Waterboy Kevin Ryan

So there is this guy, Kevin Ryan who is no involved with A & E for Truth. They take the "Certified Quality Engineer" title to list him in the "Engineering Professionals (Degreed only)" section, despite him not having an engineering degree.

His former position was Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL). That is a water testing lab.

Ryan is a Chemist, not qualified to speak to the metallurgical testing being done by UL.

Ryan sent an email to NIST and copied it to a Truther who published it on their site, and subsequent to this Ryan was fired for expressing his own opinions as though they were institutional opinions and beliefs of UL.

Ryan has been seen in the truth movement as a whistleblower when the reality is he's a misguided truther who was stupid enough to get himself canned from his own job.


Link

There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional driving force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC collapse is at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. Either you can make sense of what really happened to those buildings, and communicate this quickly, or we all face the same destruction and despair that come from global decisions based on disinformation and “chatter”.

Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You may know that there are a number of other current and former government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth. I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign of respect and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of fact around which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can grow again. Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.

Link should be this one

You sound like you are trying way too hard to discredit someone on a topic that has long been beaten to death. What are your motives? Your post seems suspiciously hostile.

originally posted by: r0gueAgent
You sound like you are trying way too hard to discredit someone on a topic that has long been beaten to death. What are your motives? Your post seems suspiciously hostile.

Yes, it was derailing another thread and I made a new one because of that.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: r0gueAgent

There are a few people on ATS that hold onto this guy in their belief he disproves WTC tower inward bowing and collapse, and he was fired for digging to deep. People that over look he was simply canned for violating company police and lied about the UL's role in certifying structural steel.

As noted, Ryan has been referred to in threads centered on the pentagon and what caused the damage on 9/11.

Whether you buy that 9/11 was an inside job or not does not change the fact that nothing like that happens unless it is.

Peace.

a reply to: D8Tee

the reality is he's a misguided truther who was stupid enough to get himself canned from his own job.

Is that all our reality or just the one you are making up for yourself?

What makes you write a thread about this?


I mean you actually believe the official story.......?

originally posted by: HeliocentricFantasy
a reply to: D8Tee

the reality is he's a misguided truther who was stupid enough to get himself canned from his own job.

Is that all our reality or just the one you are making up for yourself?

What makes you write a thread about this?


I mean you actually believe the official story.......?

It was explained that a few individuals denying a large jet hit the pentagon with no credible arguments where trying to deflect the original topic of the pentagon to the WTC and Ryan.

The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The point Ryan was injected

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: HeliocentricFantasy

What do you mean by the official story? The official story as defined, misrepresented, and misquoted by the truth movement? For example, pictures of the steel columns at the WTC cut by thermal lance during clean up? The pictures individuals were falsely claiming were cut by thermite?

Do you believe the truth movement infiltrated with con artists? Fire extinguisher bombs at the WTC? Nukes in WTC 7 diesel tanks, lasers and holograms, missiles and holograms? Thermite ceiling tiles?

DR Wood's WTC dustification?

Jones thermite WTC dust that he never showed reacted in an inert atmosphere? Or his peer review paper were the experiments could not be replicated, and it was proven the paper was fraudulently peer reviewed?

Or Richard Gage and fizzle no flash bombs?

a reply to: neutronflux

There is only one official story. Take note of the word official.

If you need any more help identifying what it is I am talking about, let me know.

originally posted by: HeliocentricFantasy
a reply to: neutronflux

There is only one official story. Take note of the word official.

If you need any more help identifying what it is I am talking about, let me know.

Sorry you cannot read posts. Let's try this again.

I should have defined the official story as outlined in reports and documents.

Or you confused by the official story as portrayed by the misquoting, innuendo, misrepresentation, and the pseudoscience of the truth movement.

a reply to: neutronflux

You are the only one confused here. I said "official story". I don't see how I can be any clearer about what I am refering too.

What part of "official story" do you not understand?

a reply to: neutronflux

The point Ryan was injected

The OP could have injected his findings into that discussion. It's hardly thread worthy, as we can see.......it's a free world though, or at least it is supposed to be.

a reply to: HeliocentricFantasy

Do you have a specific example from the official account that is false and the evidence it is false? Or you just going of opinions from the truth movement.

Or a credible theory from the truth movement to supersede the official account?

a reply to: neutronflux

I don't feel a need to discuss fairytales with you here, nor do I see the point. Been there, done that. If you still believe the official story then

originally posted by: HeliocentricFantasy
a reply to: neutronflux

I don't feel a need to discuss fairytales with you here, nor do I see the point. Been there, done that. If you still believe the official story then...

This is the common response when a theorist is asked to detail what they believe really happened and what the evidence is for their version. After dragging out the same, tired old "proofs" and finding themselves in a corner, they resort to responses such as you have made. Some people are still promoting paint-on thermite after having it explained to them why thermite is not used for demolitions and why paint-on thermite wouldn't do anything even if it could be ignited. I guess when a theorist has a nice fantasy about really being "in the know," disruptions are not to be permitted.

What this means is that there is still no evidence of anything but the official narrative.

originally posted by: HeliocentricFantasy
a reply to: neutronflux

I don't feel a need to discuss fairytales with you here, nor do I see the point. Been there, done that. If you still believe the official story then

I support for the towers that:

Pre 9/11 fire proof insulation studies found the fire proofing for the structural steel deficient.

On 9/11, only 11 floors in one tower had their insulation updated.

The fires in the towers was spread at a rate and instantly among floors beyond design parameters.

The jet impacts cut electrical, elevator, fire water services. (So not sure how a wiring system for CD implosion would survive the impacts and fires)

The fire caused the long floor trusses, which had no supporting concrete columns along their span, to droop.

The drooping trusses caused inward bowing once they cooled and started to contract. Initiating collapse.

Video and thread here.....

www.metabunk.org...

With the initiation of tower collapse with no tail tell boom of charges capable of generating a pressure wave forcefully enough to cut steel columns, there is no proof of implosion.

Is that the official account for the towers? That is the model I came to through research? Inward bowing and collapse?

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: HeliocentricFantasy
a reply to: neutronflux

I don't feel a need to discuss fairytales with you here, nor do I see the point. Been there, done that. If you still believe the official story then...

This is the common response when a theorist is asked to detail what they believe really happened and what the evidence is for their version. After dragging out the same, tired old "proofs" and finding themselves in a corner, they resort to responses such as you have made. Some people are still promoting paint-on thermite after having it explained to them why thermite is not used for demolitions and why paint-on thermite wouldn't do anything even if it could be ignited. I guess when a theorist has a nice fantasy about really being "in the know," disruptions are not to be permitted.

What this means is that there is still no evidence of anything but the official narrative.

I like how they assume you buy into the official account 100 percent for a straw man argument.

And will not provide examples of what they think are official lies and pseudoscience?

The jet impacts

a reply to: HeliocentricFantasy

There are multiple threads on the jet impacts....

Do you read any posts other than your own.

Is my view on the WTC towers the "Offical Account". Is it wrong?

This thread was created to stop derailing a thread on the pentagon.

I am thinking you are another shameless conspiracists that ignores honest debate, ignores valid questions directed at them, and only come backs are:

"the official narrative"...

"But what about that"

"But what about this"

Good luck on the pentagon threads and shanksvilles threads....