Then Why Focus on Building 7?
Box Boy Gage's group responds to criticism of their "Rethink 9-11" campaign:
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth responded on Thursday, taking issue with the notion they were being insensitive to run the campaign. They also said their campaign is sponsored by a group representing more than 100 victims' family members.
"To Councillor Deans and to all who question our sensitivity and legal right to run the ReThink911 ads, we would like to make clear: the ReThink911 coalition includes 9/11 victims’ family members who want nothing more than an accurate and unbiased accounting of the death of their loved ones," the group said in a letter published on their website.But of course no 9-11 victims died in WTC-7. Not one. In context, the third (fourth, really; the Troofers always forget about the Marriot) tower to collapse that day is a bit of trivia for that reason.
posted by Pat @ 3:57 PM
60 comments
60 Comments:
The Marriot didn't collapse. Part of it was crushed. The rest of it remained standing.
And no, WTC7 was not a "bit of trivia". It was baffling to engineers. The "vaporized" steel (that NIST still hasn't explained) was characterized as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation" by the NYT.
NIST's behavior with respect to their models, their refusal to provide calculations requested by Mr. Brookman, their strange assertion of a period of invisible buckling before the beginning of a 2.25 second period of freefall,
leaving the girder shear studs out of their assumptions, and their removal from the final report of the claim that their analysis was "consistent with physical principles" all lend doubt to their findings.
Also notable is the striking difference between the behavior of the building as we see it in the video and the behavior of the computer models, which fold up like a wet paper bag.
Further unexplained mysteries include these:
what caused the explosions reported by Michael Hess and Barry Jennings?
What blew the elevator car out into the hallway as reported by a FDNY recon team?
What caused the damage to the basement reported by some guys who went in there in the afternoon to try to get to the dog kennels?
Why did the alleged collapse of 47 concrete floors apparently not make any noise?
Why did the alleged collapse of 47 concrete floors not pump clouds of dust out the widows in the way that we saw with the towers?
The internal collapse mechanism proposed by NIST would result in a debris distribution pattern different from a more conventional bottom-to-top failure. Why did NIST not provide photographic or interview evidence from the rubble pile to support their collapse theory?
Can we petition for Martial Law so I can go to Brian's condo and pull him by his head and drag his skinny body out in the street so I can have a good old American ass kicking?
David's the kind of kid who bites the heads off of chess pieces when he doesn't like the way the game is going.
Brian, there are at least six structural engineering firms in Palo Alto which ones have you contacted regarding WTC7, and what did they say?
I invited all the structural engineers in the South Bay to hear a structural engineer speak about the destruction of the twin towers. If any of them came, they did not make their presence known in the Q/A period after.
On 9/11 I was on University Avenue at lunch time with a big sign. I talked for about 45 minutes with a chemical engineer. He had a lot of questions and seemed to be quite interested in what I had to say.
And no, WTC7 was not a "bit of trivia". It was baffling to engineers.
Brian, just because you don't understand what happened to WTC 7 doesn't mean engineers were baffled by it. You're not an engineer. You're a pathetic paranoid lunatic who lives with his parents because he couldn't hold down a job mopping floors, remember?
and their removal from the final report of the claim that their analysis was "consistent with physical principles" all lend doubt to their findings.
Yes, Brian, they took that wording out so that paranoid lunatics like you would pick up on it and conclude that magic thermite elves destroyed WTC 7.
Also notable is the striking difference between the behavior of the building as we see it in the video and the behavior of the computer models, which fold up like a wet paper bag.
Yes, grainy youtube videos shot from one direction at a great distance are smoking-gun evidence, at least when you're a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
what caused the explosions reported by Michael Hess and Barry Jennings?
Micro-nukes planted by modified attack baboons. I mean, there's no other explanation for explosions in a massive, uncontrolled fire.
What blew the elevator car out into the hallway as reported by a FDNY recon team?
See above.
What caused the damage to the basement reported by some guys who went in there in the afternoon to try to get to the dog kennels?
See above.
Why did the alleged collapse of 47 concrete floors apparently not make any noise?
Dick Cheney had placed special silencers throughout the building so that falling concrete would not make any noise.
Why did the alleged collapse of 47 concrete floors not pump clouds of dust out the widows in the way that we saw with the towers?
It's well-known that micro-nukes do not cause dust clouds. Learn to Google.
The pathetic thing is that it actually seems to think it's clever.
I invited all the structural engineers in the South Bay to hear a structural engineer speak about the destruction of the twin towers. If any of them came, they did not make their presence known in the Q/A period after.
They probably didn't show. Why would serious engineers waste their time with idiotic conspiracy theories? They're busy people.
On 9/11 I was on University Avenue at lunch time with a big sign. I talked for about 45 minutes with a chemical engineer. He had a lot of questions and seemed to be quite interested in what I had to say.
So nobody paid you any attention except one person, who nodded and smiled at the crazy homeless person with the insane sign (and you would easily be mistaken for a homeless person with that hideous haircut and your awful clothes, Brian) for his amusement.
Yup, that's why I post here too, Brian. I am amused by your deranged babbling. It's quite hilarious.
The pathetic thing is that it actually seems to think it's clever.
And right on schedule, the humiliated squealing begins. Poor Brian. It must be tough to go into such detail about one's beliefs about 9/11, only to have everyone point and laugh at you.
Ian, your stupidspam humiliates only yourself.
Ian, your stupidspam humiliates only yourself.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Hey Brian, have the widows had their questions answered yet?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!
Yup, I see what you mean. And I mock you for it because what you mean is the kind of idiocy that one would expect from a failed janitor, liar, and lunatic who lives with his parents.
Brian, the truth movement is dead, and all the gibberish about WTC 7 won't change a thing. It will only continue to make you the object of ridicule that you are here.
So Pat says there's no mystery to WTC7, and when I show that there are mysteries to WTC7, you respond with juvenile jokes about micro-nukes and attack babboons.
You discredit not only yourself. You also discredit Pat's argument. Is your intellectual candlepower so dim that you can't see that?
Perhaps you are aiming to influence feeble-minded juveniles, because you can't possibly be influencing anyone else.
So Pat says there's no mystery to WTC7, and when I show that there are mysteries to WTC7, you respond with juvenile jokes about micro-nukes and attack babboons.
Not quite. Pat says there's no mystery to WTC 7. You start babbling about how WTC 7 mystifies you, because you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor who doesn't understand how things work, then I mock you with comments about micro-nukes and attack baboons, and then you start squealing hysterically and call me "it" like a transsexual serial killer.
You discredit not only yourself. You also discredit Pat's argument. Is your intellectual candlepower so dim that you can't see that?
See what I mean about the hysterical squealing?
Perhaps you are aiming to influence feeble-minded juveniles, because you can't possibly be influencing anyone else.
Bad news, Brian. I took a poll of the 287,000 unique daily visitors to this site.
97% agree that you're mentally ill.
92% agree that you're an unemployed janitor.
77% agree that you sniff glue.
89% think you're homosexually obsessed with Willie Rodriguez.
And an astounding 100% (that's right, every single respondent) think your haircut is terrible.
So obviously, people do listen to me. Too bad for you, Brian. HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood
Ah yes, there it is: Brian's hideous homeless mullet in all its glory.
Ian, you're a liar and a waste of time. You discredit yourself, and you influence only feeble-minded juveniles.
That you think your obsession with hairstyling is sophisticated suggests that you grew up in a barnyard.
C'mon, Brian, you were supposed to say "it thinks its funny".
Ian, you're a liar and a waste of time. You discredit yourself, and you influence only feeble-minded juveniles.
For the record, you've been spamming this blog for almost 5 years, and the whole time I've been mocking you mercilessly. You constantly say we're a "waste of time" here, and obsessed lunatic that you are, you keep coming back for more abuse. Whatever. I guess you enjoy being reminded that you are a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
That you think your obsession with hairstyling is sophisticated suggests that you grew up in a barnyard.
Poor Brian. I've humiliated him about his hideous haircut yet again.
Anyway Brian, did the chemical engineer you spoke to talk about his friends in the white coats who would come take you to a nice place to live? You didn't give us many details of your idiotic conversation with the guy.
I haven't been spamming. I've mostly been refuting most of the things y'all say. The spammer is you, with your repetitive Liananity. IT wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny for the hundredth time five years later.
There's no reason to give details of my conversation. I was merely responding to MGF's implicit charge that I don't have the guts to discuss the issues in public with all comers. I do. But apparently none of the 200 structural engineers I invited to the talk about the WTC have the guts to discuss the issues in public.
You still can not name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
I haven't been spamming. I've mostly been refuting most of the things y'all say. The spammer is you, with your repetitive Liananity. IT wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny for the hundredth time five years later.
And yet, when I go to sleep tonight, I will have a big smile on my face knowing the widows will never have their questions answered. I win and you lose again, Brian.
There's no reason to give details of my conversation. I was merely responding to MGF's implicit charge that I don't have the guts to discuss the issues in public with all comers. I do. But apparently none of the 200 structural engineers I invited to the talk about the WTC have the guts to discuss the issues in public.
The fact that structural engineers don't waste their time with a paranoid lunatic babbling incoherently about things he doesn't understand doesn't mean they lack "guts".
If you want to see a coward, look in the mirror. Remember that time you ran away squealing and crying from Willie Rodriguez' debate challenge? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
You still can not name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
Uncle Steve. Sorry, but you've been pwn3d again, Brian.
I didn't run away from anything. Willie ran away from me. Here I am. Here he is not.
You lie and lie and lie.
Let's get back to the OP. Pat said WTC7 was no mystery. I showed how it was a mystery, and you just tried to laugh it off.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
Ian's needs to cite his Uncle Steve's public statement to meet the specification. He won't.
I didn't run away from anything. Willie ran away from me. Here I am. Here he is not.
False.
You lie and lie and lie.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Let's get back to the OP. Pat said WTC7 was no mystery. I showed how it was a mystery, and you just tried to laugh it off.
No, Pat said WTC 7 was no mystery, and then you demonstrated that you're a paranoid lunatic who doesn't understand anything about 9/11, then I mocked you mercilessly for it, then you started squealing and called me "it" like a transsexual serial killer.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
Brian, you can repeat this dumbspam all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Uncle Steve has endorsed the NIST reports. Maybe if you learned how to read, you wouldn't be so confused about 9/11.
Ian's needs to cite his Uncle Steve's public statement to meet the specification. He won't.
I already have.
Lyin Ian just continues his Lyin Iananity.
You lie and lie and lie. You're not fooling anyone.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
Lyin Ian just continues his Lyin Iananity.
You lie and lie and lie. You're not fooling anyone.
Squeal squeal squeal!
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
No matter how many times you repeat this dumbspam, it doesn't change the fact that Uncle Steve has endorsed the NIST reports.
Meanwhile, you can't name a single independent widow with a question.
Your Uncle Steve has not publicly endorsed the NIST reports, and you have not showed that he is free of professional ties to NIST, so you're proving my point and showing yourself for an idiot.
The September 11th Advocates (Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg,and Lorie Van Auken) have questions. If you believe they have professional ties to NIST, please detail them.
Every time I hear Brian refer to everyone as "it", it makes me think of The Silence of the Lambs...
Your Uncle Steve has not publicly endorsed the NIST reports, and you have not showed that he is free of professional ties to NIST, so you're proving my point and showing yourself for an idiot.
False. He has publicly endorsed the NIST reports, and he has no ties to NIST. You lose again, Brian.
The September 11th Advocates (Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg,and Lorie Van Auken) have questions. If you believe they have professional ties to NIST, please detail them.
Thanks for proving my point. These women are not independent because they are members of the "September 11th Advocates". I asked for questions from an independent widow. You have none.
Every time I hear Brian refer to everyone as "it", it makes me think of The Silence of the Lambs...
Yup, that's why I keep saying that he sounds like a transsexual serial killer. If chubby women in the Bay Area start disappearing only to turn up dead and skinned, at least we have a prime suspect.
Brian's the kind off asshole in which to insert an American made boot up his ass and an all American fist in his face.
Seriously, if someone would kick Brian's ass he'd cry about it like a baby.
I'll gladly kick the lying charlatans ass for you. (After all, the lying freak likes to talk sh*t about my innocent and defenseless children). Unfortunately, every time I've asked the son of a bitch to pick a park in Palo Alto, where I can kick his ass and put him in the ICU, he -- you guessed it! -- runs away squealing and crying like a pussy.
So Brian, have you always been a pussy? Let me guess, in grade school even the girls picked on you.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
The lying jackass lies, "... I talked for about 45 minutes with a chemical engineer."
Sure you did, liar. Sure you did.
Since when is a "chemical engineer" qualified to determine the collapse mechanism for a skyscraper?
I'll bet Brian "snug.bug" Good calls his mom's dentist every time he makes a trip to San Francisco's Castro District and returns with an Sexually Transmitted Disease.
Idiot.
BRIAN GOOD -- PERVERT, LIAR, INTERNET VANDAL AND DEGENERATE SEX STALKER EXPOSED
Actually, GuitarBill, I imagine Brian did have a conversation with a chemical engineer. The chemical engineer probably nodded and smiled while Brian babbled because that's what people do when confronted by crazy homeless people (never mind that Brian has a home in his parents' basement, he looks homeless).
Ian, when did your Uncle Steve publicly endorse the NIST report, and how can we verify that he is independent of NIST?
Now y'all are going to beat me up for being so stupid as to ask Ian to back up his lying claims.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
The September 11th Advocates (Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg,and Lorie Van Auken) have questions and they are independent of professional conflicts of interest. You're not fooling anyone, Lyin Ian.
ButtGale, I never said a chemical engineer was qualified to determine a collapse mechanism. But a chemical engineer is certainly qualified to spot an unscientific investigation and an incomplete and unacceptable report.
Even you could--if you were honest enough-- determine that the NIST report failed to fulfill its number one objective and explain "why and how" the towers collapsed--and dodged the ten essential mysteries of the collapses.
You sure have a big hangup about gays, ButtGoo. Something to do with with religious authority figures when you were a child, maybe?
Ian, when did your Uncle Steve publicly endorse the NIST report, and how can we verify that he is independent of NIST?
I can give you the links to his public statements and his work history from his website.
Now y'all are going to beat me up for being so stupid as to ask Ian to back up his lying claims.
Everyone does enjoy humiliating you, that's for sure.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence. Such a universal silence is indicative of a great chill that needs to stop.
Uncle Steve.
The September 11th Advocates (Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg,and Lorie Van Auken) have questions and they are independent of professional conflicts of interest. You're not fooling anyone, Lyin Ian.
They are not independent. I asked for one independent widow with a question and you can't find one.
Even you could--if you were honest enough-- determine that the NIST report failed to fulfill its number one objective and explain "why and how" the towers collapsed--and dodged the ten essential mysteries of the collapses.
Why: airplane crashes
How: gravity
10 essential mysteries: the delusions of a failed janitor who lives with his parents, believes in modified attack baboons, sniffs glue, and has a hideous homeless mullet.
There. Simple explanations.
Lyin Ian with more wall to wall hot and cold running Iananity.
Ian, claim you can provide links, but you won't. None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence.
The 9/11 widows are independent of any professional relationship with NIST. You fool only simple-minded juveniles, and you corrupt the integrity of everyone in this forum who does not call you out as a clown spreading nonsense.
"Gravity" does not explain how the buildings collapsed any more than "death" explains how someone died. NIST has admitted that they can not explain the total collapses, and even claims that they did not analyze the collapses. We need new investigations on that basis alone.
You're on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of truth.
I'm guessing Brian's father molested him or beat him when he was a child. Would explain his erratic behavior on here.
Ian, claim you can provide links, but you won't.
I already have. I will provide them again, if you want.
None of you can name even one independent architect or engineer who is willing to publicly express confidence in NIST's collapse sequence.
Uncle Steve
The 9/11 widows are independent of any professional relationship with NIST.
True, but they're not independent of the September 11th Advocates. You can't name a single independent widow with a question.
"Gravity" does not explain how the buildings collapsed any more than "death" explains how someone died.
Gravity makes things fall down, Brian. Maybe if you understood this, you wouldn't be so confused about 9/11.
NIST has admitted that they can not explain the total collapses, and even claims that they did not analyze the collapses. We need new investigations on that basis alone.
False.
You're on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of truth.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Lyin Ian, you have never provided any links to any public statement by your Uncle Steve about NIST's report. You lie like a Barrett; you lie like a Willie; you lie like Guitar Bill.
The membership of the 9/11 widows in a widows' group does not represent a conflict of interest. Professional ties to NIST do. A professional would understand the concept of conflict of interest. Apparently you do not.
Gravity makes things fall down only when what's holding the things up is weaker than gravity. Saying that something fell from gravity is like saying somebody became deceased from death.
NIST has admitted that they can not explain the total collapses, and even claims that they did not analyze the collapses. We need new investigations on that basis alone. You don't know what you're talking about.
You're on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of truth. There will be new investigations. It's just a matter of time.
History will look back on these years and wonder how Americans could have been so stupid and cowardly.
History will look back on these years and wonder how Americans could have been so stupid and cowardly.
And all we'll do is show them your hideous picture.
Lyin Ian, you have never provided any links to any public statement by your Uncle Steve about NIST's report.
False. I have provided them. I will provide them again to you, but you have to do 3 things.
1, admit that you are punxsutawneybarney
2, admit that the widows have no questions
3, admit that you ran away squealing and crying when Willie Rodriguez challenged you to a debate on this blog.
The membership of the 9/11 widows in a widows' group does not represent a conflict of interest. Professional ties to NIST do. A professional would understand the concept of conflict of interest. Apparently you do not.
Thanks for proving my point. The widows are not independent. Therefore, their questions are invalid.
Gravity makes things fall down only when what's holding the things up is weaker than gravity.
Yes, which is why the WTC towers fell. Maybe you're not quite as stupid as you look.
NIST has admitted that they can not explain the total collapses, and even claims that they did not analyze the collapses. We need new investigations on that basis alone. You don't know what you're talking about.
False.
You're on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of truth. There will be new investigations. It's just a matter of time.
False.
History will look back on these years and wonder how Americans could have been so stupid and cowardly.
Yup. In 2013 America, we have a mentally ill unemployed janitor who lives with his parents babbling incessantly about 9/11 as if he's an expert on engineering or physics or architecture. It doesn't get more stupid than that.
As for cowardly, well, running away squealing and crying from a debate with a real hero that you slander every day is not exactly a sign of courage.
"David", your notion that history will care about my hairstyle is a prediction of the kind of future that I am laboring to try to avoid.
Lyin Ian, your lying Iananity is not worth a response.
William Rodriguez is a blatant con artist. I have proven that, and Der Spiegel says the same thing. It is not slander to point out the truth. What kind of hero steals his glory from the dead? I didn't run away from him. Here I am, and here he is not. Even his sock puppets have vanished.
The hits just keep coming from Brian Good and the Petgoats:
"History will look back on these years and wonder how Americans could have been so stupid and cowardly."
"I have reason to believe that one of these days you're going to
see some diagrams from more authoritative sources that look
something like these."
"Meatball on a fork is a metaphor."
"If your co-workers have any questions, intelligent or otherwise, please forward them. That you were unable to intuit the obvious implications of rakeonrake suggests that, if they're anything like you, they won't have any at all."
Lyin Ian, your lying Iananity is not worth a response.
Translation: I've completed pwn3d Brian.
William Rodriguez is a blatant con artist. I have proven that, and Der Spiegel says the same thing. It is not slander to point out the truth. What kind of hero steals his glory from the dead? I didn't run away from him. Here I am, and here he is not. Even his sock puppets have vanished.
Nobody cares about your homosexual obsession with Rodriguez.
If you want to talk about a topic that interests other people, why not talk about your hideous haircut. I'm guessing you keep it that ugly by washing it with dish detergent, given that you're probably too poor to afford shampoo.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pat, I'm sorry that the concept of a metaphor seems outlandish to you, but that's not my fault. People who are educated in the sciences are familiar with the use of metaphor to explain scientific concepts. They understand that when we discuss the "plum pudding" model of the structure of the atom, nobody is proposing that the universe is built of plum pudding. They understand that when a physics teacher wiggles a clothesline to demonstrate the properties of waves, nobody is proposing that sound reaches our ears through the agency of clotheslines or that the ocean is filled with clotheslines.
I warned y'all years ago that your tolerance of Ian's posture of willful stupidity and ignorance was going to corrupt you. And it has. Stupidity is contagious.
Ian, your obsession with my hair is noted. Where I come from, people are more concerned with what's inside someone's head than what's on it, but you come from somewhere with different prioroties, obviously. You know who needs fashion advice? Guitar Bill! He looks ridiculous! Got any pointers for him?
"David", your notion that history will care about my hairstyle is a prediction of the kind of future that I am laboring to try to avoid.
You should've thought about that before you became a deranged nutcase. If you wanted to avoid it you should've never been a Truther. Now you can't avoid it cause you're hooked and you can only blame yourself for your own mistakes.
Stupidity is contagious.
And that's probably why the TM got rid of your ass cause your stupid was too contagious.
Where do you get the idea that the truth movement got rid of my ass? Where do you get the idea that I made mistakes? Are you going to spend yet another Saturday night fantasizing about me?
Poor Brian. He's squealing and crying because his haircut is hideous and everyone makes fun of him for it.
Don't worry, Brian, we can make fun of you for other things. For example, it's pathetic that you're unemployed and you live with your parents despite being old enough to have grandkids yourself.
Where do you get the idea that the truth movement got rid of my ass? Where do you get the idea that I made mistakes?
You sure you're not a homeless man living in a cardoard box?
You know who really needs your haircut advice, Ian? Abraham Lincoln. Man, that's what I always say about Old Abe--what a hideous haircut! How could he expect anyone to take him seriously?
Have you considered writing a Haircut History wherein you critique historical figures and show how they sabotaged themselves by eshewing the tender attentions of the barber? I mean, it's not like Abe couldn't snap his fingers and have a guy with a comb and a pair of scissors come in.
So I take it you subscribe to the John Edwards Great Man theory of history?
Post a Comment
<< Home