911 facts no theories

[candycorn]

Yeah ... I'm guessing 100 times more.

Mr. SFC Ollie:

About 1 percent seems about right. That is still a lot of credentialed people willing to stand up, be vetted and verified, and stand up to the ridicule of people like yourself (to be called 'twoofers.')

So what about starting a petition of "Archictects and Engineers for the Fire and Structural Trama induced Failure of the WTC Buildings."

See how many will actually stand up with their credentials for that one. Then we will know who to contact about ublic debates.

Do us a favor....pick 20 of the "professionals" at random and look at their credentials. I'd wager you'd get about 14 who have never designed anything that was more than a few stories tall. They have no inkling of all of the variables at work on 9/11.

 

[Wayne1954]

They have nothing to prove. The official reports have spoken for the vast majority. Even though some may disagree with some points in those reports, the Overwhelming majority believe all the main points are correct. As do I.

Mr. SFC Ollie:

I understand what you say to actually mean ... they wouldn't want to put their credentials at risk. If it were a slam dunk, they could show their technical expertise, and advertise themselves.

But the risk of falling flat of their face is 100 percent ... so they will say nothing.

What we seem to get from people that had supported the official story is simply: "I stand by my previous statements."

Remember, those statements were written years before the evidence was pieced together by independent scientists (because the offical investigation decided not to look at lots of evidence). Now that contradictory evidence is available, and a large body of technical material to counter the offical story is available, none of these so called experts will speak in public.

Ask your engineer friends (and their engineer friends) to stand up in public to debate the structural collapse of the three WTC skyscrapers with representatives of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth"

 

[candycorn]

They have nothing to prove. The official reports have spoken for the vast majority. Even though some may disagree with some points in those reports, the Overwhelming majority believe all the main points are correct. As do I.

Mr. SFC Ollie:

I understand what you say to actually mean ... they wouldn't want to put their credentials at risk. If it were a slam dunk, they could show their technical expertise, and advertise themselves.

But the risk of falling flat of their face is 100 percent ... so they will say nothing.

What we seem to get from people that had supported the official story is simply: "I stand by my previous statements."

Remember, those statements were written years before the evidence was pieced together by independent scientists (because the offical investigation decided not to look at lots of evidence). Now that contradictory evidence is available, and a large body of technical material to counter the offical story is available, none of these so called experts will speak in public.

Ask your engineer friends (and their engineer friends) to stand up in public to debate the structural collapse of the three WTC skyscrapers with representatives of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth"

When do you think the NIST report came out? Just curious.

 

[Wayne1954]

So your answer is that it would have been impossible. I guess you shot yourself in the foot. I love when you morons do my job for me. "I don't know...BUT I DO KNOW THE OFFICIALS TORY IS WRONG". You sound like a God Damn fool.

Mr. CandyCorn:

We are Architects and Engineers. We understand physics and science. We don't know how the building was actually wired, but the evidence is overwhelming that controlled demolition is the cause of their collapse.

Since you raised yet another entire "debunking site" site as your "ace-in-the-hole" ... what is the strongest argument from that web-site that you would suggest we talk about?

If you say "everthing," then I assume you don't have any idea what you are talking about. So pick something.

 

[eots]

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng – Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]." AE911Truth.org

Bio: http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov


]Larry L. Erickson, MS, PhD



Larry L. Erickson, BS Aeronautical Eng, MS Aeronautical Eng, PhD Eng Mechanics – Retired NASA Aerospace Engineer and Research Scientist. Conducted research in the fields of structural dynamics, aerodynamics, aeroelasticity and flutter. Recipient of NASA's Aerodynamics Division Researcher-of-the-Year Award. 33-year NASA career. Member, American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics. Instructor, Physics and Aerospace Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 1998 - present. Author and co-author of several scientific papers on aerodynamic analysis. Contributing author to Applied Computational Aerodynamics (1990).


Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"Serious technical investigations by experts seem to be lacking from the official explanations." AE911Truth.org


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 1,300 Architects and Engineers:

"On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe that there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore that the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that may have been the actual cause behind the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC Building 7." Sign the Petition



Robert H. Waser, BS ME,
MS ME, PE

Robert H. Waser, BS ME, MS ME, PE – Retired Research and Development Engineer, U.S. Naval Ordinance Lab. 33 year career, of which 15 years were as Chief Engineer of the laboratory's wind tunnel complex, which includes the world's largest hypervelocity wind tunnel. Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Maryland.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:


"The 'official' 9/11 story seems to violate laws of physics and engineering analysis, specifically with respect to the collapse speed and the temperatures of molten iron. The only explanation that seems to be in accordance with all observations is controlled demolition." AE911Truth.org

Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 1,300 Architects and Engineers:



George M. Campbell, PhD



George M. Campbell, PhD – Retired Research Scientist, Los Alamos National Laboratory, specializing in plutonium chemistry 1963 - 1991. Author and co-author of several journal articles on plutonium chemistry.


Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"Pictures of collapse are not consistent with a burning building. I believe that someone is covering up the facts for some reason." AE911Truth.org


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 1,300 Architects and Engineers:

 

[candycorn]

So your answer is that it would have been impossible. I guess you shot yourself in the foot. I love when you morons do my job for me. "I don't know...BUT I DO KNOW THE OFFICIALS TORY IS WRONG". You sound like a God Damn fool.

Mr. CandyCorn:

We are Architects and Engineers. We understand physics and science. We don't know how the building was actually wired, but the evidence is overwhelming that controlled demolition is the cause of their collapse.

There is zero evidence of any such thing except in the fertile mind of weak individuals such as yourself.

Since you raised yet another entire "debunking site" site as your "ace-in-the-hole" ... what is the strongest argument from that web-site that you would suggest we talk about?

I suggest you go play with children your own age. You're doing nothing but embarrassing yourself here sonny boy.

 

[Wayne1954]

When do you think the NIST report came out? Just curious.

Mr. CandyCorn:

NIST Released the Final WTC 7 Investigation Report on 11/25/2008. The draft of the twin towers report was sometimes in 2005.

The failure of these reports to address, credibly, the structural and engineering questions has precipitated the interest in grups such as Architects and Engineers fo r 9/11 Truth.

Many experts spoke before all the facts were known, and now theat they are available, they won't talk in public. However, a grand jury would be a nice alternative. Don't you think so?

 

[DiveCon]

When do you think the NIST report came out? Just curious.

Mr. CandyCorn:

NIST Released the Final WTC 7 Investigation Report on 11/25/2008. The draft of the twin towers report was sometimes in 2005.

The failure of these reports to address, credibly, the structural and engineering questions has precipitated the interest in grups such as Architects and Engineers fo r 9/11 Truth.

Many experts spoke before all the facts were known, and now theat they are available, they won't talk in public. However, a grand jury would be a nice alternative. Don't you think so?

you actually have to have EVIDENCE first before you can call for the grand jury

 

[Wayne1954]

[There is zero evidence of any such thing except in the fertile mind of weak individuals such as yourself.

I suggest you go play with children your own age. You're doing nothing but embarrassing yourself here sonny boy.

Mr. CandyCorn:

Let me reiterate a little secret about why I am on this thread.

I am here to leave a series of reponses, based on physical evidence, science and engineering, that ultimately can't be argued with. I do this not for your benefit ... but those that will later read this post to see what the issues and evidence are.

I do this for those that follow ... not to flatter you.

I do not think you have any interest in understanding the physical events that destroyed the three World Trade Center skyscrapers.

In fact, I am a registered professional engineer that believes the laws of physics apply everyday. Everyday, including Septemer 11th.

 

[candycorn]

When do you think the NIST report came out? Just curious.

Mr. CandyCorn:

NIST Released the Final WTC 7 Investigation Report on 11/25/2008. The draft of the twin towers report was sometimes in 2005.

The failure of these reports to address, credibly, the structural and engineering questions has precipitated the interest in grups such as Architects and Engineers fo r 9/11 Truth.

Many experts spoke before all the facts were known, and now theat they are available, they won't talk in public. However, a grand jury would be a nice alternative. Don't you think so?

Snicker* I think that is an absolutely BRILLIANT IDEA! GO FOR IT!

Usually grand juries are only empaneled at the order of a US Attorney unless I'm mistaken. To get to that level, you've got to show probable cause. So I suggest you take all of your evidence to the US attorney. Please do so tomorrow.

 

[candycorn]

[There is zero evidence of any such thing except in the fertile mind of weak individuals such as yourself.

I suggest you go play with children your own age. You're doing nothing but embarrassing yourself here sonny boy.

Mr. CandyCorn:

Let me reiterate a little secret about why I am on this thread.

I am here to leave a series of reponses, based on physical evidence, science and engineering, that ultimately can't be argued with. I do this not for your benefit ... but those that will later read this post to see what the issues and evidence are.

I do this for those that follow ... not to flatter you.

I do not think you have any interest in understanding the physical events that destroyed the three World Trade Center skyscrapers.

In fact, I am a registered professional engineer that believes the laws of physics apply everyday. Everyday, including Septemer 11th.

Dear Ms. Wayne;

Let me let you in on a little secret;

I understand much more than you'll ever know. In fact, I have forgotten more about 9/11 than you'll ever know.

Actually, I mis-spoke.

I don't think it is that much of a secret to most here; except you.

 

[eots]

[there is zero evidence of any such thing except in the fertile mind of weak individuals such as yourself.

I suggest you go play with children your own age. You're doing nothing but embarrassing yourself here sonny boy.

mr. Candycorn:

Let me reiterate a little secret about why i am on this thread.

I am here to leave a series of reponses, based on physical evidence, science and engineering, that ultimately can't be argued with. I do this not for your benefit ... But those that will later read this post to see what the issues and evidence are.

I do this for those that follow ... Not to flatter you.

I do not think you have any interest in understanding the physical events that destroyed the three world trade center skyscrapers.

In fact, i am a registered professional engineer that believes the laws of physics apply everyday. Everyday, including septemer 11th.

dear ms. Wayne;

let me let you in on a little secret;

i understand much more than you'll ever know. In fact, i have forgotten more about 9/11 than you'll ever know.

really... You have never demonstrated that

 

[eots]

When do you think the NIST report came out? Just curious.

Mr. CandyCorn:

NIST Released the Final WTC 7 Investigation Report on 11/25/2008. The draft of the twin towers report was sometimes in 2005.

The failure of these reports to address, credibly, the structural and engineering questions has precipitated the interest in grups such as Architects and Engineers fo r 9/11 Truth.

Many experts spoke before all the facts were known, and now theat they are available, they won't talk in public. However, a grand jury would be a nice alternative. Don't you think so?

Snicker* I think that is an absolutely BRILLIANT IDEA! GO FOR IT!

Usually grand juries are only empaneled at the order of a US Attorney unless I'm mistaken. To get to that level, you've got to show probable cause. So I suggest you take all of your evidence to the US attorney. Please do so tomorrow.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzC3QI8JenU[/ame]

 

[Wayne1954]

Mr. EOTS;

Since you showed a link to the videos from the "BuildingWhat" website ( BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - Home Page ) and seemed appreciate of it ... here is some breaking news.

"On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show “Geraldo At Large” on Fox News to talk about the “BuildingWhat?” TV ad campaign."

BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - BuildingWhat? Appears on Geraldo At Large on FOX News

In many places around the country, this show is probably showing ... just about now.

So you folks who disbelieve the science and engineering evidence based research ... better get your sleep now because you will need to be defending the official NIST story and mocking "twoofers" 24/7, Furthermore, once you-all actually pay attention to what the evidence actually is, there will be far fewer of you (anti-"twoofers") willing to support the official NIST story.

 

[candycorn]

Mr. EOTS;

Since you showed a link to the videos from the "BuildingWhat" website ( BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - Home Page ) and seemed appreciate of it ... here is some breaking news.

"On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show “Geraldo At Large” on Fox News to talk about the “BuildingWhat?” TV ad campaign."

BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - BuildingWhat? Appears on Geraldo At Large on FOX News

In many places around the country, this show is probably showing ... just about now.

So you folks who disbelieve the science and engineering evidence based research ... better get your sleep now because you will need to be defending the official NIST story and mocking "twoofers" 24/7, Furthermore, once you-all actually pay attention to what the evidence actually is, there will be far fewer of you (anti-"twoofers") willing to support the official NIST story.

So are you going to go to the US attorney tomorrow little girl? Present your evidence along with all of the "I don't know's" you admitted to earlier. I'd get my affairs in order first--you'll probably be deemed a threat to yourself and taken into protective custody since you do and will, of course, sound absolutely nuts.

Geraldo presenting facts....yeah okay. Whatever dipshit.

 

[DiveCon]

Mr. EOTS;

Since you showed a link to the videos from the "BuildingWhat" website ( BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - Home Page ) and seemed appreciate of it ... here is some breaking news.

"On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show “Geraldo At Large” on Fox News to talk about the “BuildingWhat?” TV ad campaign."

BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - BuildingWhat? Appears on Geraldo At Large on FOX News

In many places around the country, this show is probably showing ... just about now.

So you folks who disbelieve the science and engineering evidence based research ... better get your sleep now because you will need to be defending the official NIST story and mocking "twoofers" 24/7, Furthermore, once you-all actually pay attention to what the evidence actually is, there will be far fewer of you (anti-"twoofers") willing to support the official NIST story.

So are you going to go to the US attorney tomorrow little girl? Present your evidence along with all of the "I don't know's" you admitted to earlier. I'd get my affairs in order first--you'll probably be deemed a threat to yourself and taken into protective custody since you do and will, of course, sound absolutely nuts.

Geraldo presenting facts....yeah okay. Whatever dipshit.

i watched the Geraldo segment for that
i DVR'd it, i thought it was going to be much more than it was
just 2 guys on spouting the same crap these morons do

btw, not a lick of actual evidence was presented

 

[candycorn]

Mr. EOTS;

Since you showed a link to the videos from the "BuildingWhat" website ( BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - Home Page ) and seemed appreciate of it ... here is some breaking news.

"On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show “Geraldo At Large” on Fox News to talk about the “BuildingWhat?” TV ad campaign."

BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - BuildingWhat? Appears on Geraldo At Large on FOX News

In many places around the country, this show is probably showing ... just about now.

So you folks who disbelieve the science and engineering evidence based research ... better get your sleep now because you will need to be defending the official NIST story and mocking "twoofers" 24/7, Furthermore, once you-all actually pay attention to what the evidence actually is, there will be far fewer of you (anti-"twoofers") willing to support the official NIST story.

So are you going to go to the US attorney tomorrow little girl? Present your evidence along with all of the "I don't know's" you admitted to earlier. I'd get my affairs in order first--you'll probably be deemed a threat to yourself and taken into protective custody since you do and will, of course, sound absolutely nuts.

Geraldo presenting facts....yeah okay. Whatever dipshit.

i watched the Geraldo segment for that
i DVR'd it, i thought it was going to be much more than it was
just 2 guys on spouting the same crap these morons do

btw, not a lick of actual evidence was presented

I'm sure it will be construed by the rank and file twoofers as the smoking gun; the 258th smoking gun they've come up with so far that absolutely proves it was "da joos".

Miller makes me miss Curvelight.

 

[candycorn]

Mr. EOTS;

Since you showed a link to the videos from the "BuildingWhat" website ( BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - Home Page ) and seemed appreciate of it ... here is some breaking news.

"On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show “Geraldo At Large” on Fox News to talk about the “BuildingWhat?” TV ad campaign."

BuildingWhat? - A campaign to raise awareness of BUILDING 7 - BuildingWhat? Appears on Geraldo At Large on FOX News

In many places around the country, this show is probably showing ... just about now.

So you folks who disbelieve the science and engineering evidence based research ... better get your sleep now because you will need to be defending the official NIST story and mocking "twoofers" 24/7, Furthermore, once you-all actually pay attention to what the evidence actually is, there will be far fewer of you (anti-"twoofers") willing to support the official NIST story.

Here's a link to it:

Screw Loose Change: Turns Out Al Capone's Vault Was A High Point

Point out any facts you may come across. LOL

 

[SFC Ollie]

So are you going to go to the US attorney tomorrow little girl? Present your evidence along with all of the "I don't know's" you admitted to earlier. I'd get my affairs in order first--you'll probably be deemed a threat to yourself and taken into protective custody since you do and will, of course, sound absolutely nuts.

Geraldo presenting facts....yeah okay. Whatever dipshit.

i watched the Geraldo segment for that
i DVR'd it, i thought it was going to be much more than it was
just 2 guys on spouting the same crap these morons do

btw, not a lick of actual evidence was presented

I'm sure it will be construed by the rank and file twoofers as the smoking gun; the 258th smoking gun they've come up with so far that absolutely proves it was "da joos".

Miller makes me miss Curvelight.

I don't miss either one. They are both morons I can live without.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hey I'm not a scholar, architect, nor an engineer, and I'm assuming neither are you, so we have to put our faith in people that have the knowledge and skill to look at this situation objectively. There are 2 sides that are competing for your approval of their presentation of the facts. One is the government, who has not presented a viable story IMO, according to the science presented and has often lied to its citizens, in many peoples opinions. The other side are people who are not government appointed, non biased, and are under no pressure to produce or manufacture evidence, at the govs. behest, and come from all over the fields of science and technology, aviation, military etc.. And they present a compelling counter point, that the NIST, and the gov. have not even considered on many points. Countless people are saying the collapse looked looked a CD, the collapse exhibited all the trademarks of a CD, but one that was brought down by an unconventional agent, thermite. NIST doesn't mention the pools of molten metal in the sub structures of the buildings that lingered for months afterward! WTF? NIST didn't talk to eyewitnesses, and left a lot of things out of the investigation. That doesn't sound like a thorough investigation to a lot of people, myself included.

Notice there is a series of explosions before the building starts to move, it begins to fall with the second series of explosions.


NIST left out what?

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, NIST and the World Trade Center. This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster - Frequently Asked Questions

All of which has been argued against with compelling counter points and facts.

yeah you and that other guy took agent Gomer Pyle to school big time and handed him his ass on a platter.Gomer cant deal with FACTS that Tom Sullivan the head of CDI-CONTROLLED DEMOLITION INC has said the collapse of the towers could have only happened if it was a controlled demolition and that molten pools of metal along with thermite found,is evidence as well of a controlled demolition.agent ollie covers his ears and closes his eyes to EXPERT testimonys. "rolls on floor laughing."