(September 12, 2016 at 10:55 pm)Tres Leches Wrote: Arkilogue, Do you believe the moon landing was faked too? Cause there's "evidence" for that as well.
Do you have any idea how difficult impossible it is to keep a secret like this? 15 years and not ONE conspirator/ participant has come forward to support these looney-bin theories.

What's that other Hitch saying - oh yeah -
"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Red Herring
Ignoratio elenchi

(also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, smokescreen, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation, judgmental language [form of])

---

I do understand it's a very uncomfortable consideration.

(September 12, 2016 at 10:27 pm)Losty Wrote: If nearly 3,000 people die in a terrifying and gruesome tragedy and you don't care because you're not that patriotic...that's a little bit fucked up.

Not gonna lie, I didn't really care about America that morning. I lived less than 1/4 mile from a major seaport on the West Coast with a Navy base attached. I was worried about my son and myself getting away from the fan before the shit hit it.

Start @ 14:14, watch the "conspiracy theorist" try to get the Forensic Structural Engineer Dr. Leroy Hulsey to jump to conclusions and watch the Dr.'s commitment to science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxG4lYyitsI

And more to come...

(September 12, 2016 at 10:43 pm)Sterben Wrote: It's not that I don't care, for me to show a concern for an issue I always ask myself one question. Is the situation relevant to me? I then exam the info I do know at the time and figure out my answer. For the 9-11 I used the exact same method of thinking, I paused my conversation with my friends for brief moment; I came to conclusion that it was not for the moment and went back to what I was doing. Did that action make me a bad American? I don't think so, it just makes me self-centered.

It means you lack empathy.

(September 12, 2016 at 10:42 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: The greater certainty about the material properties involved would allow the team to evaluate whether WTC 7 could have collapsed as a result of burning materials being ejected from WTC 1 and igniting fires on the 12th and 13th floors. The team’s analysis eventually led them to conclude that even with very high estimates for the amount of combustible materials present in office buildings — using the maximum amounts allowed in the building codes — and making many other generous assumptions, such as having two floors “totally ablaze with raging inferno fires,” WTC 7 still would not collapse.

The fires that caused the collapse were obviously lower than the 12th and 13th floors:



Additionally, the color of the smoke tells the canny fireman that petrochemicals (most likely plastics, in this case) were highly involved. Those burn are very high temperatures.

We have a hot fire on the lower floors of a large heavy building that burned unabated for hours. Steel loses 50% of its load-strength after 30 minutes exposed to 1300°F heat. The steel in the lower part of the building failed.

(September 12, 2016 at 11:26 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 10:27 pm)Losty Wrote: If nearly 3,000 people die in a terrifying and gruesome tragedy and you don't care because you're not that patriotic...that's a little bit fucked up.

Not gonna lie, I didn't really care about America that morning. I lived less than 1/4 mile from a major seaport on the West Coast with a Navy base attached. I was worried about my son and myself getting away from the fan before the shit hit it.

I didn't care about America either. I was 12 and I was gathered with my entire family at my grandma's house watching in horror as everyone tried to get in touch with my uncle who lived and worked very nearby. We all stayed there in that living room. The whole night. I was confused and I was scared for my uncle. I was horrified at the things I saw on tv. I wasn't thinking about America at all. I surely didn't have any patriotism on my mind.

(September 12, 2016 at 11:36 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: The fires that caused the collapse were obviously lower than the 12th and 13th floors:



Additionally, the color of the smoke tells the canny fireman that petrochemicals (most likely plastics, in this case) were highly involved. Those burn are very high temperatures.

We have a hot fire on the lower floors of a large heavy building that burned unabated for hours. Steel loses 50% of its load-strength after 30 minutes exposed to 1300°F heat. The steel in the lower part of the building failed.

Dude, that picture is taken half way through it's near free-fall.

Here's a better one...



Do you know how many blocks away it was taken? You can definitely see the burnt out floors and that looks fairly high....look at all those street lamps going off into the distance...

And this is the official NIST report: https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laborat...estigation

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

---

Excuse me I was in error, it was in free fall for 2.25 seconds.

http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/...6-47-4.pdf

The total collapse of WTC 7 at 5:20 PM on 9/11, shown
in Fig. 2, is remarkable because it exemplified all the signature
features of an implosion: The building dropped
in absolute free fall for the first 2.25 seconds of its descent
over a distance of 32 meters or eight stories [3]. Its
transition from stasis to free fall was sudden, occurring
in approximately one-half second. It fell symmetrically
straight down. Its steel frame was almost entirely dismembered
and deposited mostly inside the building’s
footprint, while most of its concrete was pulverized into
tiny particles. Finally, the collapse was rapid, occurring
in less than seven seconds.

Given the nature of the collapse, any investigation
adhering to the scientific method should have seriously
considered the controlled demolition hypothesis, if not
started with it. Instead, NIST (as well as the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), which conducted a
preliminary study prior to the NIST investigation) began
with the predetermined conclusion that the collapse was
caused by fires.

Trying to prove this predetermined conclusion was
apparently difficult. FEMA’s nine-month study concluded
by saying, “The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how
they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at
this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises
contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis
has only a low probability of occurrence.” NIST, meanwhile,
had to postpone the release of its WTC 7 report
from mid-2005 to November 2008. As late as March 2006,
NIST’s lead investigator, Dr. Shyam Sunder, was quoted as
saying, “Truthfully, I don’t really know. We’ve had trouble
getting a handle on building No. 7.”

All the while, NIST was steadfast in ignoring evidence
that conflicted with its predetermined conclusion.
The most notable example was its attempt to deny thatWTC 7 underwent free fall. When pressed about that matter during a technical briefing, Dr. Sunder dismissed it by saying, “[A] free-fall time would be an object that
has no structural components below it.” But in the case
of WTC 7, he claimed, “there was structural resistance
that was provided.” Only after being challenged by high
school physics teacher David Chandler and by physics
professor Steven Jones (one of the authors of this article),
who had measured the fall on video, did NIST acknowledge
a 2.25-second period of free fall in its final report. Yet
NIST’s computer model shows no such period of free fall,
nor did NIST attempt to explain how WTC 7 could have
had “no structural components below it” for eight stories.

(September 12, 2016 at 11:40 pm)Losty Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 11:26 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Not gonna lie, I didn't really care about America that morning. I lived less than 1/4 mile from a major seaport on the West Coast with a Navy base attached. I was worried about my son and myself getting away from the fan before the shit hit it.

I didn't care about America either. I was 12 and I was gathered with my entire family at my grandma's house watching in horror as everyone tried to get in touch with my uncle who lived and worked very nearby. We all stayed there in that living room. The whole night. I was confused and I was scared for my uncle. I was horrified at the things I saw on tv. I wasn't thinking about America at all. I surely didn't have any patriotism on my mind.

I hear you -- for me, it was an Event, the JFK moment of my generation, and veteran though I am, I wasn't processing it as "Ermagerd, 'Murrica's bein' 'tacked!" -- but rather, "Where the hell should Jake and I go in case this port's a target too?" Also, trying to figure out a good answer to "What's wrong, Daddy?" when he's only four occupied a bit of my mind.

Funny, the things we think about in those sorts of times.

When it happened, I was walking into Walmart and it was on all the front screens. There was an old black lady pushing a shopping cart passing by watching and she said "Lawd I wish I never live to see these days..." and shuffled off.

Prescient lady.

(September 13, 2016 at 12:03 am)Arkilogue Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 11:36 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: The fires that caused the collapse were obviously lower than the 12th and 13th floors:



Additionally, the color of the smoke tells the canny fireman that petrochemicals (most likely plastics, in this case) were highly involved. Those burn are very high temperatures.

We have a hot fire on the lower floors of a large heavy building that burned unabated for hours. Steel loses 50% of its load-strength after 30 minutes exposed to 1300°F heat. The steel in the lower part of the building failed.

Dude, that picture is taken half way through it's near free-fall.

Here's a better one...

That smoke is still emanating from floors much lower than you'd claimed earlier, sorry.

(September 13, 2016 at 12:03 am)Arkilogue Wrote: Do you know how many blocks away it was taken? You can definitely see the burnt out floors and that looks fairly high....look at all those street lamps going off into the distance...

Silly. Even from your street-level shots, it's clear that that fire is very low in the building. Are you even looking at what you're posting? Or is this copypasta?

(September 13, 2016 at 12:03 am)Arkilogue Wrote: And this is the official NIST report: https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laborat...estigation

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

[Emphasis added -- Thump]

Yeah, your source is verifying what I was telling you. Steel fails after prolonged heat exposure. Your own source says that it happened on the lower floors, just as I'd mentioned.

It may come as a surprise to you, but when supporting beams in a high-rise fail, the building cannot resist gravity so well. Collapse sometimes happens.

What do you think happened to cause that building to drop?

Be specific.