The First 9/11 Sceptic

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Then start with the kink that developed in WTC 7 before the WTC 7 facade fell, which is clearly visible in the video of the WTC 7 collapse.

And why it’s not in the Hulsey model.

You cannot. Because the Hulsey model is based on false mythology.

Not the actual physical, video, audio, photographic, seismic evidence.


Is a hack model...

Again.

UAF WTC 7 Evaluation Simulation Plausibility Check (Leroy Hulsey, AE911Truth)

m.youtube.com...

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Building seven did not come apart at all

By the why. The kink in the WTC 7 clearly shows you have created a false mythology concerning WTC 7.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Then start with the kink that developed in WTC 7 before the WTC 7 facade fell, which is clearly visible in the video of the WTC 7 collapse.

And why it’s not in the Hulsey model.

You cannot. Because the Hulsey model is based on false mythology.

Not the actual physical, video, audio, photographic, seismic evidence.





Is a hack model...

Again.

UAF WTC 7 Evaluation Simulation Plausibility Check (Leroy Hulsey, AE911Truth)

m.youtube.com...

Kink? 8 floors got taken out here underneath so clearly the upper part of the building no longer secure and stable, my friend. All that mass above slipping downwards, since that section below is after pancaking!

NIST model does not have any kink either. There building crumbles and tilts over it is the reason they shut the model off and did not allow the model to to continue collapsing to the end.

You keep quoting that information in the black box, Again, debunkers are not understanding the implications here. The NIST model there is an element breakages resulting from heat of a fire. The beams and girders buckling under that strain and tension.

Hulsey however cannot precisely show what would happen to the steel core if explosives are used to bring a building down. You probably can render a computer game like scenario for the building, but it be more of a visual showcase than a accurate rendition of what happened. .

You keeping overlooking here (ignore Hulsey findings here) the NIST model shows that freefall never occurred during the progressive collapse outlined by them at any stage. So that’s problematic. Freefall was timed and recorded real time using physics tool kits. The mass is falling through the structure ( at gravitational acceleration i) over 100 feet. Only known away to remove structural support across the entire width of the building with this kind of precision (before actual collapse) would be by controlled demolition. NIST modelling and lack of freefall should be enough to doubt the official explanation for the collapse.

I fully understand, its unbelievable to some posters, people would place explosives in a building before the big event on 9/11. The evidence strongly supports that conclusion. 18 years after, the inside job was successfully pulled off. Since as far as we know nobody in the FBI looking to find the men/women who did it/

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Yes.

There was a kink before the facade fell.

That indicates what remained after the initial interior progressive collapse caused the building to separate into at least two separate sections. Proving your statement of, “ Building seven did not come apart at all” is a lie.

And why is the “kink” not in the Hulsey model.

Because....

Its a hack model...

Again.

UAF WTC 7 Evaluation Simulation Plausibility Check (Leroy Hulsey, AE911Truth)

m.youtube.com...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Yes.

There was a kink before the facade fell.

That indicates what remained after the initial interior progressive collapse caused the building to separate into at least two separate sections. Proving your statement of, “ Building seven did not come apart at all” is a lie.

And why is the “kink” not in the Hulsey model.

Because....

Its a hack model...

Again.

UAF WTC 7 Evaluation Simulation Plausibility Check (Leroy Hulsey, AE911Truth)

m.youtube.com...

Eastside columns (79 you see) have connections to the main core. Why do you think would happen to the eastside steel frame, when floors over 8 stories are taken out? Everything on that side of the building would become unstable. 8 floors of space removed would mean that eastside has a void and everything up top would fall down through it.

This is a match for the NIST model.




NIST model shows no freefall. In the box i highlighted you can see clearly , the floors are not removed (westside) In the NIST scenario the underneath section still there providing resistance. The reality is very different since the building across the entire width came down through its own structure. Freefall only possible when columns and floors are removed from east to west.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Why does Hulsey’s model not have the kink in it.

All you are doing is repeating the lies and false mythology of the truth movement. And ignoring the actual video, audio, photographic, physical, and seismic data that WTC7 by the way items on the roof dunk in to WTC 7, and the way the kink developed underwent a progressive interior collapse, then the facade fell.

While you ignore the best measurements of the collapse speed of the facade has the second stage of the facade collapse accelerating faster than what is accounted for by gravity. Which would be only possible if the interior of WTC 7 collapsed first, placing the facade under a mechanical strain.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

From...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

You

The debris field of almost null for WTC 7 is hard to simulate.

How is this contradictory? What logic drives such a statement?

Trying to be dishonest about my actual post.

The actual argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

Please explain how Hulsey’s model of WTC7 simulates the actual debris fiend of WTC 7, and the collateral damage by WTC 7 concerning other buildings.

Especially as pointed out by Oystein

But he didn't replicate...
the collapse or the East Penthouse correctly, as Mick showed earlier
the kink that formed in the east part of the roof
the flectures
the counter-clocwise rotation of the building
the fall of the north wall onto the roof of Fiterman Hall
Essentially, Hulsey himself erected a standard of precision that he wants to hold NIST to (without actually giving a reason), and then fails that standard.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

Pointless post, ignoring the lies and falsehoods of your sources.

You posted this statement from your source...

Unlike NIST the UAF study found a scenario that exactly matched the observed collapse both visually and in the time domain

But you contradict your own source with:

The debris field of almost null for WTC 7 is hard to simulate.

Trust me McGowan was not the only one who realized as hijacked planes hit 2 skyscrapers and the Pentagon that this could only happen through complicity inside the response system of NORAD. When the towers fell I'm sure I wasn't alone thinking "fires NEVER do this to steel buildings!". Once might have been believable but 3 times?!!? NOFINGWAY. I was home watching it all happen that day and it was surreal is the only word to describe it. Physical reality and governmental controls both went haywire for a few select hours. That could only happen through vast planning and a very large number of participants.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Like Middle East governments and rich private individuals backing a small army of dedicated individuals willing to commit suicide kamikaze style.

There has never been any history of people willing to die kamikaze style. Only if there was a word for individuals willing to die for a religious fanatic state by flying aircraft into things...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Why does Hulsey’s model not have the kink in it.

All you are doing is repeating the lies and false mythology of the truth movement. And ignoring the actual video, audio, photographic, physical, and seismic data that WTC7 by the way items on the roof dunk in to WTC 7, and the way the kink developed underwent a progressive interior collapse, then the facade fell.

While you ignore the best measurements of the collapse speed of the facade has the second stage of the facade collapse accelerating faster than what is accounted for by gravity. Which would be only possible if the interior of WTC 7 collapsed first, placing the facade under a mechanical strain.

You keep criticizing the truthers explantation for the collapse and you can do what you like there. But i have eyes and the models released by a government agency hired to investigate the collapse show logical errors.. The truther camp played no role in designing this collapse model it was a model released by NIST.

In the model shown here. Open your eyes please, you can see, the west side steel frame in place, so it not possible the upper section came through it’s own structure at freefall.

Falling section is not what caused the freefall and obvious, just looking at screenshot i posted (again open your eyes) Something else entirely was clearing out the structural resistance underneath. It's the only explanation that makes sense.

NIST wrongly measured the descent using a bad camera angle. The descent was freefall when the roofline dropped and by time it reached the 29th floor it slowed to almost freefall. NIST measured the descent in three stages, the part of the collapse we see on video, but this is deception. They hide it was only two stages, so they could claim in revised report, the building steel frame was still buckling underneath. So they slowed the fall down in the first stage and measured a point that was wrong.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Like Middle East governments and rich private individuals backing a small army of dedicated individuals willing to commit suicide kamikaze style.

There has never been any history of people willing to die kamikaze style. Only if there was a word for individuals willing to die for a religious fanatic state by flying aircraft into things...

+

You need to look up information, since its well-known history, Japanese fighter pilots, committed suicide all the time.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Trust me McGowan was not the only one who realized as hijacked planes hit 2 skyscrapers and the Pentagon that this could only happen through complicity inside the response system of NORAD. When the towers fell I'm sure I wasn't alone thinking "fires NEVER do this to steel buildings!". Once might have been believable but 3 times?!!? NOFINGWAY. I was home watching it all happen that day and it was surreal is the only word to describe it. Physical reality and governmental controls both went haywire for a few select hours. That could only happen through vast planning and a very large number of participants.

Speaking for myself here. The pentagon attack, for me, looks like a plane opened a hole in the wall. Too many people witnessed a commercial plane in Washington for it to be considered a fake. Still you can't fully rule out a secondary attack from within or timed to occur when the plane hit? Speculation not really based on any first hand knowledge.

I do think it extremely unlikely Planting explosives in a building like the Pentagon occurred. It would be uniquely difficult for any covert team to do this with the armed security. But then again the area, the plane hit, was unused and building works were ongoing before the event.. An airline missing a jet so it ended up in hitting the wall at the Pentagon or landed somewhere else,speculation is all we got. There photos of plane wreckage at the Pentagon so that tends to give credence to the plane version of the story.

Behind the scenes maybe.. It is odd the terrorists somehow off all days picked a day when the US airforce was off doing drills near Alaska. The drills were simulating air attacks by terrorists, and tapes from Norad reveal that personnel at the base got confused when FAA phoned in and asked was this real world or drill.

Reality is the terrorists (whoever they are in reality) put the US airforce out of action for two hours. First plane hit sometime after 8am and wasn’t until 10.30am the drills were called off. That raises lot of questions about a set up before the event.

Plus it’s obvious here building seven collapse was not natural and only explantation that fits the evidence is controlled demolition. Only a foreign government with ties to US intelligence would have foreknowledge of drills and operations in the states. My best guess a rogue group of operatives inside the US planted the demolitions or Israel gained intelligence, did it in secret; (maybe with help or no help) hard to know. Accusations is not prove. Culprits are unknown. But someone piggybacked this plane operation to carry out some other put together operation.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You keep criticizing the truthers explantation for the collapse and you can do what you like there.

Just point out there is zero credibility to planted pyrotechnics at the WTC

But i have eyes and the models released by a government agency hired to investigate the collapse show logical errors.

Has nothing to do with the actual video, audio, photographic, physical, and seismic evidence.

Again...

Everything from no demolition shrapnel recovered from the 19,000 body fragments of the WTC victims. 6,000 that could fit into in test tubes. No indication that there was hundreds of 3000 degree Fahrenheit fires from the ridiculous fantasy hundreds of thermite charges were planted. No indication there were explosions with the force to cut steel columns. To controlled demolition systems would not survive the jet impacts, being hit by debris, and the wide spread fires.


What do you not understand a demolition system is not going to survive hours of fires in WTC 7. Not the wiring, not the computer boards for remote detonators.

You

In the model shown here. Open your eyes please, you can see, the west side steel frame in place, so it not possible the upper section came through it’s own structure at freefall.

What are you babbling about.

For the twin towers. The cores fell last.





For WTC7. By the way items fell into WTC 7 from the roof. Such as the penthouse before the facade ever moved downward, and the kink that developed in WTC 7. WTC 7 underwent an interior progressive collapse. Then the facade fell.

You

Falling section is not what caused the freefall and obvious,

Building 7 began to visibly shake in the video evidence. Then the penthouse fell out of sight below the roofline before the facade began to move. Then the faced fell for a second at rates slower than gravity. (Which contradicts your false mythology that all resistance was removed instantly in the same instance) Then best analysis of WTC 7 has the facade accelerating faster than what can attributed to gravity for a split second, like an interior collapse place loading on the facade. Then the last second or so of the facade collapse was slower than free fall.

NIST wrongly measured the descent using a bad camera angle.

Good thing I don’t use the NIST analysis.

What analysis are you using?

The three stages you are referring to is after the penthouse completely disappeared below the roof line of WTC 7 before the facade ever stated to move down. Is that false.

So WTC 7 already underwent an interior collapse before the facade ever stated to move downward.

The facade columns were at the outer walls of WTC 7 at the Windows. With no indication of explosions. No indication of sparking and flashing from thermite.

With no possible way a controlled demolition system of wires and /or remote detonators would survive being hit from the debris from the twin towers, and the wide spread fires that burned for hours.

With thermite burning and cutting to slow and inconsistent for the split second precise timing by something like 600 charges required by your false mythology.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Plus it’s obvious here building seven collapse was not natural

What the hell does that mean? And building 7 itself was natural? Did it grow or something?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

When you going to address real issues...

Please explain how Hulsey’s model of WTC7 simulates the actual debris fiend of WTC 7, and the collateral damage by WTC 7 concerning other buildings.

Especially as pointed out by Oystein

But he didn't replicate...
the collapse or the East Penthouse correctly, as Mick showed earlier
the kink that formed in the east part of the roof
the flectures
the counter-clocwise rotation of the building
the fall of the north wall onto the roof of Fiterman Hall
Essentially, Hulsey himself erected a standard of precision that he wants to hold NIST to (without actually giving a reason), and then fails that standard.

originally posted by: TheSpanishArcher
Bought this book: Weird Scenes Inside The Canyon: Laurel Canyon, Covert Ops & The Dark Heart Of The Hippie Dream by David McGowan.

I only found out about Dave McGowan after he died myself. He was great and I wish I had known about him when he was alive. I read the whole thread before posting and see that somebody put his website up but I will do it again.

centerforaninformedamerica.com...

His daughter has attempted to continue his legacy and you can spend hours reading his stuff. One of my brothers who is a Naval Academy graduate is just getting over the cognitive dissonance that comes with getting red pilled thanks to McGowan. I started trying to tell him about things when the scamdemic started and he resisted hard. As much as I’d like to take credit for helping him see things for what they are, it was McGowan who changed his mind.

His series Wagging the Moondoggie is amazing and if you still think that anyone let alone the United States has sent people to the Moon after reading that then I would certainly like to interest you in some investing opportunities.

Neu to the forum and this thread what is a good primer for where the disinformation comes from.

a reply to: SpiritSea

I'm a long time eater at The Waffle House, as I waffle on everything. I don't know if everything he wrote is true, none of it or somewhere in between.

I don't know if the oil leak on my car is real or not. So, I'm not much help but coming across a dude who wrote a book that I just had to have being a white rock n roll "historian" type of guy AND he was one of the first who cried foul when this farce happened. Heck, it took me - no scholar, I admit, but - a few years to even think of a question about the OS. I didn't know anybody had the balls or the common sense to question what happened as we were all in shock.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

People on many levels did ask, and have always asked why security measures did fail. Is that false.

That contradicts this by you

I didn't know anybody had the balls or the common sense to question what happened as we were all in shock.

In fact. From the onset. People asked why and how this happened.

And many like me are angered that nobody was really held accountable over government incompetence.

a reply to: neutronflux

Please explain how Hulsey’s model of WTC7 simulates the actual debris fiend of WTC 7, and the collateral damage by WTC 7 concerning other buildings.

Why do you need this information and who cares after column 79? What Oystein, Mick and Neutron still can not understand is symmetrical and freefall.

How about you simulate Hulsey wrong.