Was anyone ever inside WTC1?

[Gamolon]

He didn't write a paper

Really jackass?

What's this then?
http://www.enfp.umd.edu/documents/QuintiereNATOFinal.pdf

And here is the conclusion he wrote at the end of his non-existent paper:

An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

 

[eots]

you are the one that injected the word "PAPER' what he did was write a critique of the investigation ...you re-titled..

.and his conclusion was that all records be archived and a new investigation done....so why ya gotta lie like that ?

 

[Gamolon]

you are the one that injected the word "PAPER' what he did was write a critique of the investigation ...you re-titled..

.and his conclusion was that all records be archived and a new investigation done....so why ya gotta lie like that ?

The bottom line is that based on the evidence he saw, the heat and fire caused the floor trusses to fail. Nothing more.

He wants a new investigation to find out if his theory is correct or in NIST is correct. NOT because he thinks that there was thermite or explosives or that the government brought down the towers.

An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

Tell you what eots. His email address is in that PAPER he wrote. I'm sure there are listings elsewhere also to contact him. Instead of you quoting him and interpreting on your own what he meant and how he feels about the towers, why don't you ask him? Clearly you think he thinks there is some secret stuff going on.

Or are you just like Christophera and would rather sit here and spew crap instead of finding out the truth from the source?

 

[Gamolon]

...well..he makes an interesting case at times.. I will give him that much..if he did not you would not being sending e-mails to willie

No.

I sent emails to Willie because Chris is dead wrong about the whole theory. Chris wanted to talk to Willie about the actual layout of the towers. Funny though. He said Willie never responded to him.

Yet I got responses from Willie telling me that the leaked blueprints are what I need to look at for a representation of the cores.

That means the blueprints are NOT faked and that he lied about his WTC1 lobby layout to cover his ass.

 

[eots]

you are the one that injected the word "PAPER' what he did was write a critique of the investigation ...you re-titled..

.and his conclusion was that all records be archived and a new investigation done....so why ya gotta lie like that ?

The bottom line is that based on the evidence he saw, the heat and fire caused the floor trusses to fail. Nothing more.

He wants a new investigation to find out if his theory is correct or in NIST is correct. NOT because he thinks that there was thermite or explosives or that the government brought down the towers.

An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

Tell you what eots. His email address is in that PAPER he wrote. I'm sure there are listings elsewhere also to contact him. Instead of you quoting him and interpreting on your own what he meant and how he feels about the towers, why don't you ask him? Clearly you think he thinks there is some secret stuff going on.

Or are you just like Christophera and would rather sit here and spew crap instead of finding out the truth from the source?

he states very clearly in his "critique of the wtc investigation" that fact finding was deterred..and blocked calls for his peers to be conspiracy theorist and calls for a re-investigation...the fact he favors a different theory than I is irrelevant to this fact...NIST failed in its investigation and a fact driven investigation is required ...you apparently disagree with Q

 

[Gamolon]

you are the one that injected the word "PAPER' what he did was write a critique of the investigation ...you re-titled..

.and his conclusion was that all records be archived and a new investigation done....so why ya gotta lie like that ?

The bottom line is that based on the evidence he saw, the heat and fire caused the floor trusses to fail. Nothing more.

He wants a new investigation to find out if his theory is correct or in NIST is correct. NOT because he thinks that there was thermite or explosives or that the government brought down the towers.

An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue.

Tell you what eots. His email address is in that PAPER he wrote. I'm sure there are listings elsewhere also to contact him. Instead of you quoting him and interpreting on your own what he meant and how he feels about the towers, why don't you ask him? Clearly you think he thinks there is some secret stuff going on.

Or are you just like Christophera and would rather sit here and spew crap instead of finding out the truth from the source?

he states very clearly in his "critique of the wtc investigation" that fact finding was deterred..and blocked calls for his peers to be conspiracy theorist and calls for a re-investigation...the fact he favors a different theory than I is irrelevant to this fact...NIST failed in its investigation and a fact driven investigation is required ...you apparently disagree with Q

That fact is eots, your EXPERT, PROFESSIONAL witness you keep quoting states in his CRITIQUE that based on the evidence he saw, he believes that FIRE and HEAT caused the FLOOR TRUSSES to FAIL.

End of story.

You lose. You're just pissed because you look stupid trying to make it look like he means something else.

Have you asked Quintiere about what he thought and meant about all this? I bet you haven't.

You're a coward just like Christophera aren't you? You'd rather sit here and twist words instead of going to the source.

 

[eots]

The bottom line is that based on the evidence he saw, the heat and fire caused the floor trusses to fail. Nothing more.

He wants a new investigation to find out if his theory is correct or in NIST is correct. NOT because he thinks that there was thermite or explosives or that the government brought down the towers.



Tell you what eots. His email address is in that PAPER he wrote. I'm sure there are listings elsewhere also to contact him. Instead of you quoting him and interpreting on your own what he meant and how he feels about the towers, why don't you ask him? Clearly you think he thinks there is some secret stuff going on.

Or are you just like Christophera and would rather sit here and spew crap instead of finding out the truth from the source?

he states very clearly in his "critique of the wtc investigation" that fact finding was deterred..and blocked calls for his peers to be conspiracy theorist and calls for a re-investigation...the fact he favors a different theory than I is irrelevant to this fact...NIST failed in its investigation and a fact driven investigation is required ...you apparently disagree with Q

That fact is eots, your EXPERT, PROFESSIONAL witness you keep quoting states in his CRITIQUE that based on the evidence he saw, he believes that FIRE and HEAT caused the FLOOR TRUSSES to FAIL.

End of story.

You lose. You're just pissed because you look stupid trying to make it look like he means something else.

Have you asked Quintiere about what he thought and meant about all this? I bet you haven't.

You're a coward just like Christophera aren't you? You'd rather sit here and twist words instead of going to the source.

wow what a loon ..I twisted no words..I retitled none of his work...why would I need to ask what he meant by government lawyers blocked everything and deterred fact finding and all work should be archived and a new investigation done ?..seems clear enough to me ..as does the fact he feels his theories are "more likely" than explosions ...I am not trying to add or subtract anything from his words ..we fully agree on the character of the NIST report,we have a different view on the probability of different theories

 

[Mini 14]

The entire city of New York was a hologram.

I say "was" because it was destroyed on 12/31/1999 by The Artist Formerly Known as Prince

 

[eots]

The entire city of New York was a hologram.

I say "was" because it was destroyed on 12/31/1999 by The Artist Formerly Known as Prince

but you are a complete idiot so consider the source

 

[Gamolon]

..as does the fact he feels his theories are "more likely" than explosions

There you go again. Twisting his words and/or making shit up.

He has ONE theory and that theory is stated in the conclusion part of the paper he wrote.

END OF STORY.

Now theories. Theory. One. Based on the evidence he saw, it is his theory that the heat from fore caused the floor trusses to fail.

If you want to prove to prove otherwise, then contact him and discuss. Until you do that, you are doing nothing more than twisting his words. Have you spoken to him yet about what you think he means?

 

[the other mike]

Been there lots of times.