Scott Grainger, FPE (Fire Protection Engineer) Interview by Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Scott Grainger, FPE has been a practicing engineer for 39 years. He uses his professional and experienced knowledge to discuss the World Trade Center fires and resulting collapses:






It is indeed great to see a professional in the fire field give facts about what should and should not happen. He states what the 9/11 truth movement has been stating all along: that those buildings could not possibly have completely collapsed due to fires.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

I don't see the need to repeat every 9/11 blogger post on ATS. Or A & E for that matter!

Originally posted by banned62
reply to post by _BoneZ_

 

i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

It's still talked about because there are so many questions unanswered. Not to mention the fact that as a result of this millions of people have been killed across the globe due to the war on terror.

So that is why people are still talking about it and until the U.S government have a full inquiry and talk to the people who were involved at the top of government, then there will always be questions. Well from many people anyway.

You are entitled to believe what you want, but take a look at the video before you start shouting crap!!

Originally posted by banned62
reply to post by _BoneZ_

 

i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

That's funny, this is a 9/11 forum. If you don't care or want to know, then get the hell out of here! But, since you did take the time to read it and you're a registered member of a conspiracy site, you must care a little bit. So, what's your deal?

I don't see the need to repeat every 9/11 blogger post on ATS. Or A & E for that matter!

Why not?

Oh yeah, good job Bonez that was a great video. Although, someone will soon tell us why he isn't credible I'm sure.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


"Steel framed building" and "similar buildings". The WTC towers were not steel framed and there are no similar buildings that have evere been subjected to the stresses that the towers were on 9/11. Two strikes and not even a minute into the video.

The guy is supposedly an engineer. Have him put his opinion on paper, sign and seal it.

Thank you for the video. My question is only this: why do we need professionals to tell us what is so obvious. The whole world was brainwashed on that terrible day. Even hearing them use the word "collapse" makes me roll my eyes. Just take two sets of video side by side: buildings that burned for many hours (longer than the towers burned) and buildings that were "taken down" with planned explosives and tell me which ones look more like the twin towers.
THAT, my friend, was the real "Shock and Awe".

Originally posted by freedom12
I don't see the need to repeat every 9/11 blogger post on ATS. Or A & E for that matter!

I don't see the need for people to troll threads and make off-topic comments. Nobody forced you to read this thread. If you don't have anything constructive to say about the subject, why waste time and bandwidth to post at all?

ATS is the main source of news and information for many. Almost every news story that is posted on ATS is repeated from another source. I would say that if you dislike news stories "repeated" from other sources, then you may want to look at the reasons why you come to ATS.

Originally posted by budaruskie

Originally posted by banned62
reply to post by _BoneZ_

 

i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

That's funny, this is a 9/11 forum. If you don't care or want to know, then get the hell out of here! But, since you did take the time to read it and you're a registered member of a conspiracy site, you must care a little bit. So, what's your deal?

I don't see the need to repeat every 9/11 blogger post on ATS. Or A & E for that matter!

Why not?

Oh yeah, good job Bonez that was a great video. Although, someone will soon tell us why he isn't credible I'm sure.

edit on 3/31/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)

Yes you were right. Hooper came along and answered that call.

I can only assume he must be an engineer as he seems to know an awful lot more than the guy in the video.

Originally posted by banned62
i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

Any recommendations on what we should do, that wouldn't be talking to deaf ears or landing us in jail?

Originally posted by hooper
The WTC towers were not steel framed

You are correct. The towers were not steel-framed, they were steel tube-framed. However, Mr. Grainger was also talking about WTC 7 which was steel-framed. So, nice try at attempting to twist Mr. Grainger's words to discredit him.

Looks like you are the discredited one, again.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by hooper
The WTC towers were not steel framed

You are correct. The towers were not steel-framed, they were steel tube-framed. However, Mr. Grainger was also talking about WTC 7 which was steel-framed. So, nice try at attempting to twist Mr. Grainger's words to discredit him.

Looks like you are the discredited one, again.

Then why wouldn't a professional engineer, making an explanatory video be that specific? I mean its not like someone stopped him on the street on his way to a movie and threw a microphone in his face. I'm not buying it, he was talking about the towers, and went on to say other similar buildings in similar situations, of which we know that are none. Again, why can't he put his opinion on paper, seal and sign it. That's what engineers do.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by banned62
i cant believe everyone is still talking about this crap, either go do something about what happened or let it be.

Any recommendations on what we should do, that wouldn't be talking to deaf ears or landing us in jail?

Why not call for a convention of all like minded individuals and conduct an investigation and put together a unified theory? You may not have millions of dollars or subpeona power but at least you can clear up some of the clutter in the "movement".

Originally posted by hooper
Why not call for a convention of all like minded individuals

Already been done, hundreds of times, notably a series of worldwide conferences that AE911 lead.

and conduct an investigation and put together a unified theory?

"Conduct an investigation" would imply legal authority. Subpoena power, etc. Who should contact whom in order to arrange for this? Isn't that something the FBI is supposed to do?

You may not have millions of dollars or subpeona power but at least you can clear up some of the clutter in the "movement".

No, what you are describing is petty and useless and you are not helping anyone.

Originally posted by hooper
Then why wouldn't a professional engineer, making an explanatory video be that specific?

Why does he need to be that specific? It really doesn't matter what the technical term for the steel structure of the towers is. How many lay people are going to care about the technical term for the structure of the towers? All people need to know is that no steel-structured highrise has ever completely collapsed due to fire, period.

That, in and of itself, completely destroys the NIST report and its theories.

reply to post by bsbray11

Already been done, hundreds of times, notably a series of worldwide conferences that AE911 lead.

Attendance?

"Conduct an investigation" would imply legal authority. Subpoena power, etc. Who should contact whom in order to arrange for this? Isn't that something the FBI is supposed to do?

Not really. You are already assuming that there are guilty parties other than those already identified and yet there hasn't been any formal testing the science of your conspiracy theories except on internet forums.

No, what you are describing is petty and useless and you are not helping anyone.

Its as petty and useless as you make it.

Originally posted by hooper

Already been done, hundreds of times, notably a series of worldwide conferences that AE911 lead.

Attendance?

What would it matter how many people attended? Is there some magic number that automatically grants subpoena power?

You wouldn't know what a logical argument was if it punched you in the face, I'm pretty sure.

Anyway, since they had literally hundreds of conferences all across the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, Japan, etc., I don't know how many people attended over-all. If you are that interested then you could look it up yourself. As it has nothing to do with anything, and you don't seem to really be interested, it looks like you're just putting your trolling shoes on.

"Conduct an investigation" would imply legal authority. Subpoena power, etc. Who should contact whom in order to arrange for this? Isn't that something the FBI is supposed to do?

Not really. You are already assuming that there are guilty parties other than those already identified and yet there hasn't been any formal testing the science of your conspiracy theories except on internet forums.

Videos like what John Cole did, is science being put to the test. So that part of your statement is erroneous. What you mean to say is that there has been no formal investigation that would validate any number of our suspicions. Welcome to circular reasoning 101. You are telling us we don't deserve an investigation, because no investigation has validated any of our suspicions, even when our whole objective is to get that same investigation since the "official" ones left so much information missing.

reply to post by bsbray11

What would it matter how many people attended? Is there some magic number that automatically grants subpoena power?

Uh, yes - its call a voting majority. You garnish enough votes for your candidate then that candidate wins the election and calls for an investigation by the governmental body that your candidate is in. Thats how it works.

You wouldn't know what a logical argument was if it punched you in the face, I'm pretty sure.

Try one and I'll see.

Anyway, since they had literally hundreds of conferences all across the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, Japan, etc., I don't know how many people attended over-all. If you are that interested then you could look it up yourself. As it has nothing to do with anything, and you don't seem to really be interested, it looks like you're just putting your trolling shoes on.

Not having a political majority has a lot to do with a successful campaign to achieve a transformative goal.

Videos like what John Cole did, is science being put to the test. So that part of your statement is erroneous.

Sorry, youtube videos of backyard experiments of dubious quality is not a substitute for science.

What you mean to say is that there has been no formal investigation that would validate any number of our suspicions.

Actually, your just confusing what you don't like with what actually exist. Investigations were conducted by relevant professionals and results published. Sorry.

Welcome to circular reasoning 101. You are telling us we don't deserve an investigation, because no investigation has validated any of our suspicions, even when our whole objective is to get that same investigation since the "official" ones left so much information missing.

Suspicion is the key word there. Suspicion is another word for opinion and bias. Granting a few fringe groupies millions of dollars and subpeona power is not going to happen without something solid being presented first by the "suspicious". But you know that.

Originally posted by hooper

What would it matter how many people attended? Is there some magic number that automatically grants subpoena power?

Uh, yes - its call a voting majority. You garnish enough votes for your candidate then that candidate wins the election and calls for an investigation by the governmental body that your candidate is in. Thats how it works.

Oh okay, so now someone is running for president that we all have to vote for.

Maybe I should pop some popcorn for this.

You wouldn't know what a logical argument was if it punched you in the face, I'm pretty sure.

Try one and I'll see.

Okay, let's try this one. "No one has subpoena power to re-investigate 9/11 because not enough people showed up at the AE911 conferences."

To you, this is a logical argument. Yes?

Not having a political majority has a lot to do with a successful campaign

Ohhh, so first we have to form a political party, then we have to have someone run for president.

I had no idea this was standard procedure for investigating a "terrorist attack."

Sorry, youtube videos of backyard experiments of dubious quality is not a substitute for science.

Again, you have just shown (and are continuing to show) that you wouldn't know how to think scientifically, even if science was your own mother.

What you mean to say is that there has been no formal investigation that would validate any number of our suspicions.

Actually, your just confusing what you don't like with what actually exist. Investigations were conducted by relevant professionals and results published. Sorry.

Right, and people who make much more logical and convincing statements than yourself are trying to defend those reports on these forums, and failing. You are never a part of those discussions, because you have nothing to contribute to them.

Welcome to circular reasoning 101. You are telling us we don't deserve an investigation, because no investigation has validated any of our suspicions, even when our whole objective is to get that same investigation since the "official" ones left so much information missing.

Suspicion is the key word there. Suspicion is another word for opinion and bias. Granting a few fringe groupies millions of dollars and subpeona power is not going to happen without something solid being presented first by the "suspicious". But you know that.

Thanks for not taking the time to understand what a circular argument is, just to repeat it again instead. You're a real winner.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by freedom12
I don't see the need to repeat every 9/11 blogger post on ATS. Or A & E for that matter!

I don't see the need for people to troll threads and make off-topic comments. Nobody forced you to read this thread. If you don't have anything constructive to say about the subject, why waste time and bandwidth to post at all?

ATS is the main source of news and information for many. Almost every news story that is posted on ATS is repeated from another source. I would say that if you dislike news stories "repeated" from other sources, then you may want to look at the reasons why you come to ATS.

And calling someone on your side of this issue a "troll" .......how does this advance your cause?