9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - Can we not just nail the b****** with this evidence?

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

Can we not just nail the b****** with this evidence?
Goto page 1, 2 Next

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:45 pm Post subject: Can we not just nail the b****** with this evidence?

Expert says WTC 7 was a controlled demolition http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_BMcMLsIQk

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:06 am Post subject:

He was presented with the film, stone cold, and with no explanation of the background. Subsequently he has come out strongly against CD of WTC 1+2 at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI I strongly suspect he's embarrassed about his original opinion on WTC7 regards

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:39 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

He was presented with the film, stone cold, and with no explanation of the background.
Subsequently he has come out strongly against CD of WTC 1+2 at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkZMQAC95kI

I strongly suspect he's embarrassed about his original opinion on WTC7

regards

Why will he be embarrassed?

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:41 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

He was presented stone cold simply because as not to inhibit his conclusion

He was then told it was building 7 and they explored other avenues on why it may have collapsed but he still stuck to his original answer.

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:46 am Post subject:

Ignatz, are you mates with Perry Logan? Im utterly fascinated with this dry rot denial that has set into the likes of you and Perry. It's definitely a mental illness!

John White
Site Admin

Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:54 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

Fear is a powerful motivator in the unprepared
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:03 am Post subject:

John White wrote:

Fear is a powerful motivator in the unprepared

To sum it up all in one sentence! Brilliant!! Wink

John White
Site Admin

Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:04 am Post subject:

its a knack _________________ Free your Self and Free the World

prole art threat
Validated Poster

Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:08 am Post subject:

John White wrote:

its a knack Wink

Keep it up, mate. I reckon youve got a talent there! Very Happy

MiniMauve
Moderate Poster

Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:52 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

Worried about his original opinion is more accurate IMHO. When the host told him it was a WTC building the expert got an, "Oh no, what have I done?!" kind of look on his face. What he's worried about... maybe ridicule, maybe his career, maybe his CD business if he has one, maybe he's read too many spy thrillers and feared for his life, who knows.

Don't you think that his original emphatic view of the collpase as CD would be the more honest view? Why should the fact that it occurred at WTC on 911 change his mind? A demolition is a demolition, right? ...unless there are political considerations?
_________________
Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not.

blackcat
Validated Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:06 am Post subject:

Quote:

Don't you think that his original emphatic view of the collpase as CD would be the more honest view? Why should the fact that it occurred at WTC on 911 change his mind? A demolition is a demolition, right? ...unless there are political considerations?

Exactly!

Ignatz wrote

Quote:

I strongly suspect he's embarrassed about his original opinion on WTC7

Why embarrassed? Why not worried? Why anything - has he changed his mind? Has he indicated that he is "reviewing" his initial conclusion. As for the twin towers - he never considered they were cd.

The oft believers are fond of saying than no structural engineers support the cd point of view but what this man shows is that most probably have not even thought about it. How many more when presented with a video of wtc7 would say the same thing as this man? Probably the vast majority considering that is is a perfect example of a cd.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:17 am Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

The oft believers are fond of saying than no structural engineers support the cd point of view but what this man shows is that most probably have not even thought about it. How many more when presented with a video of wtc7 would say the same thing as this man? Probably the vast majority considering that is is a perfect example of a cd.

I suspect the vast majority of people being shown the LC (say) film of WTC7 would be shocked. I certainly was. Anybody who has seen film of CD would immediately form the opinion that it was CD. I certainly did. But that was before seeing film+photos of the rubble of WTC1 hitting it, and reading firefighters testimony. Was Jowenko shown that stuff?

But with Jowenko's expert opinion for CD of WTC7 but against CD of 1+2, where does that leave you regarding 1+2. Did they collapse 'naturally' because of impact and fire damage? Or will you accept only the part of his expert opinion that suits you?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:31 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

blackcat wrote:

The Towers used a top-down demolition sequence, which a professional CD team wouldn't consider using. So he would not recognise them as a normal CD.
But perhaps if he were asked were they explosive events - which the upward and outward direction of ejected material clearly shows - his answer might be different.
But I'm fairly certain (or as much as a non- engineer/ physicist/ mathematician can be) that Jim Hoffman and Jeff King have nailed the energy deficit of the powderising contents and pyroclastic dustclouds compared to a supposed gravity driven collapse that the point is now
reduced to getting people to believe what their eyes are telling them.

blackcat
Validated Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:36 am Post subject:

Quote:

Did they collapse 'naturally' because of impact and fire damage? Or will you accept only the part of his expert opinion that suits you?

I will accept that he says wtc7 is an example of controlled demolition. Do you have an explanation why wtc7 was destroyed by cd? Do you know who did it and how long they prepared it for demolition and what was their motive? Do you know why the 9/11 commission ignored it? Can you see that if wtc7 was a cd then the whole thing unravels?

There was zero "natural" about the collapse of wtc 1 & 2. The fact they were exploded from the top down is not even "natural" for the cd it clearly was.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:56 am Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

Quote:

Did they collapse 'naturally' because of impact and fire damage? Or will you accept only the part of his expert opinion that suits you?

(My bolding)

But I don't accept WTC7 was a CD.

Was Jowenko shown the video that shows that E Penthouse disappearing into the building several seconds before the global collapse? How many times did you watch it before you noticed the E Penthouse going, if ever?
Have you seen it yourself? It's freely available out there. It's even used in CT vids. Do your own timings. What kind of CD would this be?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:08 pm Post subject:

[quote="Ignatz"]

Quote:

Do your own timings. What kind of CD would this be?

A criminal one.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:45 pm Post subject:

[quote="chek"]

Ignatz wrote:

Quote:

Do your own timings. What kind of CD would this be?

A criminal one.

Most amusing Smile

But have you done the timings chek? Seen the E Penthouse falling in?
Here we have a "CD" that starts several seconds early in the top E corner of a 40+storey building. Summat amiss I'd say. What say you?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:09 pm Post subject:

[quote="Ignatz"]

chek wrote:

Ignatz wrote:

Quote:

Do your own timings. What kind of CD would this be?

A criminal one.

Most amusing Smile

I say I don't know a damn thing about the setting up of a controlled demolition, or what timings are necessary to fold a building up into a neat pile.

But if the time taken equals a gravity fall in vacuum, straight down symmetrically, then that's acting, walking and quacking like a controlled or should we say 'deliberate' demolition to me.

Naturally falling objects do not and probably never will take the path of maximum resistance through the building, still beat a weight dropped from the same height through thin air, and yet have enough energy left over to create super-heated molten metal in the basement.

But I guess if you're really determined, it could just be 'one of those things', for the third time in the history of ever, that happened that day.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:40 pm Post subject:

Bongo Brian wrote:

Ignatz, go away and read my response to your other nonsense post. http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=4320&start=30

I would highly recommend you go away and do some research, so that you are fully conversant with the issues at hand before dismissing valid questions out of hand and with no factual data to back your persistant assumptions.

The issue I was dealing with - which you have carefully avoided - is that WTC7 started collapsing several seconds before the global collapse. That fact was based on research and I doubt if 10% of CT'ists are even aware of it. Were you?

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:58 pm Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

Bongo Brian wrote:

EVERYONE is aware of it.
We have ALL seen Steve Jones tell us to watch for the kink
as the roof dips.
CD's aren't simultaneous collapses - they are carefully sequenced mini collapses leading to global collapse.
Mystery solved, but I doubt that'll cure your sophistry.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:34 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

Ignatz wrote:

Bongo Brian wrote:

CD's aren't simultaneous collapses - they are carefully sequenced mini collapses leading to global collapse.

Can I quote you on that? Take care now ...

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

chek wrote:

Ignatz wrote:

Bongo Brian wrote:

CD's aren't simultaneous collapses - they are carefully sequenced mini collapses leading to global collapse.

Can I quote you on that? Take care now ...

If you're asking me can you quote me as saying that "controlled demolitions are a sequenced series of explosions designed to progressively collapse a building into the smallest possible area", then yes, go ahead. Knock yourself out.

As I said a few posts ago, I'm no engineer, so I'm not sure how much weight my 'definition' carries.

It's good enough for me as a non-specialist (on a day-to-day basis), but no doubt grist to the mill for a seasoned sophist such as yourself.

I'm sure some minor (or maybe even major!) technical howler I've inadvertantly included will now enable you to prove beyond a doubt that black is white, up is down and Elvis is still alive.
Go for it - and I hope you apply such rigorous scrutiny to Herr Blair's speech today as well.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:26 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

Go for it - and I hope you apply such rigorous scrutiny to Herr Blair's speech today as well.

I would puke to watch it. Blair disgusts me, but not half as much as Bush disgusts me (in case that's relevant)

p.s. that "kink" you mention - I've had a good look round at my motley collection of stuff and found references to Jones and the kink but not him pointing it out on vid. They're reports and the like, with links to video.

Would that be the kink in the facade you're talking about?

paul wright
Moderator

Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:27 pm Post subject:

Alex Jones points out the demolition kink in his Martial Law documentary, not Prof Steven Jones _________________ http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:20 am Post subject:

dh wrote:

Alex Jones points out the demolition kink in his Martial Law documentary, not Prof Steven Jones

The funny thing is dh, I know it wasn't Alex (bless his tireless energy and full-on commitment) because I can't stand his videos!

I don't know what it is! And when I do I have to force myself by imagining he's Bill Hicks' older brother or something.

I didn't know how many video files I had collected until I started looking -unsuccessfully so far) for the Jones clip, but I seem to recall in it he also mentions getting his students to time the fall. I also think his arm is resting on top of the monitor as he points out the start of the dip (which - for Ignatz benefit - looks like that pesky core structure being destroyed first yet again).

I also know I got the video of his recent PP presentation which had a new photo of the WTC7 squibs only last week, yet can I lay a mouse pointer on it when I need it?

MiniMauve
Moderate Poster

Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:24 am Post subject:

I'm still a little confused about what the significance is supposed to be of the E Penthouse collapse prior to the global collapse of WTC7, Ignatz. We had discussed this in another thread and I had come to the conclusion that it was odd, but inconclusive. You hadn't disagreed, at least in that thread. The WTC7 collapse, starting with the kink that occurs fractions of a second before the global collapse, still appears to me to be a classic example of CD, irreguardless of the earlier collapse of the E Penthouse (which I'll take your word that that's what it is). _________________ Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not.

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 7:53 am Post subject:

MiniMauve wrote:

I'm still a little confused about what the significance is supposed to be of the E Penthouse collapse prior to the global collapse of WTC7, Ignatz. We had discussed this in another thread and I had come to the conclusion that it was odd, but inconclusive. You hadn't disagreed, at least in that thread. The WTC7 collapse, starting with the kink that occurs fractions of a second before the global collapse, still appears to me to be a classic example of CD, irreguardless of the earlier collapse of the E Penthouse (which I'll take your word that that's what it is).

(MiniMauve, with the best will in the world it almost never happens than any thread reaches a conclusion satisfactory to all eh? I think that other one got diverted )

The E Penthouse collapse is much more than odd. The E penthouse is gone several seconds before the facade kink and global collapse that I believe chek is referrring to. This is the clearest video I have seen for the E Penthouse:

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html (the first of the three)

CD that concentrates at the centre of a building is legitimate technique (to bring the walls inwards) as far as my reading on the subject suggests.

CD that starts several seconds early, high up on one side isn't a legitimate CD technique.. Plus, there's no external sign of explosions on the N side (where the filming takes place on all the videos), which would mean CD starting high up on the S side specifically. That's a very unusual CD indeed.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 8:10 am Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

MiniMauve wrote:

With the best will in the world eh? heh - good one.

However without any of us being deliberate demolition experts we have no idea what destruction sequences are necessary. William Rodriguez reported basement explosions BEFORE the first strike, and the North Tower antenna noticeably goes before the remainder of the building.

I imagine your point in pursuing this timing aspect is building up to suggesting some sort of 'natural' collapse?

Ignatz
Moderate Poster

Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

With the best will in the world eh? heh - good one.

You're seeing malice where none exists chek.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:23 pm Post subject:

Ignatz wrote:

chek wrote:

With the best will in the world eh? heh - good one.

You're seeing malice where none exists chek.

Oh, I don't know.... Ok, maybe not malice per se, but you sure are
re-iterating a whole lot of ground you've previously covered with other posters.

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum