislation implementing many of the 9/11 Commission recommendations represents a milestone for The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (FSC). The passage of this legislation is the culmination of the efforts of the FSC and the other family members who worked with us; the 9/11 Commission; the members of Congress who sponsored the bill; their staffs; the press whose coverage provided a conduit to the American people; and each and every person who wrote, called and faxed our elected officials on these issues.
Our 12 member group officially became The Family Steering Committee in 2002, when the 9/11 Commission was created after our yearlong campaign for its formation. Our ultimate goal was to identify and subsequently correct those circumstances that contributed to the failure of our government to protect us and our loved ones.
The FSC monitored the Commission’s work to the best of our ability, making every effort to ensure that it fulfilled its mandate. At times we found it necessary to demand that they revise their procedures to better achieve an in-depth, substantive, and independent inquiry. We also worked with the Commission to obtain additional funding, access to witnesses and documents, and an extension to enable the Commission to complete its mandate.
When the Commission concluded its investigation, it issued a report containing 41 recommendations for improving our nation's security. The report did not answer all of our questions, but its in-depth analysis of intelligence, foreign policy, security and other failures and subsequent recommendations for improvement were reforms we could endorse. The FSC then focused our efforts on ensuring that those recommendations would be implemented. Congress responded by holding hearings and drafting legislation. After a rigorous battle, a bill incorporating many of the 9/11 Commission recommendations passed both Houses of Congress and was signed into law on December 17, 2004.
After three years of work toward making America more secure, the FSC is transitioning in order to address issues such as the release of the still embargoed 9/11 CIA and FAA reports; terrorist financing; immigration reform; the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission; and other issues that continue to emerge. Although the FSC as a group will no longer exist, many of us will continue to work individually and through other 9/11 related groups for these causes.
In closing, our heartfelt thanks go out to the countless Americans who supported us and whose words of encouragement and recent expressions of gratitude made our difficult journey worthwhile.


It seems to me they endorsed the commissions recomendations and then disbanded. Although not totally happy they don't mention in thier final statement anything about WTC 7 being blown up or the towers but I guess you knew this already.

ETA , sorry TAM beat me to it.

[chipmunk stew]

Barry Jennings said an explosion blew the floor out from under him. Explosions are caused by explosives.
Explosions are also caused by high-velocity impacts, overpressure (or more generally, overstress) failures, and chemical explosions of materials not normally classified as "explosives". Which one did Jennings experience, and what is your evidence for it?

[T.A.M.]

Great!

Can you get me the list of all the answers of the unanswered questions?

The 9/11 Commission had only touched upon 30% of the questions.

You want answers for the questions, or answers from those who were asked. Almost all of the questions they have asked can be answered through the official account of 9/11.

TAM:)

Edit: Going through the top 20 or so questions, I agree they should be answered, as they are asking details only a few could answer, but how are they, in any way, related to the Woo that is MIHOP?

TAM:)

[beachnut]

Enigma:
Thank you for responding in a civilised manner. I think the debunkers maybe don't realise that a lot of people who question what happened on 9/11 do so because of the awful way in which people lost their lives that day and wonder how it may have been prevented.
It seems flight 93 passengers figured out how to prevent planes from hitting buildings. Why did you fail to do something to prevent 9/11?

You posted the biggest piece of garbage I have seen today on 9/11. Why are you only able to question what happen, why can't truthers answer some of their own questions? Are you unable to be an individual and research something solved over 5 years ago? It is appalling how poor the research capabilities are from those in the 9/11 truth movement and how easy it is to mislead people like you.

[Galileo]

Please post Barry's quote on this verbatim and in context.


Of course Jennings' timeline matters. If the explosion he experienced coincided with a known explosive event, then we can postulate that the event may have some relation to the explosion. If it did not, then we are forced to seek a different hypothesis. Unfortunately for the veracity of his account, there is no evidence to support his claim that there was an explosion in WTC7 before the towers collapsed.

Based on the lack of corroborating evidence, I believe Jennings is wrong and that his experience was the result of a known event.

Chipmunk Stew said; "Please post Barry's quote on this verbatim and in context."

WTC 7 Eyewitness Testimony Transcribed by Rolf Lindgren (edited for clarity with notes)
Sources: http://www.prisonplanet.com/audio/190607clips2.mp3
http://69.80.230.7/Archives2/Jun2007/gwrpt1erT/0619071.mp3
http://69.80.230.7/Archives2/Jun2007/gwrpt1erT/0619072.mp3

[Start of transcript]

“I was asked to go and man the Office of Emergency Management [OEM] at the World Trade Center 7, on the 23rd floor.

[This was immediately after the North Tower was struck. OEM is also know as Rudy’s Bunker.]

As I arrived there, there were police all over the lobby.

They showed me the way to the elevator; we got up to the 23rd floor.

We couldn’t get in; we had to go back down. [The witness was with another person.]

Then security and police took us to the freight elevators where they took us back up and we did get in.

Upon arriving into the OEMEOC [OEM Emergency Operating Center], we noticed that everybody was gone.

[The witness’s voice inflection indicates elevated surprise. It seems he has arrived before the official evacuation time of 9:30 AM]

I saw coffee that was on the desks still, the smoke was still coming off the coffee.

I saw half-eaten sandwiches.

And after I called several individuals, one individual told me to leave and to leave right away.

[Could indicate foreknowledge]

I came running back in.

He said we’re the only ones up here.

We gotta get out of here. He found the stairwell.

So we subsequently went to the stairwell and we’re going down the stairs.

When we reached the 6th floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way, there was an explosion and the landing gave way.

[The witness’s timeline places this event well before the collapse of either Twin Tower.]

I was left there hanging.

I had to climb back up, and now I had to walk back up to the 8th floor.

After getting to the 8th floor everything was dark.”

[However, according to FEMA maps, none of the South Tower debris, excepting dust clouds, reached Building 7. (Source: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch1.pdf, esp. p. 9). The North Tower did not collapse until 10:28 A.M., far too late to fit into the witness’ timeline.]

“As I told you earlier, both buildings were still standing. Because I looked to, I looked one way, looked the other way, there’s nothing there.

When I got to the 6th floor before all this happened, I got to the 6th floor, there was an explosion, that’s what forced us back to the 8th floor, both buildings were still standing.”

[The above two paragraphs were obtained from another source not listed above. For this source, please contact the Scholars.]

{note - this is the source:

Barry Jennings
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NttM3oUrNmE}

….

“Well, I’m just confused about one thing and one thing only, why World Trade Center 7 went down in the first place? I’m very confused about that.

I know what I heard; I heard explosions.

The explanation I got was it was the fuel oil tank. I’m an old boiler guy. If it was the fuel oil tank, it would have been one side of the building.

When I got to that lobby, the lobby was totally destroyed.

It looked like King Kong had came through and stepped on it.

And it was so destroyed I didn’t know where I was.

And it was so destroyed that they had to take me out through a hole in the wall.

A makeshift hole that I believe that the fire department made to get me out.”

[The damage to the lobby may have been related to the earlier explosion or possibly be related to the destruction of the North Tower, a point that will be resolved when the entire tape is released.]

….

“And it wasn’t until some years later that I testified in front of them [9/11 Commission or NIST].

It was very scary because they looked like very important people; they were questioning me about certain things.

I don’t know if they liked the answers I gave, I could care less, I gave what, my account of it, the truth, and that was that.

I thought they were just doing an interim report or investigation on as to what happened. They got my point of view.

I haven’t heard any more from them.”

[End of transcript]

http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=113&Itemid=67

[Pardalis]

The explosion heard and felt by Jennings was in the stairwell on the 6th floor. This was a strategic location for a bomb, because NIST has determined that a structural failure here can take the whole building down.

Here lies your whole logical problem. If that's true, then there's no need for a controlled demolition.

You're trying to consolidate the existing evidence for a natural collapse with your personal theory that a bomb went off 8 hours too early, because some guy heard a noise; just like Lyte Trip is trying to consolidate the fact that everybody saw a plane heading towards the pentagon with his own personal pet theory that it flew over, also loosely based on some eyewitnesses discrepancies, just like others are trying to consolidate their CD theory with the fact that the towers fell top-down. It doesn't work. You can't have it both ways. Either WTC7 collapse because of structural failure or it was brought down by controlled demolitions.

[LashL]

<snip>And the explosion JUST HAPPENED to occur in almost the exact location where NIST says WTC 7 suffered a critical failure later at 5:20 p.m.


Where is this "almost the exact location" of which you speak? From what I have read, there is no indication of which stairwell Mr. Jennings was in.

Without knowing where he was located, how can you claim that he was in "almost the exact location" of, well, anything?

The stairwells, by the way, were nearly on the centre-line of the core (as it relates to north and south), so it is disingenuous of you to claim that they were in the north side as you have in some of your posts.

[Galileo]

Explosions are also caused by high-velocity impacts, overpressure (or more generally, overstress) failures, and chemical explosions of materials not normally classified as "explosives". Which one did Jennings experience, and what is your evidence for it?

dude, NIST has a diagram showing where the debris damage to WTC 7 was or might have been.

Neither stairwell was in, or anywhere near an area impacted by possible debris.

Core columns # 74 and # 75 blocked the path to the east stairwell, had any debris decided to head in that direction.

Compare page L-6 with page L-22:

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

The explosion wasn't from jet fuel falling down the elevator shafts.

It wasn't because the fireproofing got dislodged.

It wasn't from computers blowing up in a fire.

Maybe WTC 7 was just having a bad day, and decided to commit suicide, I don't know.

We've been over this 5 times already.

[T.A.M.]

Lets look at them:


President George W. Bush
updated May 13, 2004

As Commander-in-Chief on the morning of 9/11, why didn’t you return immediately to Washington, D.C. or the National Military Command Center once you became aware that America was under attack? At specifically what time did you become aware that America was under attack? Who informed you of this fact?

Only Dubya can answer this...is this related to LIHOP or MIHOP in any way?


Vice President Richard Cheney

Please discuss the advice and plans of the Energy Advisory Council specifically as they relate to pipeline development and gas/oil exploration in Afghanistan, Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries, and the feasibility of such development or exploration specifically in those two countries in 2001.
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/2002/Bates/02-340.pdf


There are lots of official articles on the alleged pipeline, and how it never came to be. Apart from that the question seems to have to do with the feasability of such a thing in 2001. Given it never came to be, how is it relavent to an "inside job"?


Condoleezza Rice
posted April 6, 2004

Regarding the meeting of Abdullah Abdullah (close aide to Massoud and now the Afghan Foreign Minister) in July , 2001, with “some top National Security Council (NSC) and State Department officials,” what information about al Qaeda did he convey?

I believe there was an article detailing what went on in that meeting, however, Perhaps Condi could clarify it for you...what do you think she'll say?

"He was here so we could congratulate him for funding the 9/11 attacks."


Central Intelligence Agency

George Tenet, Director of the CIA

Why didn't the CIA share vital information about the terrorists with the FBI

This was covered by the commission.


Federal Bureau of Investigation

Robert Mueller, FBI Director, September 4, 2001-present

Which hijackers have been positively identified by DNA? Is the FBI in possession of DNA samples for all of the hijackers?


This has been addressed since the question was asked, though details of which ones ID'ed by DNA have not been released, the number that have from the WTC sites was made available. I am sure they have DNA for most of the hijackers, but getting comparitive samples is the difficult thing.


Questions for Director Mueller Regarding the Hijackers

Please explain how the passports of Mohammed Atta and Satam al-Sugam, both on Flight 11, survived the inferno to be found on the street near the World Trade Center.

ummm...chance, just like the papers that survived, and the debris, and some of the luggage.


•Who found the passports and what time where they found?
•Please describe the condition of each passport.
•Please explain how the passports of two hijackers survived the explosion and inferno.
The first two questions could be answered, the last one is a repeat of the initial question.


Thomas Pickard and Louis Freeh
posted April 3, 2004

From the questions for Thomas Pickard:

Please explain why the July 10, 2001, Phoenix memo got no farther than FBI headquarters. Why wasn’t the Phoenix memo shared with “threat subgroup” of the interagency Counterterrorism Security Group?

Sure, he could answer this...how is it related to MIHOP?


From the questions for Louis Freeh:

Why weren’t the flight schools shut down, or the terrorists deported, if the “FBI Knew Terrorists Were Using Flight Schools” for years, as reported in the Washington Post, September 23, 2001.


Because the Post was probably wrong, or had no proof, just allegations. Even if the allegations were true, wouldnt it be easier to kick out the alleged terrorists, and prevent them from entering the schools, rather than close down the schools for letting them in?


Richard Clarke
posted April 6, 2004

" On July 5th, Clarke summoned all the domestic security agencies —the Federal Aviation Administration, the Coast Guard, Customs, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the F.B.I.—and told them to increase their security in light of an impending attack."

Were plans made to implement immediate counter-measures to deflect an attack?
If so, what were they? If not, why not?

While I am sure he has addressed this issue, what was he suppose to do about a vague attack with no time, means, or location given? Shut down all ports, airports, and man the borders until the threat had passed?


The Clinton Administration

Bill Clinton, former President of the United States

Why wasn’t bin Laden brought to the United States for trial when the Sudan offered to extradite him?

Yes that is a good question.

I am sure we could go into all the questions, but I am fatigue of it now...anyone else wanna tackle these in more detail, or tackle a few of the others on their list...

http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

TAM:)

[e^n]

When we reached the 6th floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way, there was an explosion and the landing gave way.

[The witness’s timeline places this event well before the collapse of either Twin Tower.]
Actually no, I've been through this with NK-44 at LC. Barry Jennings timeline indicates he arrived in WTC7 quite late, the evacuation of the OEM took place between 9:30 and 9:44am, the south tower collapsed at 9:59am. In order to claim that the event was well before the collapse of either tower we need to establish that Jennings had enough time to reach the OEM, descend, contact security, get into the OEM, make a few phone calls and then descend to the 6th floor. Fitting this into 29 minutes is possible, but there are also issues of him reporting 'bodies in the lobby' which may have been part of the triage centre set up there. Depending on when exactly he claims to have seen these bodies this would put his descent time very very close to WTC2s collapse.

When I got to that lobby, the lobby was totally destroyed.

It looked like King Kong had came through and stepped on it.

And it was so destroyed I didn’t know where I was.

And it was so destroyed that they had to take me out through a hole in the wall.

A makeshift hole that I believe that the fire department made to get me out.”

[The damage to the lobby may have been related to the earlier explosion or possibly be related to the destruction of the North Tower, a point that will be resolved when the entire tape is released.]
Indeed it's important to point out that Jennings was rescued from WTC7 after the collapse of both towers and people have mistaken his quotes for other time periods.

[Galileo]

Where is this "almost the exact location" of which you speak? From what I have read, there is no indication of which stairwell Mr. Jennings was in.

Without knowing where he was located, how can you claim that he was in "almost the exact location" of, well, anything?

The stairwells, by the way, were nearly on the centre-line of the core (as it relates to north and south), so it is disingenuous of you to claim that they were in the north side as you have in some of your posts.

Hey, someone makes a good point.

That's right, we don't know for sure which stairwell Jennings was in.

But Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, Barry Jennings, and Mike Hess do.

The east stairwell was closer to the lobby emphasized by Jennings. It was also closer to the area of debris damage than the west stairwell.

We know that Jennings was trying to get back to the lobby when he left the command center.

So if it turns out, after Dylan releases the entire interview, that he was in the west stairwell, then that explosion will not be in the area where NIST says structural failure began.

The stairwells were both right near to the north edge of the core, in the north half of the building, to use precise language.

[chipmunk stew]

dude, NIST has a diagram showing where the debris damage to WTC 7 was or might have been.
Yes, and they label it as an estimate or approximation. We know it to be inaccurate in that it does not cover the huge gouge seen in images that surfaced later.

Neither stairwell was in, or anywhere near an area impacted by possible debris.
You may be right, I don't know. But the impacts appear to have caused cascading damage in at least one area of the building, the aforementioned gouge, so it's not unreasonable to entertain the possibility that such cascading damage occurred elsewhere.

Core columns # 74 and # 75 blocked the path to the east stairwell, had any debris decided to head in that direction.
This is an unfounded assertion. The stairwell lies just to the east of these two columns:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_512246ae8a27306e2.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7365) (click to enlarge)

Compare page L-6 with page L-22:

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_512246ae8b4c6b09a.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7366) (click to enlarge)

We know this estimate to be based on incomplete data. That's why they used the word "possible", not "likely" or "probable".

[beachnut]

That's right, we don't know for sure which stairwell Jennings was in.

But Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, Barry Jennings, and Mike Hess do.
So you think the Author and LC lackey know something to support their fictional LC videos? You believe LC videos are real, even after Dylan tells you it was fictional, he made it up?

You got some funny stuff here. If this is proof of something the FBI would have taken it already and acted. But since this stuff is woo made up over 5 years after 9/11, you are working with data from frauds who are out to make money off of people like you.

[LashL]

Hey, someone makes a good point.

That's right, we don't know for sure which stairwell Jennings was in.

But Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, Barry Jennings, and Mike Hess do.


You don't know, actually, whether the loose change boys or Alex Jones even asked Barry which staircase it was, and knowing how poor their research skills are, and how poor their interview skills are, it would not surprise me in the least if they didn't even ask.

In any event, the only people who may know for sure are Jennings, Hess, the third gentleman who was with them, and the firefighters who rescued the trio.

The east stairwell was closer to the lobby emphasized by Jennings.

I do not think that this is entirely accurate. Can you please explain what you mean when you say that the east stairwell was closer to the lobby?

We know that Jennings was trying to get back to the lobby when he left the command center.

Yes, of course Mr. Jennings was trying to get back down to the bottom floor, but that really has no bearing on which stairwell he found himself in. If I recall his accounts correctly, he said that someone else (Mr. Hess?) found a stairwell, which suggests that he (or they) didn't know for certain where the stairs were located. It does not sound like any kind of a conscious decision being made as to which set of stairs, among two options, to take.

So if it turns out, after Dylan releases the entire interview, that he was in the west stairwell, then that explosion will not be in the area where NIST says structural failure began.

And even it turns out that he was in the east stairwell, it will still not indicate that he was in "almost the exact location" where NIST says structural failure began.

The stairwells were both right near to the north edge of the core, in the north half of the building, to use precise language.

And, to use even more precise language, the stairwells were located very close to dead centre of the building (when referring to the north/south). The core was oriented more to the south than the north, but the stairwells were nearly dead centre viz north and south of the building. I misspoke when I previously said that they were in the centre of the core. I meant to say in the centre of the building.

So, while they were in the northern half of the core, they were nearly dead centre of the building on the north/south orientation.

[Gravy]

Article dated September 11, 2001:

After the initial blast, Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings, 46, reported to a command center on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center. He was with Michael Hess, the city's corporation counsel, when they felt and heard another explosion. First calling for help, they scrambled downstairs to the lobby, or what was left of it. "I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked like hell," Jennings said.

http://www.record-eagle.com/2001/sep/11scene.htm
WTC 7's lobby was damaged after the south tower collapsed. That's also when its fire alarm went off. Of course much more damage was done when the north tower collapsed.

Just moments before the south tower collapsed and, you know, when it happened we didn't know it was the south tower. We thought it was the north tower. There was a reporter of some sort, female with blond hair and her cameraman, an oriental fellow. They were setting up outside 7 World Trade Center, just east of the pedestrian bridge. I told them it would probably be better off to be set up under the bridge. At least it was protected. I was just about to enter a dialogue with her when I heard a sound I never heard before. I looked up and saw this huge cloud. I told him run. I grabbed the female, I threw her through the revolving doors of number 7.

We were proceeding inside. She fell to the ground. I helped her out, I pushed her towards the direction of where we were all in the south corner and there was a little doorway behind that desk which led into the loading bays. Everybody started to run through that. Never made it to that door. The next thing that I remember was that I was covered in some glass and some debris. Everything came crashing through the front of number 7. It was totally pitch black.

Q. Were you injured?

A. Yes, I saw some stuff had fallen on me. I didn't believe that I was injured at that time. I discovered later on I was injured. I had some shards of glass impaled in my head, but once I was able to get all this debris and rubble off of me and cover my face with my jacket so that I could breathe, it was very thick dust, you couldn't see. We heard some sounds. We reached out and felt our way around. I managed to find some other people in this lower lobby. We crawled over towards the direction where we thought the door was and as we approached it the door cracked open a little, so we had the lights from the loading bay. We made our way over there. The loading bay doors were 3-fourths of the way shut when this happened, so they took a lot of dust in there, but everyone in those bays was safe and secure. We had face to face contact with Chief Maggio and Captain Nahmod. They told me – I said do whatever you need to do, get these people out of here. Go, go towards the water. –EMS Division Chief Jon Peruggia

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110160.PDF
The lobby of building 7 was used as a triage area until the south tower collapsed. After the ST collapse:

The decision was either to go left or right and we ended up going right, between the two buildings, in the alleyway on the north, which turned out to be the right direction because apparently there was a lot of debris and part of 7 down already. Also, I did notice as I was making my exit the sound of the firefighters' alarms indicating that they were down. I did remember that as well but just could not see anything. –Dr. Glenn Asaeda

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/sept11_fdny_transcripts/9110062.PDF

[Gravy]

dude, NIST has a diagram showing where the debris damage to WTC 7 was or might have been.

Neither stairwell was in, or anywhere near an area impacted by possible debris.

"Dude," you're referring to a progress report issued three years ago, when NIST's investigation into WTC 7 was just beginning.

NIST updated its WTC 7 south face damage estimates in October, 2006. You'll read about that in their final report. Please don't make definitive statements based on very incomplete information.

[Mince]

The government? Who said anything about the government doing it? Galileo has not been arguing that the government destroyed the building(s)-- at least not on this thread. He is only contending that WTC-7 was brought down by controlled demolition, not by fire and structural damage as per the official story...?


No, he didn't exactly say it was the government. You're right, maybe he thinks it was Alvin, Simon and Theodore. I don't know. Galileo, who do you think purposefully caused the WTC buildings to collapse?



What's your point here? Are you really saying that if the buildings were brought down by CD, but we can't figure out who exactly did it, that we should simply shrug our shoulders...?

No, I simply asking what you plan to do about it, since your extensive research hasn't turned up even one indictable name. That's all.


My overall point, obviously missed, is that if Galileo puts so much faith in Jowenko's analysis of WTC7, he must put as much faith in Jowenko's analysis of WTC 1 and 2. Jowenko, according to the appropriate videos, thinks WTC7 was a controlled demolition but that WTC 1 and 2 were not a controlled demolition. Thus the conundrum. If Jowenko cannot be mistaken, then why did (whoever) purposefully destroy WTC7 but not WTC 1 and 2? I thought I was very clear on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI

[Viper Daimao]

slight side question here mince or anyone else who can answer it. Jowenko was shown a very misleading video of wtc7 falling, not showing any of the damage or told what it was. I assume he has since been appraised of what the situation actually was, is he still claiming wtc7 was a controlled demo despite contrary evidence?

[Gravy]

slight side question here mince or anyone else who can answer it. Jowenko was shown a very misleading video of wtc7 falling, not showing any of the damage or told what it was. I assume he has since been appraised of what the situation actually was, is he still claiming wtc7 was a controlled demo despite contrary evidence?Yes. Pomeroo and others have called him. Very nice guy, apparently, thinks sensitive government material stored in WTC 7 makes the whole thing suspicious. Wow: he should see the government material in the Federal Office Building down the street, not to mention in...Washington, D.C.! I guess we can expect those buildings to be blown up whenever their shredders break. :rolleyes:

He doesn't think the towers were CD's. Do NOT tell him about all the sensitive material that was stored in those buildings!

[Gravy]

Thus the conundrum. If Jowenko cannot be mistaken, then why did (whoever) purposefully destroy WTC7 but not WTC 1 and 2? I thought I was very clear on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI

'Cuz they ranned outta airliners, silly.

[Galileo]

"Dude," you're referring to a progress report issued three years ago, when NIST's investigation into WTC 7 was just beginning.

NIST updated its WTC 7 south face damage estimates in October, 2006. You'll read about that in their final report. Please don't make definitive statements based on very incomplete information.

""Dude""

Barry Jennings saw the Twin Towers standing AFTER he heard and felt the explosion.

Your damage speculations are irrelevant.

No, we don't need to wait until the final damage estimates come out.

[Drudgewire]

""Dude""

Barry Jennings saw the Twin Towers standing AFTER he heard and felt the explosion.

Your damage speculations are irrelevant.

No, we don't need to wait until the final damage estimates come out.
Because one eyewitness trumps all the other witnesses and physical evidence as long as it supports your wacky theory.

Durrr.

Please stick to verified scientific facts.
http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/lolsmilie.gif

[Galileo]

Yes, and they label it as an estimate or approximation. We know it to be inaccurate in that it does not cover the huge gouge seen in images that surfaced later.


You may be right, I don't know. But the impacts appear to have caused cascading damage in at least one area of the building, the aforementioned gouge, so it's not unreasonable to entertain the possibility that such cascading damage occurred elsewhere.


This is an unfounded assertion. The stairwell lies just to the east of these two columns:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_512246ae8a27306e2.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7365) (click to enlarge)


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_512246ae8b4c6b09a.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7366) (click to enlarge)

We know this estimate to be based on incomplete data. That's why they used the word "possible", not "likely" or "probable".

"Possible" damage means NIST is speculating.

They don't know.

Please stick to verified scientific facts.

[Galileo]

Because one eyewitness trumps all the other witnesses and physical evidence as long as it supports your wacky theory.

Durrr.

Barry Jennings was with Mike Hess, there are two eyewitness.

You don't have one iota of physical evidence to trump Barry Jennings. ALL the evidence is consistent with what Jennings has said.

Are you calling Jennings a liar?

He was oulled out of the rubble on 9/11 and did TV interviews, you know.

Are you calling a 9/11 survivor wacky?

[Drudgewire]

Are you calling a 9/11 survivor wacky?
No moreso than you are to every one that doesn't "verify his story."

I'd prefer "deluded" to "liar."

[Par]

Is this fellow a sock?

[Galileo]

You don't know, actually, whether the loose change boys or Alex Jones even asked Barry which staircase it was, and knowing how poor their research skills are, and how poor their interview skills are, it would not surprise me in the least if they didn't even ask.

In any event, the only people who may know for sure are Jennings, Hess, the third gentleman who was with them, and the firefighters who rescued the trio.



I do not think that this is entirely accurate. Can you please explain what you mean when you say that the east stairwell was closer to the lobby?



Yes, of course Mr. Jennings was trying to get back down to the bottom floor, but that really has no bearing on which stairwell he found himself in. If I recall his accounts correctly, he said that someone else (Mr. Hess?) found a stairwell, which suggests that he (or they) didn't know for certain where the stairs were located. It does not sound like any kind of a conscious decision being made as to which set of stairs, among two options, to take.



And even it turns out that he was in the east stairwell, it will still not indicate that he was in "almost the exact location" where NIST says structural failure began.



And, to use even more precise language, the stairwells were located very close to dead centre of the building (when referring to the north/south). The core was oriented more to the south than the north, but the stairwells were nearly dead centre viz north and south of the building. I misspoke when I previously said that they were in the centre of the core. I meant to say in the centre of the building.

So, while they were in the northern half of the core, they were nearly dead centre of the building on the north/south orientation.

Please explain to me how gravity could throw heavy steel debris 355 feet or more through the air in a downward parabolic arc, then the debris smashes through the perimeter columns of WTC 7, plows through the building, goes through two rows of core columns, and crerates an explosion just below the 6th floor of the west stairwell.

[chipmunk stew]

"Possible" damage means NIST is speculating.

They don't know.

Please stick to verified scientific facts.
... :nope:

DUDE, that's the graphic you've been referencing as evidence against debris damage to the stairwell.

:bike:

[beachnut]

""Dude""

Barry Jennings saw the Twin Towers standing AFTER he heard and felt the explosion.
Hearsay. Good job.

[uk_dave]

Please explain to me how gravity could throw heavy steel debris 355 feet or more through the air in a downward parabolic arc, then the debris smashes through the perimeter columns of WTC 7, plows through the building, goes through two rows of core columns, and crerates an explosion just below the 6th floor of the west stairwell.

Think........Avalanches.....

U8BWBn26bX0

[beachnut]

Please explain to me how gravity could throw heavy steel debris 355 feet or more through the air in a downward parabolic arc, then the debris smashes through the perimeter columns of WTC 7, plows through the building, goes through two rows of core columns, and crerates an explosion just below the 6th floor of the west stairwell.
No, the key is it sounded like. If there was an explosion, Barry would be dead. Why are you unable to figure out physics. He did not see an explosion, he heard something that sounded like and explosion. Is your reading comprehension zero?

It is due to physics, that object are being ejected from the building. The amount of explosives to do that would be giant. You have no ideas, nor are you capable of calculating the energy involved, you seem to be just kid. Your comprehension of physics and what happen on 9/11 is at a first grade level, revealed by your posts.

If you really have some expertise in physics, you are doing a great job hiding it.

[Dave_46]

"Ha Ha" or "Peculiar"?

Yes.

Dave

[chipmunk stew]

Please explain to me how gravity could throw heavy steel debris 355 feet or more through the air in a downward parabolic arc, then the debris smashes through the perimeter columns of WTC 7, plows through the building, goes through two rows of core columns, and crerates an explosion just below the 6th floor of the west stairwell.
Average impact force (F):

F = m * ( ∆v / ∆t )

where:
m equals mass
v equals velocity
t equals time

So if a one-tonne piece of debris hits WTC7 at, say, 20 meters per second, and takes 0.5 seconds to come to a rest, it exerts:

1000 kg * ( 20 m/s / 0.5 s ) = 40,000 N ( = approx. 8992 lbf )

[Stellafane]

Stellafane;

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.

There are times when it's just so easy, I actually wish for more worthy adversaries...

Galileo, ye of perhaps the most unfitting screen name ever, could you perhaps explain to me exactly why an unarmed man would be at a disadvantage in an intellectual battle? You know, a battle of intellects? Where intellect is used against your opponent, not weapons? Where being unarmed is totally irrelevant? That kind of battle? I know you probably don't have a lot of experience in battles of intellect, but even you must see how utterly stupid your comparison is.

"Intellectual battle against an unarmed man" -- priceless. I don't do Stundies myself, but this sure looks like a contender to me.

[Galileo]

Average impact force (F):

F = m * ( ∆v / ∆t )

where:
m equals mass
v equals velocity
t equals time

So if a one-tonne piece of debris hits WTC7 at, say, 20 meters per second, and takes 0.5 seconds to come to a rest, it exerts:

1000 kg * ( 20 m/s / 0.5 s ) = 40,000 N ( = approx. 8992 lbf )

gravity threw the heavy steel beams horizontally at 20 meters per second.... REALLY?

[beachnut]

gravity threw the heavy steel beams horizontally at 20 meters per second.... REALLY?
The gravity collapse did. You have a comprehension problem? Do not worry, it will be spoon fed to you and you will ignore.

Why not ask your physics teacher if it is possible. Go ask an engineer, some have been telling you, why are you unable to learn.

[chipmunk stew]

gravity threw the heavy steel beams horizontally at 20 meters per second.... REALLY?
Gravity didn't "throw" anything. The lateral vectors of the falling debris were caused primarily by collisions and overstress failures. Gravity accelerated the debris along vertical vectors. The debris hit WTC7 at rather steep angles, not horizontally.

The numbers I chose were pulled out of the air. I was demonstrating a formula you can use to answer your own question.

[Par]

Me debating Gravy would be like an intellectual battle against an unarmed man.
Galileo, ye of perhaps the most unfitting screen name ever, could you perhaps explain to me exactly why an unarmed man would be at a disadvantage in an intellectual battle?


Hahaha! What an absolutely unforgivable dolt.

[Gravy]

""Dude""

Barry Jennings saw the Twin Towers standing AFTER he heard and felt the explosion.

Some people who were right there, and who stayed there, and who were nearly killed by the tower collapses, didn't know that the towers collapsed until later. Some people thought the north tower collapsed, when it was the south tower. Some people thought the south tower collapse was another plane strike. These things happen.

Sometimes people get the timing of confusing events wrong when recollecting them. That happened to many people who recollected the events of 9/11.

Many people were in building 7 until the south tower collapsed. A triage center had been set up there. No one reported an explosion in that building. Not Dr. Michael Guttenberg, not Dr. Glen Asaeda, not Manny Delgado, not John Culley, not Abdo Nahmod, not any of the other EMS, OEM, NYPD and FBI workers who were there. Nobody.

When you try to take accounts out of context, you are assured of getting the story wrong. Take care to put things in context.

Is anything unclear about this?

[Gravy]

gravity threw the heavy steel beams horizontally at 20 meters per second.... REALLY?
"Galileo" has much to learn about gravity. I guess he'll have to wait around a hundred years or so for Newton to weigh in.

[Minadin]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253246af79b4934f2.gif

Gravity can move things horizontally even though it is acting vertically.

Basic (basic, basic, basic) Physics.

If you drop a ball from a height onto an inclined plane, it will change direction and gain a horizontal component to its velocity. It's predictable for a plane which direction will be imparted, but any uneven surface will produce a similar result.

[Galileo]

Gravity didn't "throw" anything. The lateral vectors of the falling debris were caused primarily by collisions and overstress failures. Gravity accelerated the debris along vertical vectors. The debris hit WTC7 at rather steep angles, not horizontally.

The numbers I chose were pulled out of the air. I was demonstrating a formula you can use to answer your own question.

You don't any evidence of "vector forces". Can you cite some readings from scientific intruments?

What you are trying to tell us is that gravity acts horizontally, rather than vertically, which is plain nuts.

Huge explosions threw the steel beams outward as 300 witnesses have testified to and you can see on videos.

Furthermore, if the projectile path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have rammed into the floors of WTC 7 near the windows and not penetrated anywhere near the core or the stairwells.

You also forgot to mention that if the debris path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have been from the upper floors of the Twin Towers. The perimeter columns near the top was very thin, and you are suggesting that these thin columns bashed through the thick perimeter columns of WTC 7's lower floors, then flew through the building, went past two rows of core columns and made what Barry Jennings described as a "huge explosion", and explosion so big at took out the floor beneath him.

Please spare us in the future of your flight of fantasy!

[Stellafane]

"Galileo" has much to learn about gravity...

Oh, the sad, sad irony in that sentence. Is that sound I hear the Leaning Tower of Pisa toppling over in shame? (On second thought, the CTers will just say it's a CD.)

[Gravy]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253246af79b4934f2.gif

Gravity can move things horizontally even though it is acting vertically.

Basic (basic, basic, basic) Physics.

If you drop a ball from a height onto an inclined plane, it will change direction and gain a horizontal component to its velocity. It's predictable for a plane which direction will be imparted, but any uneven surface will produce a similar result.Minadin says teh AIR IS AN INCLINED PLANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

HAHAHAHA! YOU ARE PWNED, STUPID-HEADS.

[Gravy]

Oh, the sad, sad irony in that sentence. Is that sound I hear the Leaning Tower of Pisa toppling over in shame? (On second thought, the CTers will just say it's a CD.)I believe it was TS1234 who posited "slow-burning thermite." That could be the culprit in Pisa.

[Stellafane]

Minadin says teh AIR IS AN INCLINED PLANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

HAHAHAHA! YOU ARE PWNED, STUPID-HEADS.

Impossible. We all know there weren't any planes involved in 9/11.

[The Almond]

You don't any evidence of "vector forces". Can you cite some readings from scientific intruments?

What you are trying to tell us is that gravity acts horizontally, rather than vertically, which is plain nuts.

Huge explosions threw the steel beams outward as 300 witnesses have testified to and you can see on videos.

Furthermore, if the projectile path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have rammed into the floors of WTC 7 near the windows and not penetrated anywhere near the core or the stairwells.

You also forgot to mention that if the debris path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have been from the upper floors of the Twin Towers. The perimeter columns near the top was very thin, and you are suggesting that these thin columns bashed through the thick perimeter columns of WTC 7's lower floors, then flew through the building, went past two rows of core columns and made what Barry Jennings described as a "huge explosion", and explosion so big at took out the floor beneath him.

Please spare us in the future of your flight of fantasy!

Galileo, have you ever heard of Poisson's ratio? Perhaps you could look it up in a book or google it sometime. I think it will help you to figure out how a gravity driven collision between two objects can create a horizontal force.

[twinstead]

Please spare us in the future of your flight of fantasy!

Cite readings from scientific instruments? LOL I'm shocked that an intellectual giant such as yourself could stoop to using simple personal incredulity to argue a point. Perhaps you should take your advice and stick to the evidence.

You'll find that there are many here who are pretty darn good with that whole math thingy. You'd better do your homework if you want to dazzle anybody with your brilliance.

[Gravy]

Galileo, have you ever heard of Poisson's ratio? Perhaps you could look it up in a book or google it sometime. I think it will help you to figure out how a gravity driven collision between two objects can create a horizontal force.Sounds fishy to me.

[Galileo]

Galileo, have you ever heard of Poisson's ratio? Perhaps you could look it up in a book or google it sometime. I think it will help you to figure out how a gravity driven collision between two objects can create a horizontal force.

You are confusing a mountain with a mole hill.

Small horizontal forces can be generated during collapse, but the horizontal force you are conjecturing is roughly equal to the vertical force.

What you do is pure speculation.

Can you name another gravitational collapse that threw multi-ton steel objects more than the length of a football field, horizontally?

You also ignore 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt explosions and ignore the videos of explosions.

[Par]

Can you name another gravitational collapse that threw multi-ton steel objects more than the length of a football field, horizontally?


As soon as you name another gravitational collapse of a structure of a similar height and composition to that of the World Trade Center towers.

[twinstead]

What you do is pure speculation.

it's called MATH



Can you name another gravitational collapse that threw multi-ton steel objects more than the length of a football field, horizontally?

Can you name another 110 story building where a gravitational collapsed occurred?


You also ignore 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt explosions and ignore the videos of explosions.

by the way, I must have missed it the first time. what is your response to Gravy's post:

Many people were in building 7 until the south tower collapsed. A triage center had been set up there. No one reported an explosion in that building. Not Dr. Michael Guttenberg, not Dr. Glen Asaeda, not Manny Delgado, not John Culley, not Abdo Nahmod, not any of the other EMS, OEM, NYPD and FBI workers who were there. Nobody.

[Par]

It seems that as soon as it looks like people have explained the phenomenon perfectly successfully using basic principles of physics, suddenly "Galileo" would rather concentrate on a historical president.

[Galileo]

As soon as you name another gravitational collapse of a structure of a similar height and composition to that of the World Trade Center towers.

What evidence do you have that vector forces threw WTC steel 400 feet horizontally?

[Par]

What evidence do you have that vector forces threw WTC steel 400 feet horizontally?



The same evidence I have that gravity caused the last coffee mug I dropped to fall.

[Par]

Can you name another gravitational collapse that threw multi-ton steel objects more than the length of a football field, horizontally?
As soon as you name another gravitational collapse of a structure of a similar height and composition to that of the World Trade Center towers.



Would you care to address the issue now?

[Galileo]

Would you care to address the issue now?

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.

What evidence do you have that gravity threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally?

[stateofgrace]

You also ignore 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt explosions and ignore the videos of explosions.

You mean these witnesses?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1997183&postcount=1

Search is your friend, use it. Stop taking quotes out of context to push your failed theories.

[stateofgrace]

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.



How much explosives were used then? And why was it silent?

[Par]

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.

What evidence do you have that gravity threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally?



“I have evidence that invisible pixies caused your coffee mug to fall. What evidence do you have that it was due to the gravity?”

Yeah. Nice try, buddy.

[twinstead]

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.

What evidence do you have that gravity threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally?

Exactly what evidence do you have that explosives threw them? A couple witnesses who thought they felt and heard an explosion out of many who reported no such thing?

[Viper Daimao]

What evidence do you have that vector forces threw WTC steel 400 feet horizontally?

The fact that the steel was found 400 feet away?

[Par]

Exactly what evidence do you have that explosives threw them? A couple witnesses who thought they felt and heard an explosion out of many who reported no such thing?


I suspect he made that claim as it was tentatively related, yet distinct enough to successfully divert attention away from his foolishness regarding gravity and horizontal movement.

[beachnut]

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.

What evidence do you have that gravity threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally?
You do not have evidence, you can not even calculate anything. You have dodo. You have come up short and are just ranting. Talk is not evidence. There were no explosions in the WTC that sent anything anywhere. It was gravity collapse and the energy of that collapse included ejected material that damaged many building around the WTC. You can rant all you want but you still have no evidence. Not even close.

[alexg]

There are times when it's just so easy, I actually wish for more worthy adversaries...

Galileo, ye of perhaps the most unfitting screen name ever, could you perhaps explain to me exactly why an unarmed man would be at a disadvantage in an intellectual battle? You know, a battle of intellects? Where intellect is used against your opponent, not weapons? Where being unarmed is totally irrelevant? That kind of battle? I know you probably don't have a lot of experience in battles of intellect, but even you must see how utterly stupid your comparison is.

"Intellectual battle against an unarmed man" -- priceless. I don't do Stundies myself, but this sure looks like a contender to me.

Intellectual battle against an unarmed man?

I propose we simply ban talking with one's hands.

LOL

Stundie for sure!

[Galileo]

The fact that the steel was found 400 feet away?

Do you have 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt vector forces?

Do you have any videos of vector forces on 9/11?

[Par]

Do you have any videos of vector forces on 9/11?



How does one record a vector force on video exactly?

[The Almond]

You are confusing a mountain with a mole hill.

I noticed that you didn't bother to look up Poisson's ratio. Could you do that?

Small horizontal forces can be generated during collapse, but the horizontal force you are conjecturing is roughly equal to the vertical force.

How do you figure?

What you do is pure speculation.

So says the man who did no calculations to prove his second statement.

Can you name another gravitational collapse that threw multi-ton steel objects more than the length of a football field, horizontally?

Can you name a president who was impeached and removed from office? Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean that it can't.

You also ignore 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt explosions and ignore the videos of explosions.
Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted. All explosives cause explosions does not mean that all explosions are caused by explosives.

By the way, have you ever heard a 2.54 cm grade 40 steel reinforcing bar snap under a tensile load? It causes quite an explosion.

[Galileo]

How much explosives were used then? And why was it silent?

a) a lot

b) my deaf-mute girlfriend said the same thing

[Stellafane]

And Then He Was Laughed Out Of The Ring....

You have to hand it to Galileo, at least he gets the title of his posts correct (intentionally or otherwise).

Maybe we should go easy on Galileo, though. This discussion is starting to become like a battle of strength with a witless man.

[uk_dave]

a) a lot

b) my deaf-mute girlfriend said the same thing

bye bye

welcome to ignoreland

[stateofgrace]

a) a lot

Really? So the thermite theories are now moot as they used explosives and not thermite?

A lot equates to what exactly? A pound? A stone? a ton ? A couple of ton ? How much, you said you had evidence, so how much was used?


b) my deaf-mute girlfriend said the same thing

I see you are now trying to inject some humour into the thread because you are unable to back up your statements. You have failed to be humorous and you have failed to answer a single question put to you. All in all you are failing completely to convince anybody, other than yourself that you have any idea what you are taking about.

Did up even open the link I provided? Here it is again, here is how you twist and distort the quotes of explosions.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1997183&postcount=1

[Galileo]

Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted. All explosives cause explosions does not mean that all explosions are caused by explosives.



Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

[beachnut]

Do you have 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt vector forces?

Do you have any videos of vector forces on 9/11?
I have proof objects were ejected during the gravity collapse on 9/11. There is video evidence and physical evidence of damage. Gee, you have giant silent explosions with no explosions, that would have killed the guys stuck in the stairwell, who lived. See, explosions have blast effects you can not hide. There were no blast effects on 9/11, and the energy to do what we saw on video was due to gravity, no explosive energy was there, it has been proven with physics. Only damage done on 9/11 was due to impact, fire and gravity collapse. There was no extra energy observed. You are wrong. You are a liar because there were not explosive and you say there were. You must prove the energy was there, and the explosives were there. I do not have to wait for you to produce evidence, you will never have any. Your lack of education may be the problem. Did you drop out of high school?

[twinstead]

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

Can you be more circular? How can you call something an explosion when it could have been many other things, and then use it as evidence of explosives?

[Par]

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.



In as much as someone being from Germany is evidence of them being a Berliner.

[chipmunk stew]

You don't any evidence of "vector forces". Can you cite some readings from scientific intruments?
Not specific readings, but I can offer these:
WC6AgX2N1Go
SvTFhuUZ9Wk
MJRFySv0fv8

What you are trying to tell us is that gravity acts horizontally, rather than vertically, which is plain nuts.
Is that what you understood me to be saying when I said:
"Gravity accelerated the debris along vertical vectors."

Huge explosions threw the steel beams outward as 300 witnesses have testified to and you can see on videos.

Furthermore, if the projectile path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have rammed into the floors of WTC 7 near the windows and not penetrated anywhere near the core or the stairwells.
Well it depends how steep the angle, doesn't it?

You also forgot to mention that if the debris path was "at rather steep angles" then the debris would have been from the upper floors of the Twin Towers. The perimeter columns near the top was very thin, and you are suggesting that these thin columns bashed through the thick perimeter columns of WTC 7's lower floors, then flew through the building, went past two rows of core columns and made what Barry Jennings described as a "huge explosion", and explosion so big at took out the floor beneath him.
You seem to be under the impression that there was no space between the columns of WTC7.

Please spare us in the future of your flight of fantasy!
Please spare us in the future of your arguments from personal incredulity.

[HyJinX]

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

:rolleyes:

So much "wrongness" in one little sentence.

[rwguinn]

Not specific readings, but I can offer these:
WC6AgX2N1Go
SvTFhuUZ9Wk
MJRFySv0fv8


Is that what you understood me to be saying when I said:
"Gravity accelerated the debris along vertical vectors."


Well it depends how steep the angle, doesn't it?


You seem to be under the impression that there was no space between the columns of WTC7.


Please spare us in the future of your arguments from personal incredulity.
Please--Don't mock the children.
I guess he's jr. high school-late elementary school level...
It has become very obvious that our miss-named twoofer has not the foggiest idea what a vector actually is...

[chipmunk stew]

Do you have 300 witnesses who heard, saw and felt vector forces?

Do you have any videos of vector forces on 9/11?
It's probably because you are using your terms incorrectly, but it sounds like you're suggesting that there was no lateral component to the falling debris. Is that what you're saying? Because even if it were explosives causing them, there were "vector forces" (force vectors) at play.


edit:
Also, the fact that some of the debris landed 400 feet from the towers is meaningless (in terms of the force required to get it there) unless we also know how long it was airborne. That would tell us its horizontal velocity. If we also knew the mass, we could figure out how much horizontal force was imparted on it.

[Galileo]

Can you be more circular? How can you call something an explosion when it could have been many other things, and then use it as evidence of explosives?

It's not circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives.

[The Almond]

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

So, you agree that universal affirmatives can only be partially converted, but then state a universal affirmative. That makes no sense.

And how are you coming on Poisson's ratio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson%27s_ratio)?

[Gravy]

Galileo, you may not be aware that only a small percentage of people who are on record describing the specific sights and sounds of 9/11 described the collapses as being like explosions. This post of mine should help you to understand this issue.

What They Heard: WTC First Responder Accounts In & Around the Towers (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1997183&postcount=1)


I sincerely hope that you buckle down and learn some very basic physics. While on one level your posts are hilarious in a Malcolm Kirkmanesque way, when the laughter dies down your lack of knowledge really is a sad thing.

Please, please try to learn.

[Gravy]

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Beginning to see the problem, Galileo?

[The Almond]

It's circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives

Drawing on my example above, when a steel bar fails in tension, there is an explosion created. By your logic, since I find no other evidence of explosives, I have to use the sound alone to conclude that explosives were used to create the explosion.

[HyJinX]

It's circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives

Soooooo....finding no evidence of explosives means that explosives were used. Got it.

wait...

what?

[Par]

It's not circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives.



Oops. Wrong again. You seem to avoid information like the plague, but I recommend you look at the affirming the consequent fallacy (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/afthecon.html).

[Gravy]

Drawing on my example above, when a steel bar fails in tension, there is an explosion created. By your logic, since I find no other evidence of explosives, I have to use the sound alone to conclude that explosives were used to create the explosion.
Of course. It's perfectly obvious that these events are caused by bombs or demolitions explosives:


Steam boiler explosions
Electrical transformer explosions
Volcanic explosions
The explosions heard in the Madrid Windsor fire and in thousands of other fires.
Any sound that is described as being like an explosion.

[The Pig]

All eggs in microwave ovens cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by eggs in microwave ovens.

Explosions are evidence of eggs in microwave ovens.

Explosions are not proof of eggs in microwave ovens.

[beachnut]

It's not circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives.
Now it is faulty logic and circular. Or worse. Worse.

[beachnut]

All eggs in microwave ovens cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by eggs in microwave ovens.

Explosions are evidence of eggs in microwave ovens.

Explosions are not proof of eggs in microwave ovens.
Biting an egg, that was in the microwave could explode in you mouth. (yes it is like a steam burn)

[G logic] exploding egg in mouth, evidence of explosives in egg [/G logic]

[The Almond]

Of course. It's perfectly obvious that these events are caused by bombs or demolitions explosives:

Steam boiler explosions
Electrical transformer explosions
Volcanic explosions
The explosions heard in the Madrid Windsor fire and in thousands of other fires.
Any sound that is described as being like an explosion.

Hey! Would you keep quiet on the olcanic-vay xplosions-eay? The NWO volcanic eruptions group would prefer that everyone keep thinking those things are caused by natural tectonic forces. If the sheeple knew that we were hiding C4 in volcanoes to cause eruptions, well, let's just say those nice marble countertops for our in-office wet bars will not be coming down anytime soon.

[Par]

Perhaps you’ll find these helpful.

[notheist]

Of course. It's perfectly obvious that these events are caused by bombs or demolitions explosives:


Steam boiler explosions
Electrical transformer explosions
Volcanic explosions
The explosions heard in the Madrid Windsor fire and in thousands of other fires.
Any sound that is described as being like an explosion.


SMOKE EXPLOSIONS

"As Engine 15 turned up Liberty street Captain John Kahl could see light smoke from the top floor of the Hurst Building. Captain Kahl did not think he had much of a fire so he went to check the automatic alarm box. The box indicated that there was fire in the basement, so Captain Kahl had his crew force entry threw a glass door on the German street side and entered the building with a 3/4 inch chemical line and 2 1/2 hand line. As the crew was standing on the stairs to the basement they could see the fire rolling across the ceiling towards the elevator shaft. It was not long after Captain Kahl entered the building when a smoke explosion occurred in the elevator shaft. The explosion was powerful enough to blow off the roof , break several windows and also throw large embers across the street into the broken windows of several buildings. All the firefighters escaped with out injury"

What you have just read describeds what firemen call a smoke explosion at a fire in Boston. This phenomenon occurs when a fire creates a pocket of hot explosive gas in an enclosed area. The gas comes from material in the area of the fire that is heated to the point of giving off gas, but the area is not hot enough for spontaneous combustion to occure. All it takes is a spark or the inrush of oxygen rich air to make the gas ignite. Its similar to a backdraft but in a backdraft the gas has space to expand and burn, in a smoke explosion the enclosed space make the effect more explosive in nature.

[notheist]

IT WAS THE FIRE, CAUSED THE TWIN TOWER COLLAPSE
An analysis of the cause of the collapse of the WTC Towers. & Possible lessons learned to improve high-rise building life safety. March 12, 2002
By: Arthur Scheuerman, Battalion Chief FDNY (Retired), Former Deputy Chief Instructor Nassau County Fire Training Academy and high-rise Fire Safety Director NYC.

"In Tower 1 it appears the top floor or floors began failing first possibly because the top floors were receiving most of the super heated gasses rising up the damaged elevator and stair shafts and other vertical openings such as un-fire-stopped pipe or wire runs, or air conditioning shafts. These fire gasses could have accumulated and heated the entire upper ceiling area or truss voids of one floor, or several floors, starting a softening and sagging of the joists. Or, more likely, after filling the upper floors (mushrooming) these heated gasses could have exploded, and triggered the initial floor collapse. This happens at times in unventilated void spaces at serious fires.
The fact that the collapse began, apparently simultaneously, around the entire upper floor outer ring and possibly the inner core of Tower 1 rather suggests an explosion or rapid combustion of flammable gasses, such as carbon monoxide or vaporized jet fuel, over-pressuring the area."

[LashL]

Oh, the sad, sad irony in that sentence. Is that sound I hear the Leaning Tower of Pisa toppling over in shame? (On second thought, the CTers will just say it's a CD.)

No worries - my daughter is doing her part to keep it standing.

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa264/LashL/pisa.png

(This is the second thread in which I have seen the Leaning Tower of Pisa referenced today, so I just couldn't resist ;) )

What you have just read describeds what firemen call a smoke explosion at a fire in Boston. This phenomenon occurs when a fire creates a pocket of hot explosive gas in an enclosed area. The gas comes from material in the area of the fire that is heated to the point of giving off gas, but the area is not hot enough for spontaneous combustion to occure. All it takes is a spark or the inrush of oxygen rich air to make the gas ignite. Its similar to a backdraft but in a backdraft the gas has space to expand and burn, in a smoke explosion the enclosed space make the effect more explosive in nature.

Yes, smoke explosions are a very real hazard, indeed.

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/printer.jsp?id=48583

[steve s]

I have evidence that explosives threw the heavy steel beams 400 feet horizontally.

Totally ignoring the fact that controlled demolitions don't send beams flying hundreds of feet away.

Yes, but all explosions are EVIDENCE of explosives.

A steel beam snapping sounds a lot like an explosion.

Steve S.

[steve s]

welcome to ignoreland

I like that song.

Steve S.

[Gravy]

IT WAS THE FIRE, CAUSED THE TWIN TOWER COLLAPSE
An analysis of the cause of the collapse of the WTC Towers. & Possible lessons learned to improve high-rise building life safety. March 12, 2002
By: Arthur Scheuerman, Battalion Chief FDNY (Retired), Former Deputy Chief Instructor Nassau County Fire Training Academy and high-rise Fire Safety Director NYC.

"In Tower 1 it appears the top floor or floors began failing first possibly because the top floors were receiving most of the super heated gasses rising up the damaged elevator and stair shafts and other vertical openings such as un-fire-stopped pipe or wire runs, or air conditioning shafts. These fire gasses could have accumulated and heated the entire upper ceiling area or truss voids of one floor, or several floors, starting a softening and sagging of the joists. Or, more likely, after filling the upper floors (mushrooming) these heated gasses could have exploded, and triggered the initial floor collapse. This happens at times in unventilated void spaces at serious fires.
The fact that the collapse began, apparently simultaneously, around the entire upper floor outer ring and possibly the inner core of Tower 1 rather suggests an explosion or rapid combustion of flammable gasses, such as carbon monoxide or vaporized jet fuel, over-pressuring the area."For the record, this analysis, and particularly the "simultaneous" part of it, is not supported by the NIST investigation or by other investigations. Interesting about the smoke explosions, though. EMT1986 brought this up recently also.

[T.A.M.]

It's not circular, it's as solid as a tripod.

All explosives cause explosions.

Some explosions are caused by explosives.

Explosions are evidence of explosives.

Explosions are not proof of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives.

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of __________________ (insert here: Electrical Transformers, Oxygen Cannisters, Aeresol containers, heaving things falling and hitting something, The Collapse itself, other)

TAM:)

[Dog Town]

With the lack of other evidence, explosions provide a preponderance of evidence of explosives.

Are you claiming, there is no evidence, of anything in the towers that could explode? Except, for fictional explosives!
Got ya...nice research skills!

DT

ETA: I see TAM beat me to it. That'll teach me, to answer the phone, while starting a reply. 10 minute lag bad.

[Galileo]

A steel beam snapping sounds a lot like an explosion.

Steve S.

How do you know that it's a steel beam and not an explosive?

[Dog Town]

How do you know that it's a steel beam and not an explosive?

Hmmm...maybe because there is evidence of steel beams that were snapppped! NO evidence of explosives.

NEXT!

[Viper Daimao]

How do you know that it's a steel beam and not an explosive?

Given that there were snapped steal beams, how do you know it's an explosive and not a steal beam?

[Galileo]

Are you claiming, there is no evidence, of anything in the towers that could explode? Except, for fictional explosives!
Got ya...nice research skills!

DT

ETA: I see TAM beat me to it. That'll teach me, to answer the phone, while starting a reply. 10 minute lag bad.

Did BarJennings hear a fictional explosion?

When the floor gave way, did that make it a non-fictional explosion?

[Galileo]

Given that there were snapped steal beams, how do you know it's an explosive and not a steal beam?

So an explosion is evidence of a snapped steel beam, but not evidence of an explosive?

[Dog Town]

Did BarJennings hear a fictional explosion?

When the floor gave way, did that make it a non-fictional explosion?
It seems like you are starting to get it! NO EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES!
Yes, I was yelling!

[T.A.M.]

So an explosion is evidence of a snapped steel beam, but not evidence of an explosive?

No, but I think logic dictates that the more simpler answer is the most likely (see occam). In a skyscraper that has just been hit by a jet airliner, had 5-6 floors traversed by material from said plane, and has multistorey fires raging, that things such as steel beams snapping, Oxygen and aeresol cannisters exploding, electrical transformers exploding, and large things falling, might all seem more plausible than explosives...so as Dog says...

NEXT!!

TAM:)

[Dog Town]

So an explosion is evidence of a snapped steel beam, but not evidence of an explosive?

Yes, the beams, bodies striking the ground, etc... Evidence of them making loud noises! NO EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES! Pay attention!

[Drudgewire]

So an explosion is evidence of a snapped steel beam, but not evidence of an explosive?
He says snapped steel beams. You say explosive. Me? I think it was done by unicorns with laser beams for horns. All, certainly, are just theories.

But since there's no physical evidence of explosives or unicorns and more than a steel beam or two in the remains of WTC-7 his theory has a lot higher probability of being right than either of ours.

How successfully they've been able to quash open discussion of the unicorn link does mean that SOMETHING shady is going on though. :eek:

[Galileo]

Of course. It's perfectly obvious that these events are caused by bombs or demolitions explosives:


Steam boiler explosions
Electrical transformer explosions
Volcanic explosions
The explosions heard in the Madrid Windsor fire and in thousands of other fires.
Any sound that is described as being like an explosion.

So in 1993, when the people in the WTC heard, felt or saw the explosions, they were irrational to think that there might be bombs going off? (I am talking about their initiasl reaction)

Remember, according to you, hearing, feeling, or seeing explosions is not evidence of explosives.

I would argue that the people in 1993 who heard, saw, or felt explosions, had EVIDENCE of explosives, but not PROOF of explosives.

[stateofgrace]

So an explosion is evidence of a snapped steel beam, but not evidence of an explosive?

Em no a snapped beam is evidence of a snapped beam. Had you ever heard steel snap, as I have sunbeam,you would know full well that when it goes it goes with a quite loud bang, but hey you would know all about this wouldn't you?

Ps, I hope you don't mind I liked your comments so much I have paid tribute to them by putting them in my signature, please keep them coming, they are classics.

[Galileo]

Em no a snapped beam is evidence of a snapped beam. Had you ever heard steel snap, as I have sunbeam,you would know full well that when it goes it goes with a quite loud bang, but hey you would know all about this wouldn't you?

Ps, I hope you don't mind I liked your comments so much I have paid tribute to them by putting them in my signature, please keep them coming, they are classics.

What if the beam was snapped with super thermite?

:jaw-dropp

[Dog Town]

So in 1993, when the people in the WTC heard, felt or saw the explosions, they were irrational to think that there might be bombs going off? (I am talking about their initiasl reaction)

Remember, according to you, hearing, feeling, or seeing explosions is not evidence of explosives.

I would argue that the people in 1993 who heard, saw, or felt explosions, had EVIDENCE of explosives, but not PROOF of explosives.

Silly wabbit, NO! Had the expolsion been something other than explosives, YES! Explosives were proven beyond any doubt in 1993! GET IT YET?
Not irrational, just wrong! It happens.

[Par]

So in 1993, when the people in the WTC heard, felt or saw the explosions, they were irrational to think that there might be bombs going off? (I am talking about their initiasl reaction)



No, they weren’t irrational. However, no one is saying that anyone was irrational to initially think that there might have been bombs going off 9/11, so it's irrelevant. Anyone who currently thinks that there were bombs going off on 9/11, on the other hand, is being absurd.

[lapman]

What if the beam was snapped with super thermite?

:jaw-dropp
Ahh, the mythical horizontal cutting thermite.

Please provide proof of said "super thermite" which cuts horizontally and include proof that it will keep on burning for weeks.

[Galileo]

He says snapped steel beams. You say explosive. Me? I think it was done by unicorns with laser beams for horns. All, certainly, are just theories.

But since there's no physical evidence of explosives or unicorns and more than a steel beam or two in the remains of WTC-7 his theory has a lot higher probability of being right than either of ours.

How successfully they've been able to quash open discussion of the unicorn link does mean that SOMETHING shady is going on though. :eek:

SCENERIO:

Someone is seen throwing an object into a crowd, and then people in the crowd hear and feel an explosion. No bomb fragments are recovered.

RESULT:

What evidence is permitted at trial?

1) the eyewitness who saw someone throw the object.

2) Witness testimony from people who heard or felt the explosion.

or

1) the eyewitness who saw someone throw the object.

2) since whatever caused the explosion could have already been in the crowd before the object was thrown, the witnesses who heard and felt the explosion have no evidence and they can't testify.

YOUR TURN