|
Post by Jason Thompson on Mar 13, 2007 8:22:14 GMT -4
It seems I stand corrected, turbonium. I apologise for misdirecting my questions.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Mar 13, 2007 10:06:56 GMT -4
Mar 11, 2007, 7:18pm, lenbrazil wrote: The best you've come up with was the fireman who said damage was limited on the 9th floor which you think contradicts the report of a hole extending to 'ABOUT the 10th floor'. Are we sure he walked the entire perimeter? might his view have been obscured by smoke? could the hole have expanded between the time he was on the 9th floor? could "about the 10th floor" mean up to the 8th? "About" the 10th floor? NIST has clearly defined the damage in their preliminary reports... South Face Damage – • middle 1/4 -1/3 width south face, 10th floor to ground wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004WTC7StructuralFire&CollapseAnalysisPrint.pdf (page 14) And the report notes it again, for inclusion in their future models ... Structural Response and Collapse Hypotheses is being assessed with the following models and analyses: Submodel of lowest 10 floors for analysis of failure mechanisms (pg. 25) It's obvious that NIST considers the south face, up to and including the 9th and 10th floors, to have been gouged out. Do you think they are accepting this as accurate, to the point of documenting it in their early and future reports, based solely on the guesstimated accounts of damage "to about the 10th floor"??... Love when you move the goal posts, you cited the “FEMA” firefighter’s account to rebut a fireman’s account of a hole up to the 10th floor now you cite a line from a preliminary NIST report. It’s not unusual for witness accounts to vary and you didn’t reply to all my points: ."Are we sure he walked the entire perimeter? might his view have been obscured by smoke? could the hole have expanded between the time he was on the 9th floor (and when the other fireman saw it)?"BTW the 2nd NIST quote doesn’t indicate they assumed there was a hole from the 10th floor to the ground Since they were interested in structural damage in that paragraph they might not have considered what he said about fires relevant but as noted as far as we know he only examined one part of one floor (probably) shortly after the collapse of the North Tower. Firefighters have said the fires became more intense later. Even he didn’t see signs of strong fires on the south face of the 9th floor when he was there, that doesn’t contradict the numerous fireman who said there were intense fires on various floors. II skimmed through his interview with Alex Jones and didn’t see anything especially damming or anything about a lack of a) damage to or b) fire in 7 WTC or bombs there. Perhaps you can highlight what he said that you think supports your case It’s been over 5 years So they’d risk their lives to save the lives of strangers, rioted and risked losing their jobs because they thought Giuliani wanted to use mechanical excavation too early (possibly destroying the remains of their colleagues buried in the rubble but wouldn’t risk their jobs to unmask the murders of those same colleagues? Why exactly would they face dismissal 1) the 1st amendment guarantees free speech, they could not be fired for what they say when off duty 2) it’s very difficult to fire civil servants in NYC 3) firing them would make them martyrs Face it you are trying to rationalize the fact that you only have one emergency responder who backs your position a cop who was there about 15 minutes and only spoke up 5 years after the fact after seeing “Loose Change” sorry but I find the reports of numerous firemen a few weeks after 9-11 more credible. If numerous cops and firemen believe the same thing they could come out together. We can go in circles over this, he said twice he was misquoted by People and has never said since then he still thought there were bombs in the towers. I think he is a liar because he has repeatedly contradicted himself as spelled out in the other thread. I believe the version he told up through 2004 including in his RICO suit and interviews with “inside job” journalists. A single person can be brave and dishonest it is harder to believe that dozens, hundreds or even thousands of people who routinely risk their lives would be intimidated to speak up about the murders of their friends
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 13, 2007 10:15:51 GMT -4
I find the suggestion that so many firemen are cowering in fear of loosing their jobs when they have evidence or witnessed things that throw the official story into doubt to be quite insulting to them and totally illogical.
It's a common theme with CTs, mainly because it HAS to be true for their theories to be correct. It's one of the irrational ideas that must be hanged on to at all costs.
To some CTs, there can't be any other explanation, since to them the official story is so obviously wrong. The fact that it is insulting is irrelevant to them; they have the shield of 'truth' to hide behind.
|
|
|
Post by Alliterative Andy on Mar 13, 2007 10:53:50 GMT -4
Excuse me, turbonium, but since you brought up the Chris Bartmer interview, I must ask you a few questions, and I would appreciate it if you would answer them.
In the interview you posted, Officer Bartmer claims that he heard explosions. Since we know that thermate doesn't make a loud percussive sound when it reacts, what kind of explosive do you think he heard? Do you think he can tell the difference between the sounds of detonations and the global collapse of a building? Do you think that it's possible to mistake some of the sounds of a global collapse for explosions?
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Mar 13, 2007 17:01:44 GMT -4
What was used was actually amorphomite. Developed in secret laboratories using cutting-edge quantum mechanics, amorphomite is not only extremely powerful for its size, it also has to unique property of doing all things at once, the state collapsing only when observed.
For one person, the amorphomite will make a sound like an explosive. For another, it will be silent. For one, it will act as a high-brissance charge capable of cutting steel; another observer finds it acting as a low explosive as it shoves concrete dust out into the air, and the third sees no explosion as the amorphomite decides to turn metal into dripping liquids instead. It also uses this talent to work quickly enough to make a building fall at near free-fall, yet changes its mind once underground to burn for days and weeks in simmering bubbling pools of amorphomite and molten steel.
|
|
|
Post by Alliterative Andy on Mar 13, 2007 20:22:53 GMT -4
Congratulations on your 1,000th post, nomuse!
I might add, amorphomite can freshen your breath and whiten your teeth, removes warts, loosens stiffened joints, removes the odor from pet droppings, and doesn't have any detectable seismic signature!
Call now, supply is limited.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Mar 13, 2007 21:23:45 GMT -4
Not to mention, it's a floor wax and a dessert topping!
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Mar 13, 2007 22:08:19 GMT -4
Not to mention, it's a floor wax and a dessert topping! How much would I pay for such an amazing product? $50? $60?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 13, 2007 22:55:02 GMT -4
No! Just $19.95!
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Mar 13, 2007 23:31:04 GMT -4
But buy it now and receive this amazing free gift of the ability to ignore all contrary evidence just for trying this great product. A $50 value.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 14, 2007 1:03:43 GMT -4
(offer not valid in Canada)
|
|
|
Post by wingerii on Mar 14, 2007 1:12:19 GMT -4
Aww, ain't that always the way...
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Mar 14, 2007 4:24:27 GMT -4
Call now, obfuscators are standing by.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Mar 14, 2007 8:33:15 GMT -4
What about the free set of Ginsu knives?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Mar 14, 2007 16:16:11 GMT -4
Not to mention, it's a floor wax and a dessert topping! And after twenty or thirty fish, it gets to be quite a rush? (Okay, I can never remember the number he uses.) Seriously, I'm always happy when someone else gets that reference.
|
|