Question for 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

a reply to: turbonium1


Let’s start simple again.

One. State where NIST ever had its own forensic crime team. The WTC investigation started on site by local law enforcement, Local Fire Departments, engineers and specialists, and the FBI. Are you saying The New York Fire Department / New York City does not investigate building collapse.

Two, you said the pile was not a crime scene. A falsehood by you.

Three. I have provided links to material and cited items that clearly state the pile was invested and all steel and rubble was taken to the lay down yards for shipment.

You probe the material and works I cited did not have that information or are false.

Shame on you for false arguments and repeating truth movement lies.

a reply to: turbonium1

This link talks about how the WTC steel was handled.

See assertion 6

www.implosionworld.com...

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
Please cite were it is stated the WTC steel was not assessed for forensic value on site.

Please cite where it IS stated. That would be interesting to see..

originally posted by: neutronflux
Please cite were the steel was shipped off from the pile, bypassing the assessment at the lay yards before release.

How can they 'assess' 50,000 tons of steel, say 'It's scrap', and ship it to China, SEVEN MONTHS before they even said they were going to start an investigation?

Cuz FEMA did it.

So now that I’ve corrected your ignorance on this matter, how does it change your view?

a reply to: Salander

at least to my satisfaction.

well then.


the rest of my post addresses that.


Your satisfaction has nothing to do with basic brain functions that allow one to use it.

I understand your frustration at trying to defend an indefensible notion sold by a government notorious for its mendacity.

point proven.

brain dead.


Try finding 1 post where I defend any notions sold by the US government.

That is all you have, a false sense of belief based on some deluded idea you know what you are talking about.

all you see are names on a screen and based on your history with that poster you cant get passed whats written and you reply like a brain dead zombie parroting the same old nonsense.


What others say, be it government, so you can disagree or a conspiracy theorist where you parrot what they say.

there seems to be no thought involved other that telling others they have deficient underthings of things.


Please show me you can think

do you understand this description below of why things may get flung out

the energy of the collapsing building will create enough energy to throw large chunks out and blow out large pockets of air that if told was created by an explosions would be simply be believed because it seems logical without any further thinking.

Do you understand this?


anything falling will do so due to gravity, you seem to have a grasp on this. BRAVO

anything under whats falling is caught in a area of increased pressure, if the area is enclosed by 4 walls like in a building where there is open space, the open space will have such great pressure as the building above is collapsing that things will move in a direction that allows the least resistance.

If you cannot understand how things may fly out sideways then sorry the only conclusion I can accept that fits is you must have ulterior motives.

your intellectual understanding of simple physics is so deficient that "trolling" is the only way you can attempt to defend or explain what happened there.

Yes, that is what you are expected to say when you cannot grasp how something falling will hit something else and it may not push it straight down but send it flying out in a horizontal direction or whatever direction depending on impact and anything else that may have supported it.


yes, deficiency of intellectual understanding is lacking.

Gravity works in only 1 direction

yes,

and gravity on a collapsing building will create kinetic energy with every moving object,


that energy when it strikes something below it as its falling will send things flying out in every direction even up against gravity.

depending on how much kinetic energy is involved will be one factor in how far things get flung out.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

I was thinking about the gravity works in one direction. Gravity really imparts energy. If an object has potentially energy because of its position, it has stored energy.

It’s hard to find the wording for this....

Once a ball is dropped for example, the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. Now the ball is being pulled down, but it has motion. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion.

A steel ball dropped from 1 meter has enough kinetic energy to jump back up to .98 meter.
www.exploratorium.edu...

Or think about a water tower. Gravity is pulling down on the water in the pipes at all times. However, because of potential energy, pressure is created. The potential energy of the water in a water tower can push water straight up in a plumbing system until it is parallel with the level in the water tank.

So water pressure created by the use of a water tower can cause water in pipes to “defy” gravity until it reaches the height of the water in the water tower.


The release of potential imparts kinetic energy on an object. That energy is enough to get the object back to it’s starting hight if something like a collision or conduit causes a change of direction in travel.

With all the objects crashing into each other during the towers collapse, and having the vertical and core columns to bounce and slide off of, there were ample collisions to cause changes of direction.

a reply to: wmd_2008


That might be good enough for simple minds, or minds never exposed to college level physics, perhaps Boy Scouts, but it proves nothing at all. Try again.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008


That might be good enough for simple minds, or minds never exposed to college level physics, perhaps Boy Scouts, but it proves nothing at all. Try again.

What have you prove repeating the lies of the truth movement. Jack squat.

Like to actually quote the individual and create a argument why it’s wrong. Or just create more false arguments based on jack squat?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008


That might be good enough for simple minds, or minds never exposed to college level physics.

Exposed isn’t good enough.

You need to understand it too.

You don’t, do you...

a reply to: MrBig2430


I understand it way better than the poster who attempted to "explain" the horizontal ejection by dropping a steel ball on the sidewalk, LOL.

So do 2000+ architects and engineers

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430


I understand it way better than the poster who attempted to "explain" the horizontal ejection by dropping a steel ball on the sidewalk, LOL.

So do 2000+ architects and engineers

You just don’t get physics. The steel ball drop illustrates the potential energy that is imparted on objects by gravity and position above the earth.

Another false argument by you by ignoring what is modeled through a Newton’s cradle. That not only colliding objects can cause horizontal ejection, but upward horizontal ejection

Newton's Cradle - Incredible Science
m.youtube.com...

I used potential energy, kinetic energy, objects in motion tend to stay in motion, well know models that illustrate the basics of physics, what happens when a falling 100 ton chunck of building hits a five ton chunk, and described what collisions could have taken place to cause lateral ejection.


All those AE hacks you invoke, but can not answer?

How did mythical AE 9/11 Truth fizzle no flash cutting charges cause horizontal ejection. A narrative that AE created to compensate for the fact there was no explosions at the initiation and during collapse strong enough to cause an audible pressure wave. Much less cut steel.

If the towers fell in their own footprints, then when did horizontal ejection come along. Either way, the truth movement is caught in lies.

If you know the truth, why do you run away from answering to the truth?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430


I understand it way better than the poster who attempted to "explain" the horizontal ejection by dropping a steel ball on the sidewalk, LOL.

So do 2000+ architects and engineers

Nope.

You only think you do

a reply to: neutronflux

If there are any "hacks" to be observed on the 911 question, it is those who defend the absurd official story. The sophistry you offer stinks.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008


That might be good enough for simple minds, or minds never exposed to college level physics, perhaps Boy Scouts, but it proves nothing at all. Try again.

Physics, Applied mechanics, Engineering Science , Civil Eng at college worked in the design drawing office of a STRUCTURAL steel work company, many years on site testing materials to destruction, working with structural engineers, physics I know more about it than YOU.

Oh I will have fries with that

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: MrBig2430


I understand it way better than the poster who attempted to "explain" the horizontal ejection by dropping a steel ball on the sidewalk, LOL.

So do 2000+ architects and engineers

Architects for the truth, 10's of thousands OBVIOUSLY don't agree with Gage and his collection of mechanical,chemical engineers and I believe a kitchen fitter. Architects DON'T do structural calculations they are Structural Engineers best customers.

That's how little YOU know.

a reply to: wmd_2008


Egads, it is depressing to think that somebody might be paying YOU for anything involving technical analysis, but sometimes life is unfair.

I will go with the men and women of AE911 Truth any day over your analysis, because my few years of college physics and my common sense tell me that modern buildings do not just collapse from fire in the manner observed at WTC.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008


Egads, it is depressing to think that somebody might be paying YOU for anything involving technical analysis, but sometimes life is unfair.

I will go with the men and women of AE911 Truth any day over your analysis, because my few years of college physics and my common sense tell me that modern buildings do not just collapse from fire in the manner observed at WTC.

Once again a TRUTHER uses a single claim for the destruction it wasn't just fire, just love that

a reply to: Salander

I will go with the men and women of AE911 Truth any day over your analysis,

I'd go with FDNY officers and chiefs - Having listened to them in seminars, asking them questions and talking to
them in general

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

If there are any "hacks" to be observed on the 911 question, it is those who defend the absurd official story. The sophistry you offer stinks.

Are you talking about the guys that cannot watch the WTC collapse videos, and see the vertical columns still standing after the complete collapse of the floor systems.

Then please do tell how AE 9/11 Truth narrative of mythical of fizzle no flash explosives caused lateral ejection.

Please quote in this thread AE’s explanation of what explosives were used at the Towers, how there was no audible nor physical evidence of pressures waves capable of cutting steel, but AE’s burning cutting charges supposedly rocketed items through a a 500,000 ton curtain of steel and rubble you only think fell straight down?

a reply to: Salander


Plasco building Tehran Iran



www.youtube.com...

Madrid Windsor - collapse of steelwork above concrete core

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Salander

I will go with the men and women of AE911 Truth any day over your analysis,

I'd go with FDNY officers and chiefs - Having listened to them in seminars, asking them questions and talking to
them in general

Really I flew across the pond went to New York, ground zero did the tour went to the FDNY Ladder 10 saw the Museum also spoke to firemen they didn't think like you.