This is great! http://youtu.be/wpAssQgQso4 The 'project' wants to raise 1.5 Billion dollars to rebuild one of the WTC towers, buy an airplane and fly it into the building to see if it collapses. Break out those checkbooks 'truthers'! Here's your change to make history. (They haven't yet asked for volunteers to fly the planes ....)
What a waste. People who accept the OCT without question would simply find a way to ignore such an experiment by saying things like the experiment is incomparable because there were more napkins on the original planes, thus heavy enough to bring down three skyscrapers. Iam somewhat amazed at how many are still ignorant about WT(f)C 7.
So why do you ignore all the evidence about WTC 7? Don't you find it rather hypocritical pretending debunkers ignore evidence while you stick your nose up at most of the evidence? And what evidence do debunkers ignore anyway? I keep asking truthers to present any evidence they have and they all run away.
Aren't you jumping the gun there in assuming the experimental building won't collapse in a similar manner to the real ones?
Are you NUTS? Truthers know far more than the studies done by the NIST, the University of Edinburgh, and the engineering firm Arup in the UK, all of whom confirmed the collapse was caused by the fires. Of course, there isn't total agreement among the studies. The NIST says the structural damage from the planes played a small part in the collapse while the University of Edinburgh and Arup both claim the fires alone across multiple floors was enough to initiate a collapse. You also have the guy who actually designed the towers, Leslie Robertson, who has come forward and claimed the towers were stressed FAR past what they were designed to withstand and that he is grateful the design stood as long as it did and allowed many people to escape. But truthers ignore him as well because they clearly know more than he does about structural engineering and the design of the towers. So lay off the truthers, HonestJoe! They obviously are far superior to everyone else and know just about everything! OR they have massive egos and refuse to actually examine the evidence that clearly shows their retarded theories are full of (*)(*)(*)(*). One of the two. Take your pick.
Well, I hate to say I told ya, HonestJoe, but truthers honestly think they know more than the experts including the guy who actually designed the buildings. Don't you find it ironic where SS pretends debunkers would dismiss their study when truthers have already dismissed three real studies? Maybe when one is as dishonest as a truther one thinks everyone else is just as dishonest. Truthers know they will reject any study that doesn't show them what they want so they just ASSume everyone else will do the same. Notice how SS ran from addressing the fact truthers ignore the evidence for WTC 7? They ignore the fact WTC 7 was showing signs of collapse for hours and that the fire department gave up the building as lost shortly after the collapse of the North Tower. They ignore the fact WTC 7 was visibly leaning so badly that the fire department put a transom on it. They ignore the fact the building had a very unusual construction due to straddling the power substation which put much of the buildings weight on key columns. They ignore the fact that of the numerous videos which show the collapse of WTC 7, NONE of them have the explosions they claim were part of the controlled demolition. And they wonder why we call them IGNORant. One more thing, HonestJoe. As soon as you start calling them on their hypocricy and the fact they ignore evidence and have no evidence of their own, they will pretend to put you on ignore. Extremely childish, but that is how truthers are.
Who? I thought Minoru Yamasaki designed the WTC... and I fully expected them to collapse. I was surpised they stood as long after the crashes as they did.
Yes. It's one of the mainstays of Richard Gage's presentation. What do you think of that independent study? Perhaps it would be better to post your thoughts in that thread, in order to keep this one on topic. Thanks.
It was more than just three, and it wasn't the planes alone that did so. The proposed experiment, however, calls for one building and one plane, so see the results.
Yamasaki was the architect. Leslie Robertson was one of the lead structural engineers that took Yamasaki's architectural vision and turned it into reality.
Quit whining and show the flaws in the study. It is much more comprehensive and thorough than Jones' work and even goes along with the specifications Jones and company laid down in order to try and replicate the results Jones found. They found no thermitic material. Even Jones couldn't explain the results of what he "found" as the circumstances surrounding "ignition" did not occur at any known thermitic material ignition point nor did the heat output equal anything that could really be considered thermitic. What truthers fail to address with their "thermitic paint" bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is the fact thermite works not as an explosive, but by melting through whatever object they are placed on top of. Thermite in paint wouldn't create enough heat long enough to do anything to steel beams. If it could, they would have demonstrated it by now instead of just preaching it as though it is gospel. They react to anyone blaspheming their gospel like a religious zealot as well. Look at SS's righteous indignation that ANYONE would claim the red and gray chips aren't some space age nano thermite super explosive and instead are just.... red and gray paint chips.
So, how long do you think it will be before some truther claims Bush forced the Port Authority to add floors so they would collapse better on 9/11? I was not aware that the Port Authority forced the addition of floors. I know there was a big push for the towers to be the largest, but I didn't know the details.
So am I. They say ignorant things like; "The tower fell at free fall speed." When in fact the total collapse time was much longer then free fall speed. They say ignorant things like: "The tower fell into its own footprint." When in fact the collapse of the tower damaged every surrounding building. Some were so structurally damaged they had to be condemned until millions of dollars of repairs could be made. They say ignorant things like: "Fire cannot melt steel, and therefore fire cannot cause a steel building to collapse." When in fact heat does melt steel and steel loses much of its elasticity long before it changes to a liquid phase. They say ignorant things like: "Larry Silverstein profited from the demolition of the tower" When in fact Larry's insurance payout didn't cover the cost of a new building, or even the rent on the tenantless property while the new building was being built. They say ignorant things like: "The news reported the collapse before it happened" When in fact it was one news reporter who had made a mistake. It just one of many reporting mistakes made that day as every outlet rushed to scoop the others. They say ignorant things like: "Larry ordered the building to be demolished by saying "pull it"" when in fact he was talking about a conversation he had with a fire commander, and not a building demolition company. Fire personnel do not demolish buildings. The ignorance abounds when it comes to WTC7 it's true. I wonder why it's taking so long for some people to educate themselves?
They didn't force the addition of floors. They increased the required usable square footage. The problem was solved by adding floors, but it could have been solved in other ways.
Gad.. the WTC was built in the 1970s... before Bush. Its been a long time since I looked, but if you google it.. In fact, I think the changes were ordered or approved by the NJ and the NY Ports Authority.
I don't care what Gage's presentation consists of. What I do care about is they don't know the origin of the chips, thus the study is completely useless. From what I remember, there was never an official investigation into the forensic evidence of the Towers. NIST even admitted to never testing for explosives. The fundamental problem with the entire 9/11 discourse is conclusions were created prior to any serious investigations being conducted. People want to pretend the 9/11 Commission did anything other than make is findings fit with the conclusions already drawn. The best example of this is WTC 7. For years, and even currently people claim it fell from the damage of the towers and/or diesel tanks. This was repeated thousands of times prior to NIST presenting its final report. It took them seven years and they had to invent a new theory to explain the collapse.