FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Gamolon]

no it leaves the question unanswered and in question and cast doubt on the official story
from the very source that is supposed to have answered it and from the source national geographic obtained its data......but then we have the fine minds of popular mechanics
who needs NIST

What a dolt.

He explains what he doubts and also comes up with an alternative method as to why the towers collapsed, which to your demise, has nothing to do with explosives.

You and 9/11 are entertaining. STUPID, but entertaining.

 

[DiveCon]

no dodge at all.No use in trying to explain it to you cause chris has taken you to school and your too arrogant to admit it.not surprising you being a dis in fo agent though.

I thought you would take that route.

Nothing but a coward.

When get some correct evidence and some debating skills, come back and talk, otherwise your just showing your worthlessness to your cult's efforts.

that guy will put you on ignore now

he does that to anyone that doesn't by into his parroted nonsense

 

[eots]

Nice dodge. What aspects of the 130 page NIST report do you not agree with? What did they get wrong?

Summary: James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

The amount of stupid you keep displaying is unbelievable. Here is a quote from his book which states why he thinks the conclusion by NIST is questionable. Here is the link to his book SpringerLink - Book Chapter

He states in the book an alternative reason:

An alternative cause is considered that puts the cause on insufficient insulation of the steel truss floor members...

So no, he doesn't support demolition as you claim. Figures that you need to lie in order to prove your beliefs. How sad.

I suppose you also missed the fact that Mr. Quintiere does not believe the towers were brought down by explosives as stated here Onderzoeker James Quintiere (NIST) roept op tot "second opinion" 9/11 - Stormfront

Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. “If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”

His statements support you how?

I never said he claimed controled demolition..he said the findings where questionable
and he says it was....most likely not a controled demolition and calls fov peer reveiw

he also states



Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”


Dr. Quintiere discussed many elements of NIST’s investigation that he found problematic. He emphasized, “In every investigation I’ve taken part in, the key has been to establish a timeline. And the timeline is established by witness accounts, by information from alarm systems, by any video that you might have of the event, and then by calculations. And you try to put all of this together. And if your calculations are consistent with some of these hard facts, then perhaps you can have some comfort in the results of your calculations. I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report.”



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”





Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. “They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of this? I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”


Responding to a comment from a NIST representative in the audience, Dr. Quintiere said, “I found that throughout your whole investigation it was very difficult to get a clear answer. And when anyone went to your advisory panel meetings or hearings, where they were given five minutes to make a statement; they could never ask any questions. And with all the commentary that I put in, and I spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.”


“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause,

 

[Gamolon]

no dodge at all.No use in trying to explain it to you cause chris has taken you to school and your too arrogant to admit it.not surprising you being a dis in fo agent though.

I thought you would take that route.

Nothing but a coward.

When get some correct evidence and some debating skills, come back and talk, otherwise your just showing your worthlessness to your cult's efforts.

that guy will put you on ignore now

he does that to anyone that doesn't by into his parroted nonsense

That's fine by me. He's been "ignoring" facts and evidence for quite some time now. I'm starting to think that 9/11 inside job and eots are related given the fact that their mental capacity is no greater than my dog's. Although she CAN open our sliding glass door to let herself out to go to the bathroom. I just can't get her to close the damn thing when she comes back in.

 

[Gamolon]

Summary: James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

The amount of stupid you keep displaying is unbelievable. Here is a quote from his book which states why he thinks the conclusion by NIST is questionable. Here is the link to his book SpringerLink - Book Chapter

He states in the book an alternative reason:


So no, he doesn't support demolition as you claim. Figures that you need to lie in order to prove your beliefs. How sad.

I suppose you also missed the fact that Mr. Quintiere does not believe the towers were brought down by explosives as stated here Onderzoeker James Quintiere (NIST) roept op tot "second opinion" 9/11 - Stormfront

Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. “If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”

His statements support you how?

I never said he claimed controled demolition..he said the findings where questionable
and he says it was....most likely not a controled demolition and calls fov peer reveiw

he also states



Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”


Dr. Quintiere discussed many elements of NIST’s investigation that he found problematic. He emphasized, “In every investigation I’ve taken part in, the key has been to establish a timeline. And the timeline is established by witness accounts, by information from alarm systems, by any video that you might have of the event, and then by calculations. And you try to put all of this together. And if your calculations are consistent with some of these hard facts, then perhaps you can have some comfort in the results of your calculations. I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report.”



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”





Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. “They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of this? I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”


Responding to a comment from a NIST representative in the audience, Dr. Quintiere said, “I found that throughout your whole investigation it was very difficult to get a clear answer. And when anyone went to your advisory panel meetings or hearings, where they were given five minutes to make a statement; they could never ask any questions. And with all the commentary that I put in, and I spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.”


“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause,

Still doesn't support your demolition theory no matter how bad you want it to. Like I said, he goes on to explain what HE thinks was the cause. No explosives.

 

[eots]

I thought you would take that route.

Nothing but a coward.

When get some correct evidence and some debating skills, come back and talk, otherwise your just showing your worthlessness to your cult's efforts.

that guy will put you on ignore now

he does that to anyone that doesn't by into his parroted nonsense

That's fine by me. He's been "ignoring" facts and evidence for quite some time now. I'm starting to think that 9/11 inside job and eots are related given the fact that their mental capacity is no greater than my dog's. Although she CAN open our sliding glass door to let herself out to go to the bathroom. I just can't get her to close the damn thing when she comes back in.

the facts...NIST is highly critical of their own report and find it to be non conclusive...those are the facts...

 

[DiveCon]

that guy will put you on ignore now

he does that to anyone that doesn't by into his parroted nonsense

That's fine by me. He's been "ignoring" facts and evidence for quite some time now. I'm starting to think that 9/11 inside job and eots are related given the fact that their mental capacity is no greater than my dog's. Although she CAN open our sliding glass door to let herself out to go to the bathroom. I just can't get her to close the damn thing when she comes back in.

the facts...NIST is highly critical of their own report and find it to be non conclusive...those are the facts...

and that still doesn't support your claims

 

[eots]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

 

[Gamolon]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

So you admit that it doesn't support your controlled demolition claims?

Wow.

Strong proof for your theory.

 

[Gamolon]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

Yes it does. We claim that it WASN'T controlled demolition and your own evidence that you provided supports that.

 

[DiveCon]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

LOL
i have no claims
and the only thing i want re investigated was the failures in the government to put the pieces together that allowed such an event to occur in the first place
and not to be prosecuting anyone, but to make sure the mistakes are corrected

 

[Gamolon]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

LOL
i have no claims
and the only thing i want re investigated was the failures in the government to put the pieces together that allowed such an event to occur in the first place
and not to be prosecuting anyone, but to make sure the mistakes are corrected

Now THAT I agree with.

 

[eots]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

Yes it does. We claim that it WASN'T controlled demolition and your own evidence that you provided supports that.

you call the 9/11 commission report and NIST denouncing their own findings and calling for a new investigation and both expressing that the government was not forthcoming with information as support for the official theory ?...or saying what appeared to an explosion was most likely falling floors... is conclusivly ruling out secondary explosions ?

 

[eots]

nor yours...but it definitely supports the call for a real and independent investigation.. peer reviewed ..with.. full disclosure and subpoena powers...

So you admit that it doesn't support your controlled demolition claims?

Wow.

Strong proof for your theory.

it was not to prove my theory but to show the commission and NIST question their own theory and support a new investigation done in a proper manner...that has been established

 

[Christophera]

Surrounding any theory, or before and after it is the FEMA structural deception presented to NIST that invaildates the official cause of death determination.

The core structure FEMA presents with this diagram is a lie.

The fact is that there were no core columns in the core area and to the left of the concrete wall, is the empty core area to prove it. This shows the west end of the WTC 1 concrete core looking from the north, soutwards along the line of the wall.

To the right is the spire, a box column outside of the core, of the 24 columns that did exist, surrounding the concrete core. No image from 9-11 shows the supposed steel core columns.

 

[DiveCon]

Surrounding any theory, or before and after it is the FEMA structural deception presented to NIST that invaildates the official cause of death determination.

The core structure FEMA presents with this diagram is a lie.

The fact is that there were no core columns in the core area and to the left of the concrete wall, is the empty core area to prove it. This shows the west end of the WTC 1 concrete core looking from the north, soutwards along the line of the wall.



To the right is the spire, a box column outside of the core, of the 24 columns that did exist, surrounding the concrete core. No image from 9-11 shows the supposed steel core columns.

you are reading WAY too much into that simple diagram of the WTC tube within a tube"
FEAM did NOT say that was EXACTLY how it was
it was only meant to convey the principle of the design, not be an exact replica


and you have had this explained to you on MULTIPLE occasions

 

[eots]

ya engineering and science are such vague esoteric crafts...like poetry or fiction...you cant expect them to be... exacting

 

[Christophera]

Surrounding any theory, or before and after it is the FEMA structural deception presented to NIST that invaildates the official cause of death determination.

The core structure FEMA presents with this diagram is a lie.

The fact is that there were no core columns in the core area and to the left of the concrete wall, is the empty core area to prove it. This shows the west end of the WTC 1 concrete core looking from the north, soutwards along the line of the wall.



To the right is the spire, a box column outside of the core, of the 24 columns that did exist, surrounding the concrete core. No image from 9-11 shows the supposed steel core columns.

you are reading WAY too much into that simple diagram of the WTC tube within a tube"

Some have said that but have provided no evidence of the statement whereas I have provided adequate evidence of the concrete core in images from 9-11.

Here is rebar standing at around 400 feet. About 50 pieces of custom 3" diameter high tensile rebar from the north and west walls after the spire fell.

Notice the core area is totally empty. Such completely proves that FEMA deceived NIST and no evidence to the contrary has ever been posted.

The chief engineer 2 days after 9-11 gave information to Newsweek identifying a concrete core.

September 13, 2001​

Ans any assertion of error serves the usurpation of the US Constitution because it is not reasonable to suggest that the engineer, speaking on behalf of the engineering and design corporation would expose them to the liability of what was being termed a "collapse" with erroneous information.

And, if it was erroneous, the engineer would logically deman an immediate correction. That information is independently corroborated by aonther structureal engineer certified in 12 states.

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.​

 

[DiveCon]

ya engineering and science are such vague esoteric crafts...like poetry or fiction...you cant expect them to be... exacting

that diagram was not meant to be an exact drawing

 

[Christophera]

The core structure FEMA presents with this diagram is a lie.

you are reading WAY too much into that simple diagram of the WTC tube within a tube"
FEAM did NOT say that was EXACTLY how it was
it was only meant to convey the principle of the design, not be an exact replica

and you have had this explained to you on MULTIPLE occasions

The fact is that I've asked for more documentation from you to support your assertion and nothing has ever been produced. This goes for ALL opposition everywhere with regard to that diagram. The fake plans have no details of the needed diagonal and horizontal bracing that would logically be required in a steel columned core.

You support that the means of mass murder remain secret and that with that secrecy the Consitution be usurped.