Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[eots]

According to you and your posted video, the lower portion should have resisted. Now you are saying you aren't sure?

Interesting...

you asked what contacted first.. not if there would of been Resistance..of course there should be Resistance

Would you agree, that in many videos, you can see the side of WTC 2 bowing in? And would you agree that once those columns are pulled out of "true", they can no longer support the load?

no

Once the upper block starts to move & tilt, columns are no longer resting on columns. Thus, columns are landing on floors. Which obviously can't support that load.
Is there any part of this you would not agree with?

yes

 

[SFC Ollie]

“The WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause….Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? Their current explanation for the collapse of the towers is critically based on an assumption that the insulation was removed from the steel in the path of the aircraft, particularly the core columns. NIST does not show calculations or experiments to satisfactorily confirm that the insulation was removed in the core.” [1]

—James G. Quintiere, Ph.D.

Professor, Fire Protection Engineering, University of Maryland

(1971-1989, NIST chief of Fire Science and Engineering Division)

Interesting person your Dr James G. Quintiere.

I have to ask, how much of his work have you read? You see he doesn't believe in any conspiracy theory, he believes that NIST was wrong because he thinks the fires were hotter and were at peak temperatures longer than NIST says.

http://www.enfp.umd.edu/documents/QuintiereNATOFinal.pdf

bullshit ollie



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,” he said




. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have


. “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.”


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

The man does not believe there were any explosives. Read his papers, not just what Alex Jones tells you to read.

 

[Rationalist1016]

Ollie, I have to agree. Mr. Quintiere is definitely saying that he thinks the fires where hotter and more severe than NIST accounts for. Isn't it amazing that multiple people can read the same document and come to completely different conclusions? I don't know how someone could read that and conclude he is on the side of the "truthers".

 

[eots]

Ollie, I have to agree. Mr. Quintiere is definitely saying that he thinks the fires where hotter and more severe than NIST accounts for. Isn't it amazing that multiple people can read the same document and come to completely different conclusions? I don't know how someone could read that and conclude he is on the side of the "truthers".

His complaints of the procedure are accurate and factual and make any conclusive findings impossible.. if he calls the NIST investigation into question and seeks a re-investigation under the terms he list, he is on the side of truth, regardless of his personal view on controlled demolition





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.




“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.


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

 

[eots]

Interesting person your Dr James G. Quintiere.

I have to ask, how much of his work have you read? You see he doesn't believe in any conspiracy theory, he believes that NIST was wrong because he thinks the fires were hotter and were at peak temperatures longer than NIST says.

http://www.enfp.umd.edu/documents/QuintiereNATOFinal.pdf

bullshit ollie


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,” he said




. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have


. “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.”


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

The man does not believe there were any explosives. Read his papers, not just what Alex Jones tells you to read.

No one ever said he did, he believes there needs to be a re investigation.. because fact finding was deterred and blocked ..that the NIST conclusions are questionable and list very valid reasons why the investigative procedure was terrible flawed and intentionally hampered, for what ever reason

 

[Rationalist1016]

bullshit ollie


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,” he said




. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have


. “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.”


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

The man does not believe there were any explosives. Read his papers, not just what Alex Jones tells you to read.

No one ever said he did, he believes there needs to be a re investigation.. because fact finding was deterred and blocked ..that the NIST conclusions are questionable and list very valid reasons why the investigative procedure was terrible flawed and intentionally hampered, for what ever reason

Then I am surprised that you used him as a reference, sense he seems to contradict your views. If I remember correctly, you believe that explosives are the likely cause of the collapse. And as you just agreed, he does NOT believe that to be the case. He believes that the damage caused by the planes and the fire is what caused the collapses. He just thinks that NIST failed to get the exact part that failed first, triggering the collapse. So, I'm not sure what a new investigation would prove. That the trusses failed in this spot instead of in that spot? That the core failed on this floor instead of that floor? That really doesn't change the outcome.
I understand, from an engineering perspective, he wants to know the EXACT cause. That is the nature of an engineer. I know, I am one. We want the details!
As far as his questions for NIST, I think they are valid. But the answers to those questions are not going to point to some "inside job" conspiracy. They are just going to allow a better understanding of how the damage and the fires destroyed those buildings.
And if that is your stance?................That you want to know what ACTUALLY happened? Then I would be wrong to group you with the "truthers". Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!

 

[Gamolon]

you asked what contacted first.. not if there would of been Resistance..of course there should be Resistance

Also, what happened to the upper block that supposedly "sank through" (according to your accurate video) the lower portion? Why is it not sitting intact on top of the pile? Are you suggesting that they used explosives to tear apart that upper block?

that is a possibility

 

[Gamolon]

“The WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause….Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? Their current explanation for the collapse of the towers is critically based on an assumption that the insulation was removed from the steel in the path of the aircraft, particularly the core columns. NIST does not show calculations or experiments to satisfactorily confirm that the insulation was removed in the core.” [1]

—James G. Quintiere, Ph.D.

Professor, Fire Protection Engineering, University of Maryland

(1971-1989, NIST chief of Fire Science and Engineering Division)

Interesting person your Dr James G. Quintiere.

I have to ask, how much of his work have you read? You see he doesn't believe in any conspiracy theory, he believes that NIST was wrong because he thinks the fires were hotter and were at peak temperatures longer than NIST says.

http://www.enfp.umd.edu/documents/QuintiereNATOFinal.pdf

bullshit ollie



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,” he said




. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have


. “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.”


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

Really eots? Maybe you should read this paper that he was involved in. Also, his email address is listed on that page. Email him and ask him directly what he thinks about conspiracy theories and explosives being used. You can then post his email here in the forums for all to see.

Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1 | Browse - Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities

 

[Mr. Jones]

Interesting person your Dr James G. Quintiere.

I have to ask, how much of his work have you read? You see he doesn't believe in any conspiracy theory, he believes that NIST was wrong because he thinks the fires were hotter and were at peak temperatures longer than NIST says.

http://www.enfp.umd.edu/documents/QuintiereNATOFinal.pdf

bullshit ollie



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,” he said




. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have


. “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.”


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

Really eots? Maybe you should read this paper that he was involved in. Also, his email address is listed on that page. Email him and ask him directly what he thinks about conspiracy theories and explosives being used. You can then post his email here in the forums for all to see.

Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1 | Browse - Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities

Access to article objects (figures, tables, multimedia) requires a subscription; log in to view available files.
(Access to supplementary files, where available, is free for this journal.)

You are not logged in You are not logged in to this journal. Log In
Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1 | Browse - Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities


Anyone have a password?

 

[Mr. Jones]

The man does not believe there were any explosives. Read his papers, not just what Alex Jones tells you to read.

No one ever said he did, he believes there needs to be a re investigation.. because fact finding was deterred and blocked ..that the NIST conclusions are questionable and list very valid reasons why the investigative procedure was terrible flawed and intentionally hampered, for what ever reason

Then I am surprised that you used him as a reference, sense he seems to contradict your views. If I remember correctly, you believe that explosives are the likely cause of the collapse. And as you just agreed, he does NOT believe that to be the case. He believes that the damage caused by the planes and the fire is what caused the collapses. He just thinks that NIST failed to get the exact part that failed first, triggering the collapse. So, I'm not sure what a new investigation would prove. That the trusses failed in this spot instead of in that spot? That the core failed on this floor instead of that floor? That really doesn't change the outcome.
I understand, from an engineering perspective, he wants to know the EXACT cause. That is the nature of an engineer. I know, I am one. We want the details!
As far as his questions for NIST, I think they are valid. But the answers to those questions are not going to point to some "inside job" conspiracy. They are just going to allow a better understanding of how the damage and the fires destroyed those buildings.
And if that is your stance?................That you want to know what ACTUALLY happened? Then I would be wrong to group you with the "truthers". Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!

You really are very wrong. The majority of people that oppose the OCT, and NIST, and various other agencies that contributed to the inaccuracy of it, just want a fair playing field, and full disclosure.

It has been shown that the NIST report is a flawed investigation and falls way short of explaining what happened because the data has been manipulated, omitted, or not even considered.
Even by people that don't think explosives were used, what does that tell you?
That it was a flawed report, that's what.
Quinterre makes good points for both sides, but overall, he is on the side that wants the truth, and a new investigation.
He sides with no one regarding any conspiracy, either the one people like you subscribe to, or an alternative one. But he obviously feels that NIST could have done a better job, as do most people who have looked at their BS, and read what other independent researchers have to say about it.

 

[Patriot911]

So where is your evidence your bullshit fantasies are true, Jones? Come on. How long are you going to wait before either showing us all this evidence you've repeatedly claimed to have, or admit you were lying once again.

 

[Rationalist1016]

No one ever said he did, he believes there needs to be a re investigation.. because fact finding was deterred and blocked ..that the NIST conclusions are questionable and list very valid reasons why the investigative procedure was terrible flawed and intentionally hampered, for what ever reason

Then I am surprised that you used him as a reference, sense he seems to contradict your views. If I remember correctly, you believe that explosives are the likely cause of the collapse. And as you just agreed, he does NOT believe that to be the case. He believes that the damage caused by the planes and the fire is what caused the collapses. He just thinks that NIST failed to get the exact part that failed first, triggering the collapse. So, I'm not sure what a new investigation would prove. That the trusses failed in this spot instead of in that spot? That the core failed on this floor instead of that floor? That really doesn't change the outcome.
I understand, from an engineering perspective, he wants to know the EXACT cause. That is the nature of an engineer. I know, I am one. We want the details!
As far as his questions for NIST, I think they are valid. But the answers to those questions are not going to point to some "inside job" conspiracy. They are just going to allow a better understanding of how the damage and the fires destroyed those buildings.
And if that is your stance?................That you want to know what ACTUALLY happened? Then I would be wrong to group you with the "truthers". Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!

You really are very wrong. The majority of people that oppose the OCT, and NIST, and various other agencies that contributed to the inaccuracy of it, just want a fair playing field, and full disclosure.

It has been shown that the NIST report is a flawed investigation and falls way short of explaining what happened because the data has been manipulated, omitted, or not even considered.
Even by people that don't think explosives were used, what does that tell you?
That it was a flawed report, that's what.
Quinterre makes good points for both sides, but overall, he is on the side that wants the truth, and a new investigation.
He sides with no one regarding any conspiracy, either the one people like you subscribe to, or an alternative one. But he obviously feels that NIST could have done a better job, as do most people who have looked at their BS, and read what other independent researchers have to say about it.

I completely agree. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on what I was trying to say.
So, what am I "very wrong" about?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Also, you just said that the Towers were designed to support a "static" load. Once the upper block started to move, it is obviously not static anymore. Now you are dealing with an accelerating mass. You can break ANYTHING with enough mass and/or speed.

Bingo!

This is what I am trying to get Mr. Jones to discuss. Based on what was quoted above, Mr. Jones thinks that the more robust lower potion of the building should have resisted or acted differently. I want to figure out why and what reasoning was used to come to this conclusion.

The official account of the three towers' collapses, even Building 7 which was not hit by a jetliner, centers around the ridiculous notion that somehow the steel frames lost enough of their tensile strength through heat to become like "clay," and that the top floors where the damage was the greatest finally "buckled" and started a chain reaction in which the accumulating weight and momentum of collapsing floors forced the rest of the steel frame down.

But it can be observed that even clay has a tensile strength and does not squash itself flat at free-fall speed. Moreover the "momentum" from a light body, the upper floors, cannot "plunge" through the upward static resistance of a much heavier body, the massive central core which remained largely undamaged.

In any event, the speed of such an unlikely collapse would have to be considerably slower than free-fall, to account for the resistance of the "clay." Free-fall speed could only be attained by all of the steel in the structure reaching melting point of 2800F, a condition which would require the adding of even more tons of office materials burning with the heat and efficiency of a blast furnace. The only other way for a steel frame to come down at free-fall is for it to be cut into small pieces all at once or in rapid progression, so that the remains of the structure are falling through air. This is precisely what a demolition is.

The "straw man" often used by defenders of the official story is that skeptics are claiming "fire does not melt steel," which is clearly absurd. Fire melts or makes steel malleable all the time, in a blast furnace. As always with such oversimplifications, the issue is not whether fire can melt steel, but what kind of fire, burning how hot, how long, and over what area. As we have seen, how high the temperatures may or may not have gotten is only one consideration. You can raise the temperature of the steel in a very small area to melting very quickly with the 5000F point flame of a blowtorch. But you are unlikely to take down the towers with that blowtorch. It is total energy delivered which is important.

WTC engineer John Skilling said the perimeter columns alone, which were not the structures' main support (the cores were) could handle an increase in live loads of 2000% before failure.

So what explains the extreme high temps recorded and the molten metal in the rubble pile? Perhaps something else was used, that DID produce the high temps needed to remove the resistance of the huge structures, as witnessed by the pool of molten(something) exiting one of the towers, and in the mentioned rubble pile.

Perhaps allowing the intellectuals from boyh sides present what they have in an independent forum would produce more accurate results and clear this part of the 9-11 controversy up once and for all.

Simple Calculations Showing the Official 911 Story is Impossible | Ron Paul 2012 | Sound Money, Peace and Liberty

 

[Patriot911]

Simple Calculations Showing the Official 911 Story is Impossible | Ron Paul 2012 | Sound Money, Peace and Liberty

OMG THAT WAS HIALRIOUS!!!!! That is the funniest shit I have EVER READ IN MY LIFE!!!!!

This fucked up retard thinks that every pound of structural steel (all 192,000 tons of it) had to be heated to 1800F! He then goes on to claim there just wasn't enough fuel to heat up every pound of steel up to that temperature! No shit Sherlock! OMG THAT IS FUNNY!!!!!

He then goes on to point out that 1800F is far short of the melting point, but not one official report has EVER stated the metal had to be or was anywhere near the melting point.

What a ******* joke!

Thanks for the laughs Jones! Maybe next time you should actually READ what you link so you don't look like such a jackass when you try to pretend the article is relevant.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Then I am surprised that you used him as a reference, sense he seems to contradict your views. If I remember correctly, you believe that explosives are the likely cause of the collapse. And as you just agreed, he does NOT believe that to be the case. He believes that the damage caused by the planes and the fire is what caused the collapses. He just thinks that NIST failed to get the exact part that failed first, triggering the collapse. So, I'm not sure what a new investigation would prove. That the trusses failed in this spot instead of in that spot? That the core failed on this floor instead of that floor? That really doesn't change the outcome.
I understand, from an engineering perspective, he wants to know the EXACT cause. That is the nature of an engineer. I know, I am one. We want the details!
As far as his questions for NIST, I think they are valid. But the answers to those questions are not going to point to some "inside job" conspiracy. They are just going to allow a better understanding of how the damage and the fires destroyed those buildings.
And if that is your stance?................That you want to know what ACTUALLY happened? Then I would be wrong to group you with the "truthers". Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!

You really are very wrong. The majority of people that oppose the OCT, and NIST, and various other agencies that contributed to the inaccuracy of it, just want a fair playing field, and full disclosure.

It has been shown that the NIST report is a flawed investigation and falls way short of explaining what happened because the data has been manipulated, omitted, or not even considered.
Even by people that don't think explosives were used, what does that tell you?
That it was a flawed report, that's what.
Quinterre makes good points for both sides, but overall, he is on the side that wants the truth, and a new investigation.
He sides with no one regarding any conspiracy, either the one people like you subscribe to, or an alternative one. But he obviously feels that NIST could have done a better job, as do most people who have looked at their BS, and read what other independent researchers have to say about it.

I completely agree. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on what I was trying to say.
So, what am I "very wrong" about?

"Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!"
Do you realize what the "Official conspiracy Theory" has done to this nation? Who in their right mind wants that?
There are so many aspects of it that are so dubious, that it demands a new investigation.
But sometimes I wonder if the lid was blown off this cover up, what the implications would be..Massive chaos, loss of international and domestic credibility..
If the American people want truth they must acknowledge that they have been deceived. If that were to happen, and if they were to accept the facts that have been uncovered by the independent 9-11 research community, their faith in their government would be irreparably destroyed.
( For many it already has) In the long run, it is far easier to maintain one’s faith in a deceptive government than to deal with the painful details of that deception.

The defenders of the OCT of 9-11 inevitably ask how so many people could keep a secret. "Wouldn't someone have blown the whistle by now?" is the constant question by the champions of denial. How naive.

At the higher levels of government the issue is no longer about secrecy, but about survival. The extent of the 9-11 crimes are so great that a very real scenario of self preservation has arisen. It may well be that whistle blowers fear the consequences of exposing the truth about 9-11, not to themselves, but to the nation.

It is highly probable that they believe that their testimony would lead to the end of the United States of America as a viable power.
In this worst case scenario, the good people in our government and in our intelligence community may really fear that America would never ever regain its credibility in the world, and would never again be respected or trusted. They may envision a terrible time when the United States would relinquish its leadership position in the world and sink to the position of a rogue nation that had committed an unforgivable atrocity against its own people for political purposes. If this is so, can anyone blame them for not coming forward to expose what they know?

A deep love of country might easily create a dilemma for those who know the truth. What would happen at that unimaginable moment when a ranking government official was charged with complicity in 9-11? Would the nation recover? Could the nation heal after such a huge betrayal of the trust that has been cultivated and nurtured over our 230 year history as a nation?

But, in fact, they are badly mistaken. The United States of America will not crumble with the revelation of their actions because our foundation is too strong to falter at their hands. History is never without obstacles to progress and this ordeal will not be an exception. On the contrary, if and when the truth is ever known, this nation will be stronger and nobler for that knowledge.

And it is for those reasons that we must continue to pursue the truth.
Bottom line: the real facts are out there, somewhere. The questions being asked are legitimate and raise reasonable suspicions that must be addressed.
Refusing the 9/11 Evidence

 

[Gamolon]

Also, you just said that the Towers were designed to support a "static" load. Once the upper block started to move, it is obviously not static anymore. Now you are dealing with an accelerating mass. You can break ANYTHING with enough mass and/or speed.

Bingo!

This is what I am trying to get Mr. Jones to discuss. Based on what was quoted above, Mr. Jones thinks that the more robust lower potion of the building should have resisted or acted differently. I want to figure out why and what reasoning was used to come to this conclusion.

The official account of the three towers' collapses, even Building 7 which was not hit by a jetliner, centers around the ridiculous notion that somehow the steel frames lost enough of their tensile strength through heat to become like "clay," and that the top floors where the damage was the greatest finally "buckled" and started a chain reaction in which the accumulating weight and momentum of collapsing floors forced the rest of the steel frame down.

But it can be observed that even clay has a tensile strength and does not squash itself flat at free-fall speed. Moreover the "momentum" from a light body, the upper floors, cannot "plunge" through the upward static resistance of a much heavier body, the massive central core which remained largely undamaged.

Why do you continue to compare the structures to sold entities in order to make your comparisons? What you are failing to see is that the upper and lower "blocks" are comprised of many individual components brought to together with CONNECTIONS. CONNECTIONS that are not in any way, shape, or form, designed to withstand the downward force of that descending block. That is why I keep asking you the following.

Were these truss supports circled in red...

...designed to resist the force of this block, circled in red, coming down?

Why can you not understand this? This is why we see perimeter columns peeling away like banana peels from the tower proper. The debris that was the upper block came down and severed the floor truss connections circled in red. There were huge elevator motors, electrical control panels, etc. in that debris.

 

[Gamolon]

In any event, the speed of such an unlikely collapse would have to be considerably slower than free-fall, to account for the resistance of the "clay." Free-fall speed could only be attained by all of the steel in the structure reaching melting point of 2800F, a condition which would require the adding of even more tons of office materials burning with the heat and efficiency of a blast furnace. The only other way for a steel frame to come down at free-fall is for it to be cut into small pieces all at once or in rapid progression, so that the remains of the structure are falling through air. This is precisely what a demolition is.

I suggest you ask a structural engineer about this because you clearly do not understand one bit of structural engineering.

Read this.
Structural Material Behavior in Fire: Steel: Hot Rolled Carbon Steel Mechanical Properties

Steel STARTS to lose it's strength at about 572 degrees F (300 C). Here's a problem for you to ask a structural engineer. Go to this site and pick out a 40 foot long steel wide flange.
Structural Steel W Flange Section Properties Moment of Inertia, Steel Beam Size,Cross Section Area -* Engineers Edge

Ask the engineer to figure out how much of a load would need to be applied on top for the wide flange to fail. Now ask him to apply 800 degrees worth of heat to that flange and figure out how much of a load needs to applied to make that wide flange fail.

Let me know if the load remains the same for both cases. This will put your "steel needs to be melted in order to fail" claim to rest. A failed column is failed whether it is cut or over-stressed. Both will provide no support and result in the free fall of it's supported load.

I mean, what your basically saying is that no matter what load I put on a steel column, it will ALWAYS provide some resistance. The only way to do away with any resistance is to cut it or melt it.

Pure craziness.

I guess, based on your thinking, if I dropped a 1,000,000 pound weight on the top of vertical W10x60, that weight would not fall at free fall to the ground.

 

[Rationalist1016]

"Because the real "truthers" DO NOT want truth..............they want a conspiracy!!"
Do you realize what the "Official conspiracy Theory" has done to this nation? Who in their right mind wants that?
There are so many aspects of it that are so dubious, that it demands a new investigation.
But sometimes I wonder if the lid was blown off this cover up, what the implications would be..Massive chaos, loss of international and domestic credibility..
If the American people want truth they must acknowledge that they have been deceived. If that were to happen, and if they were to accept the facts that have been uncovered by the independent 9-11 research community, their faith in their government would be irreparably destroyed.
( For many it already has) In the long run, it is far easier to maintain one’s faith in a deceptive government than to deal with the painful details of that deception.

The defenders of the OCT of 9-11 inevitably ask how so many people could keep a secret. "Wouldn't someone have blown the whistle by now?" is the constant question by the champions of denial. How naive.

At the higher levels of government the issue is no longer about secrecy, but about survival. The extent of the 9-11 crimes are so great that a very real scenario of self preservation has arisen. It may well be that whistle blowers fear the consequences of exposing the truth about 9-11, not to themselves, but to the nation.

It is highly probable that they believe that their testimony would lead to the end of the United States of America as a viable power.
In this worst case scenario, the good people in our government and in our intelligence community may really fear that America would never ever regain its credibility in the world, and would never again be respected or trusted. They may envision a terrible time when the United States would relinquish its leadership position in the world and sink to the position of a rogue nation that had committed an unforgivable atrocity against its own people for political purposes. If this is so, can anyone blame them for not coming forward to expose what they know?

A deep love of country might easily create a dilemma for those who know the truth. What would happen at that unimaginable moment when a ranking government official was charged with complicity in 9-11? Would the nation recover? Could the nation heal after such a huge betrayal of the trust that has been cultivated and nurtured over our 230 year history as a nation?

But, in fact, they are badly mistaken. The United States of America will not crumble with the revelation of their actions because our foundation is too strong to falter at their hands. History is never without obstacles to progress and this ordeal will not be an exception. On the contrary, if and when the truth is ever known, this nation will be stronger and nobler for that knowledge.

And it is for those reasons that we must continue to pursue the truth.
Bottom line: the real facts are out there, somewhere. The questions being asked are legitimate and raise reasonable suspicions that must be addressed.
Refusing the 9/11 Evidence

[/QUOTE]

The "lid" is never going to be "blown off this cover-up"!! There just isn't evidence to support that. No matter how much you believe it, want it, & know it in your heart, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference unless you can PROVE IT! It's been almost a decade. Plenty of time to put a real case together against the government. Yet, there hasn't been one. And for good reason, there aren't any hard facts to prove your case. I agree there are some questions that we don't know the answers to. Do you think the answers to those questions are going to abolish the evidence that is already known? Yes, NIST may have screwed up. But correcting a few of their calculations isn't going to change the out come. The call for a re-investigation is nothing but a ploy to keep this fading "truth movement" alive. No investigation will ever satisfy the "truth movement".

 

[Patriot911]

Do you realize what the "Official conspiracy Theory" has done to this nation? Who in their right mind wants that?

Retarded statement based on a biased and flawed premise.

There are so many aspects of it that are so dubious, that it demands a new investigation.

When one refuses to look at the facts and instead pushes bullshit fantasies that are directly refuted by the facts, a new investigation is NOT going to clear anything up.

But sometimes I wonder if the lid was blown off this cover up, what the implications would be..Massive chaos, loss of international and domestic credibility..

People rising up against the government.... something you claimed truthtards like you weren't after, yet you clearly admit to the massive repercussions of people actually BELIEVING your bullshit.

If the American people want truth they must acknowledge that they have been deceived.

Another bullshit premise based on the flawed assumption that they HAD to have been lied to. Again, something that is only true when someone drinks the truthtard koolaid.

If that were to happen, and if they were to accept the facts that have been uncovered by the independent 9-11 research community, their faith in their government would be irreparably destroyed.

Which is what truthtards push for. They are out to destroy the government and by proxy the United States by pushing a bunch of lies. Fortunately their bullshit fantasies are so whacked out, very few rational people believe the TBM. The fact they have zero evidence to back up their bullshit fantasies also doesn't do the TBM any favors.

( For many it already has) In the long run, it is far easier to maintain one’s faith in a deceptive government than to deal with the painful details of that deception.

Another bullshit platitude from the truthtards to excuse their actions and to villify anyone who doesn't believe their bullshit. What is it based on? Absolutely nothing but a made up claim.

The defenders of the OCT of 9-11 inevitably ask how so many people could keep a secret. "Wouldn't someone have blown the whistle by now?" is the constant question by the champions of denial. How naive.

Yet also a question you truthtards cannot answer. You claim the thousands of people who worked on the NIST reports were in on it and covered up the truth to protect their jobs and keep their bosses happy... while covering up the murders of 3000 people and committing numerous felonies in the process. That is just ONE example of the truthtard claims that make absolutely no sense.

At the higher levels of government the issue is no longer about secrecy, but about survival. The extent of the 9-11 crimes are so great that a very real scenario of self preservation has arisen. It may well be that whistle blowers fear the consequences of exposing the truth about 9-11, not to themselves, but to the nation.

Bullshit. Whistleblowers come forward all the time and for far less. This is just another pathetic excuse the truthtards use to try and pretend the fact not one person out of thousands has come forward has a reasonable explanation.

It is highly probable that they believe that their testimony would lead to the end of the United States of America as a viable power.

So, people like you trying to promote the overthrow of the government are somehow unique? Bullshit. You're talking about EVERYONE in on the conspiracy which, by your own definition would include thousands of people, thinks the exact same way and none of them would take that risk. Riiiiiight.

In this worst case scenario, the good people in our government and in our intelligence community may really fear that America would never ever regain its credibility in the world, and would never again be respected or trusted.

Wrong. The worst case scenario is the government is overthrown. You think the worst that could happen is we lose credibility?!?!? What planet do you live on?

They may envision a terrible time when the United States would relinquish its leadership position in the world and sink to the position of a rogue nation that had committed an unforgivable atrocity against its own people for political purposes.

They wouldn't be around. Yes, the US would probably sink into anarchy for a while and lose its number one position, but it also wouldn't have the same government. You seem to think everyone is willing to forgive and forget. That is hysterical considering you neither forgive nor forget even when it is generations down the line that you lay the blame. You think the fact a plan like Northwoods was dreamed up but never executed is proof the current government drew up 9/11 and executed it.

If this is so, can anyone blame them for not coming forward to expose what they know?

Yes. The truth is the truth and people shouldn't be allowed to get away with shit like that regardless of the consequences. I can't be the only one who thinks that way. You're asking us all to believe EVERY SINGLE PERSON in on the conspiracy thinks the exact opposite and will continue to do so forever. Talk about your fantasies!

A deep love of country might easily create a dilemma for those who know the truth.

Or a deep love of country would be the driving force to make them expose the government corrupting this great country. Don't confuse love of country for love of government.

What would happen at that unimaginable moment when a ranking government official was charged with complicity in 9-11? Would the nation recover? Could the nation heal after such a huge betrayal of the trust that has been cultivated and nurtured over our 230 year history as a nation?

Yet you insist on pushing this scenaro even though you have zero evidence to back up your bullshit fantasies, and then scoff when someone like myself points out how irresposible you are being. Funny how when it suits your purpose you can see it from my angle....

But, in fact, they are badly mistaken. The United States of America will not crumble with the revelation of their actions because our foundation is too strong to falter at their hands.

And you base this on what..... your gut feeling?

History is never without obstacles to progress and this ordeal will not be an exception. On the contrary, if and when the truth is ever known, this nation will be stronger and nobler for that knowledge.

Again one has to ASSume you are right in the first place. That is a huge ASSumption to make, especially considering you have zero evidence to back up your bullshit claims. Don't you find it odd that you would ask so much of people based on nothing but your opinion?

And it is for those reasons that we must continue to pursue the truth.

You don't know DICK about pursuing the truth. In fact, you rape it on a daily basis.

Bottom line: the real facts are out there, somewhere. The questions being asked are legitimate and raise reasonable suspicions that must be addressed.

Wrong yet again. Your "reasonable suspicions" are nothing but the paranoid delusions of very sick minds. The questions have been asked AND ANSWERED. The fact you refuse to acknowledge the evidence presented and continue to push bullshit fantasies you have no evidence for precludes you from consideration as someone actually pursuing the truth.

 

[Patriot911]

So once again I am calling Jones out to present the evidence he has repeatedly claimed he has that "prove" his bullshit fantasies are true. Either present an example of this real evidence or admit to everyone you lied your ass off and apologize.