Another Look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

originally posted by: wmd_2008
The only ENGINEERS of relevance in this are STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS not chemical or electrical or mechanical engineers or architects.

I visit and talk to structural engineers on a regular basis due to my job and NOT one that has commented on this thinks it was a demolition..

Ron Bookman
*Licensed Structural Engineer
*Master’s Degree in Structural Engineering
*Professional Experience in manufacturing facilities, Industrial and Commercial Buildings.



Alfred Lopez
*Registered professional structural engineer in Michigan.
*Founded Lopez Engineering, Inc., a structural consulting engineering firm, in 1971.
*Worked on several high-rise projects in the Detroit area, including office buildings above parking decks and high-rise apartment buildings.
*He has served as an investigator of the failure of buildings due to fire damage and wind damage.



Kamal Obeid, C.E., S.E
*holds a master’s degree in civil and structural engineering from the University of California at Berkeley.
*practicing engineer for 30 years.
*a licensed structural engineer for the last 25 years.
*has designed and retrofitted numerous steel-frame buildings.



I could link to dozens more videos of dozens of structural engineers believing WT7 was demolished and are alarmed by how the Twin Towers "collapsed".


What was your point again?

a reply to: Debunkology

Being educated and possessing higher degrees does not mean you are not barking bat crap nuts.......

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Debunkology
Being educated and possessing higher degrees does not mean you are not barking bat crap nuts.......

Your reply sums this thread up precisely.

Why this thread was created:
Character assassination is an attempt to tarnish a person's reputation. It may involve exaggeration, misleading half-truths, or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. It is a form of defamation and can be a form of ad hominem argument.

More on this subject.
en.wikipedia.org...

And then following along we have posters like yourself. Using these types of arguments in the link below....
en.wikipedia.org...


And so the conclusion is this.......

a reply to: Debunkology

My point.

HUDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS that haven't commented.

On mobile just now will post some info later when I get home.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Debunkology

My point.

HUDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS that haven't commented.

Exactly. How do we know what their opinions are if they HAVEN'T even commented??

The argument can go both ways. I know structural engineers who haven't signed the petition and yet have doubts about the Twin Towers and still didn't even know about Building 7 collapsing until I showed it to them, mainly because they aren't American and they don't think there will be an independence investigation anyway. Yet they haven't been on tv, or on the internet.

From the very begginning the groups who did not believe in the official OS were attacked.

What we have is apathy

a reply to: Debunkology

Guess what VARIOUS reports have been published by engineering companies including the simple fact that THERMAL LOADING on a structure due to fire was not looked at closely when the towers were designed when home I will provide the link.

Smetimes what you that can't happen does will post example pictures later.

a reply to: firerescue

No, and being a government spokesperson does not mean you are a truth-teller either.

a reply to: Debunkology

Why this thread was created:
Character assassination is an attempt to tarnish a person's reputation. It may involve exaggeration, misleading half-truths, or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. It is a form of defamation and can be a form of ad hominem argument.

No sir,

This thread was created to show A&E for 9/11 truth for what they are its not character assassination, you only say that because you do not like the message that these guys are not the vanguards of 9/11 truth.

Show me where i am wrong, actually take a point a fact i have stated and show me how it is wrong backed up with sources and logic. I am so fed up of this, time and time again i write a full in depth thread on this subject and i get people trying to say I am wrong but with out actually demonstrating why I am wrong but yet they all run around patting each other on the back for "exposing" the "debunkers" errors.

a reply to: Debunkology


This from the Arup report on the 9/11 fires I first posted it back in Sept 2012

This is an understandable emotion driven response but we would propose instead that designing a structure with fire as a design load provides a more robust design solution.Simply increasing fire proofing thickness without understanding the actual structural response to heat provides no guarantees of increased safety.

Look at this piece of text below again from the Arup report, this may be a shock to many with NO construction experience or even some with

The important part bold and underlined!!!!

Seismic design relies on modelling, risk analysis and changes to the structural stiffness. Wind design relies on additional structural members and wind tunnel tests. Current fire design relies on very simple, single element tests and adding insulating material to the frame. Thermal induced forces are not calculated or designed for.

That's the advantage of working in the industry and talking to MANY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS on a daily basis.

As for claims of expolsions major stuctural components failing could sound to like an explosion have you never heard people saying things like it sounded like the rumble of thunder or it sounded like a explosion although no thunder or explosives were involved. Imagine what a 900t approx floor slab collapsing on another would sound like.

As for claims like a pancake collapse cant happen.



Or that metal can't get hot enough in a building fire to be a problem.





The timber survived better because it's charred surface becomes an intumescent coating to protect the timber.

For those that don't know intumescent material is a coating or sealant that swells up when heated, thus protecting the material underneath or sealing a gap in the event of a fire.

Some of those in ae911truth look like they need refresher courses !!!!