>> ^dbalsdon:
sigh Still going with the: Nobodys giving explanations, crap? Again, bullshit. Explanations are being given. You're just being an ignorant little prick.

The new NIST report does not mention the molten steel beneath the wreckage, witnessed during rescue operations by FDNY who referred to it as "like a foundry." That molten steel remained hot for six weeks.

Also important to note: there is a subset amongst the "troofers" who feel there is not enough information to accuse anyone...but at the same time they believe there are valid questions (like the above) for which there are no satisfactory answers. Yet.

>> ^jmzero:
I only listened to the first few, but if that's the best "smoking guns" they could find, then either they're not looking very hard, or that's the most accurate 10,000 page scientific document ever produced.
A document that size, with that many people working on it for that long, with such messy source data, is bound to have all sorts of problems and - despite not (edit: somehow missed the "not" before) believing any of the "truther" garbage - I am shocked they couldn't find more interesting flaws.



Who said this is a complete analysis? This is someone pointing out a few of the discrepancies. I'm sure there will be more to come.. but hey.. you don't want to see it anyways.. so I suggest you ignore this altogether jmzero... nothing to see here.. move along please.

Jones was at the center of the Cold Fusion controversy. As someone in the Physics community, I am telling you how he is seen, which is as either a really bad scientist or a fraud.

The bottom line is:

We have to be willing to accept the results that science gives us. If we experimentally determine something to be true, then to the best of our knowledge within the confines of the experiment, it is true. And we should accept that truth until another experiment proves otherwise. This doesn't mean we shouldn't question these truths. What it means is if we decide to call them false then we better have damn good evidence. To do things differently is a slap in the face to everyone who calls themselves a scientist. And I take it personally.

Don't like it? Do research and publish your findings in a paper in a peer-reviewed journal.

Let me assure of one thing: No one tells the people at NIST or in any government lab what to publish. The scientist there are autonomous from their administrators.

"I'm more inclined to believe an independent analysis then a government funded analysis."

Are you implying that the government has control over what the researchers at NIST publish?

I'm not sure that fire forensics guidelines require investigators to look specifically for Thermite when specifying "accelerants" but I'm not a fireman, It's work looking into.

Incidentally, 2500° C = 4532° F.

3: I will encamp against you all around;
I will encircle you with towers
and set up my siege works against you.

4: Brought low, you will speak from the ground;
your speech will mumble out of the dust.
Your voice will come ghostlike from the earth;
out of the dust your speech will whisper.

Isaiah 29 (New International Version)

OMG 9/11 just made me believe in the bible!

Seriously, Is asking NIST to look for thermi(a)te too much? The samples he had certainly seem to have a very good likeness to commercially available types.

Stuka, I really don't mean to offend anyone with this video, and I guess you have the right to throw epithets at people like me for questioning the events of that day. For all I know you lost a loved one on that day, or as a service member in the wars that followed, so I don't want to challenge what you may hold dear.

Your video shits on the scientists at NIST and all the hard work they did to uncover the cause of the collapses on 9/11 and hopefully prevent future disasters of their kind. It calls the scientists at NIST outright monsters, amorally complicit in the mass murder of 3,000 Americans. It seeks to erase their exemplary service to this nation and replace it with a shit-smear of empty accusation. And it libels these men and woman for nothing more than the self-aggrandizement of complete nobodies who hitched their wagons to the events of 9/11 -- parasites on the dead of that day.

Stuka, I really don't mean to offend anyone with this video, and I guess you have the right to throw epithets at people like me for questioning the events of that day. For all I know you lost a loved one on that day, or as a service member in the wars that followed, so I don't want to challenge what you may hold dear.

I do know that what I'm seeing is a historical first, a building with scattered fires and questionable and unsubstantiated structural damage falling like a dropped curtain. I go back and forth on what the cause could have been, and was for a time comfortable with NIST's original assumptions that the emergency generators were pumping diesel into the blaze, but they recanted on that detail.

I have to work pretty hard to think of this as a natural phenomena of building failure. I know you don't trust intuition or what we see with our own eyes, but do you see it? Do you rely on reports and what people say on websites? Jeez, I just donno.

And Volumptuous, I removed it from the lies channel, because I don't know who's lying. Sorry.

Yeah, "TFK" seems pretty sure of him/herself,perhaps justifiably, but there are several dissenting opinions as well...

#1 ...At least, that's how this layman understands it.
#8...I can help you. The free fall proves that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. Science has proved that.
#40...Actually, I have never read such an awful report as the NIST WTC7 report. Pure propaganda! The structural analysis after initial failure is simply not correct. (this user claimed to create his or her own finite element analysis model, so probably knows a thing or two).

Oops, even more of Chandler's bat-shittery debunked: http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php?page=Freefall+Speed

Because if the NIST is lying about the causes of the collapse of WTC 7, they would be de facto complicit in the entire scheme of 9/11.

"Hi, this is Evil Boss Overlord. Hey, look, I know you're all working on that whole WTC7 collapse thing, but I need you to do something: I need you to totally ignore all the evidence you've found of a pre-concocted collapse and come out with a report that says the collapse was the result of structural failure. Yeah, I know, 3,000 people dead -- what a bummer, eh! -- but it's really important for the Evil Master Plot -- what? I know it's obvious that we murdered those people, but is telling the truth now going to bring them . . . yes, yes, yes you're professionals with reputations to uphold and -- what ethics?! Christian, schmistian! Look, just ignore the 3,000 people we killed and release the damned report!"

See also
http://www.videosift.com/video/NIST-on-the-Freefall-of-WTC7-Wrong-Answer

>> ^StukaFox:
Here you Troofers (read, "Batshit Nuts") go: David Chandler himself shows up to defend his accusation of complicity to mass murder by the scientists at NIST...
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128194


How is anything to do with building 7 "mass murder"? No one was in the building when it came down.

Here you Troofers (read, "Batshit Nuts") go: David Chandler himself shows up to defend his accusation of complicity to mass murder by the scientists at NIST, tries to bullshit actual mechanical engineers, and gets blown out of the water with the very same "evidence" presented in the joke of a video above.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128194

"I'm a high school teacher"

Correct. What you're not is:

1. A structural engineer specializing in skyscrapers.
2. A mathematician.
3. A Ph.D. in physics.
4. An expert in video analysis.
5. An expert in forensics.
6. An architect.
7. An expert in failure analysis.
8. The guy who designed the building in the first place.

You know who ARE all these things? The people who released the NIST report. The people who had more video than you. The people who put their hands on the steel. The people who interviewed eyewitnesses. The people who ran the labs. The people who ran repeated simulations of the collapse based on models about a million times more complex than your free software and video off the internet.

So what you, and the rest of the chowderheads in the Scooby-Doo Conspiracy Movement, are telling us is that all these people are 1. lying 2. complicit in mass murder and 3. THEY WOULDA GOTTEN AWAY WITH IT IF IT HADN'T BEEN FOR US DARNED KIDS!

Thanks for being tools for Osama, you bags of shit, now go analyze how your heads got shoved so far up your asses.

>> ^jimnms:
From your own link...

(lots of info snipped)

If those fires were burning at 1500-1800°F, the people on that floor would have been dead.
I'm no conspiracy theory nutcase, but I'm also not stupid, the "official" explanations of collapse just don't match reality.


You're assuming that the entire floor is at a uniform temperature. That's not how a building fire works. The temperature only needed to be that hot in specific pockets to weaken the supports. You also don't have to weaken every single support (ie, the whole floor doesn't need to be engulfed in flames) to cause a catastrophic failure. Although built with redundancy in mind, every support beam can only take on the load of so much stress from other failing support beams before it too fails.

I know conspiracy theory-ing is fun, but there are more gaps in the conspiracy theories than in the official explanation of what happened in 9-11. That makes the official explanation "truthier" in my book.

From your own link:

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

The Madrid fire burned for 24 hours at temperatures up to 800°C (1500°F) and did not collapse. In 2004, Venezuela's tallest building burned uncontrolled for 17 hours and did not collapse. WTC7 had two small fires which burned for 6 hours and it collapsed in what looks like a controlled demolition.


When the tapes from 9/11 firefighters in were released, there was no mention of communication problems as we were told, and firefighters only reported small pockets of fire, not a huge inferno that can melt steel.

Two hose lines are needed, Chief Orio Palmer says from an upper floor of the badly damaged south tower at the World Trade Center. Just two hose lines to attack two isolated pockets of fire. ''We should be able to knock it down with two lines,'' he tells the firefighters of Ladder Company 15 who were following him up the stairs of the doomed tower.

Lt. Joseph G. Leavey is heard responding: ''Orio, we're on 78, but we're in the B stairway. Trapped in here. We got to put some fire out to get to you.''

Ladder 15 had finally found the fire after an arduous climb to the 78th floor, according to the tape. They were in the B stairwell. On the other side of the fire were hundreds of people, blocked from fleeing by smoke and flame on the stairs. Chief Palmer was facing similar fires in the A stairwell, across the floor.

''We're gonna knock down some fire here in the B Stair,'' Lieutenant Leavey is heard telling one of his firefighters. ''We'll meet up with you. You get over to the A Stair and help out Chief Palmer.''

If those fires were burning at 1500-1800°F, the people on that floor would have been dead.

I'm no conspiracy theory nutcase, but I'm also not stupid, the "official" explanations of collapse just don't match reality.