Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 4 votes

911 inside job - for what?


  • Please log in to reply
4446 replies to this topic

#1411    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:42 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

On the contrary, investigators, civil and structural engneers have sided with Brent Blanchard.
No they haven't...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

How amusing. There is nothing in that seismic data that even remotely suggest the use of explosives and look what you posted.
Except a seismic event happening 14 and 17 seconds before either plane hits the towers...lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1412    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:45 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

No they haven't..

On yes they have!! Present the evidence to the contrary. What did the Society of Civil Engineers and American Institute of Architects conclude? They have sided with Brent Blanchard and look what you posted.

Posted Image


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 1, 2002
Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee. That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are 123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/


ARCHITECT Magazine
The Magzine of the American Institute of Architects


All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

http://www.architect...y-theory_2.aspx

Edited by skyeagle409, 26 March 2013 - 07:51 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1413    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:46 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Except a seismic event happening 14 and 17 seconds before either plane hits the towers...lol

I think you misunderstood, There is no evidence anywhere in that seismic data indicates bomb explosions. You were duped again!

Edited by skyeagle409, 26 March 2013 - 07:52 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1414    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:51 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

1. No evidence of explosions in the videos
Except for this one...and numerous other too..lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

2. No sound of explosions during the collapase of the WTC buildings
Except for...
"I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions. I don't know what it was. At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out." [Keith Murphy -- (F.D.N.Y.)]

"That's when [the North Tower] went. I looked back. You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down." [Frank Campagna -- Firefighter]
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion ... And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last." - NBC Reporter

"Basically I was outside when that third explosion occurred ... the whole area turned pitch black when that third explosion happened ... this is the safest place to be right now because when when everyone was outside there were three explosions ... I'm completely covered in white smoke from that third explosion." - CNBC Maria Bartiromo

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

3. No seismic data depicting bomb explosions at ground zero
Sorry but it appears you are wrong.
http://www.journalof...longAndRoss.pdf

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

That's three strikes.
Not 3 strikes, but 3 explosions...lol

Edited by Stundie, 26 March 2013 - 07:52 PM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1415    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:53 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

Except for this one...and numerous other too..lol

Except for...
"I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions. I don't know what it was. At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out." [Keith Murphy -- (F.D.N.Y.)]

"That's when [the North Tower] went. I looked back. You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down." [Frank Campagna -- Firefighter]
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion ... And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last." - NBC Reporter

"Basically I was outside when that third explosion occurred ... the whole area turned pitch black when that third explosion happened ... this is the safest place to be right now because when when everyone was outside there were three explosions ... I'm completely covered in white smoke from that third explosion." - CNBC Maria Bartiromo

Sorry but it appears you are wrong.
http://www.journalof...longAndRoss.pdf

Not 3 strikes, but 3 explosions...lol

That is not evidence of bomb explosions. :no:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1416    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:56 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

Not 3 strikes, but 3 explosions...lol

Nothing to do with bombs. :no:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1417    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:58 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

On yes they have!! Present the evidence to the contrary. What did the Society of Civil Engineers and American Institute of Architects conclude? They have sided with Brent Blanchard and look what you posted.

Posted Image


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 1, 2002
Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee. That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are 123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/
So they deicded to agree with Brent Blanchard back in 2002, a full 4 years before Blanchard had even published his paper?? :blink: lol

How could they side with someone who didn't produce their report until 4 years later? Are they psychic?? lol

And a full 6 years before the NIST report into WTC7?? :blink:

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

ARCHITECT Magazine
The Magzine of the American Institute of Architects


All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

http://www.architect...y-theory_2.aspx
So the FEMA report, the NIST report have been peer reviewed?? lol....By whom?? Themselves....hahahahahahahahahaha!!!

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”
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.

http://www.opednews....ief_of_nist.htm

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1418    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:00 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

That is not evidence of bomb explosions. :no:
What consititues as evidence of bomb explosives?? lol

Eyewitnesses at GZ who heard, saw and felt explosions is not evidence that they were elevators crashing are they?? lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 07:56 PM, said:

Nothing to do with bombs. :no:
Or strikes for that matter...lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1419    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:02 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

What consititues as evidence of bomb explosives??

For one thing, the use of explosives

Quote

Eyewitnesses at GZ who heard, saw and felt explosions is not evidence that they were elevators crashing are they??

You haven't been paying attention. What other possible sources have I mentioned?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1420    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:04 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

So they deicded to agree with Brent Blanchard back in 2002, a full 4 years before Blanchard had even published his paper?? :blink: lol

How could they side with someone who didn't produce their report until 4 years later? Are they psychic?? lol

And a full 6 years before the NIST report into WTC7?? :blink:
So the FEMA report, the NIST report have been peer reviewed?? lol....By whom?? Themselves....hahahahahahahahahaha!!!

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”
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.

http://www.opednews....ief_of_nist.htm

Structural and civil engineers and demolition companies have concluded that fire, not explosives, brought down the WTC buildings. After all, we have evidence of fires, but absolutely none for explosives.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1421    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:05 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

For one thing, the use of explosives
Hahahaha!! I suppose you think that explosives would be lying about everywhere with people tripping over them and fall over the god damn things...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

You haven't been paying attention. What other possible sources have I mentioned?
Eyewitnesses, who are now evidence but eyewitnesses are not evidence when they witness explosions...lol

Its a mad paradox your worlds is...lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1422    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:07 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 08:05 PM, said:

Hahahaha!! I suppose you think that explosives would be lying about everywhere with people tripping over them and fall over the god damn things...

Show us the 'explosives' money. If you are unable to do so, then consider yourself broke.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1423    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:08 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:

Structural and civil engineers and demolition companies have concluded that fire, not explosives, brought down the WTC buildings. After all, we have evidence of fires, but absolutely none for explosives.
Not all structual and civil engineers and demolition companies have concluded that. lol

Like there are lots of Structural and civil engineers who disagree and have not concluded that fire down the WTC buildings.

There are demolition companies/experts who disagree and have not concluded that fire down the WTC buildings.

And yes, there is evidence of fires, but as we have seen in our comparisons, fires tend not to collapse high rise steel structures to the ground.

However, they are rather good at collapsing toy factories and over passes as you have shown us...lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1424    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:09 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 26 March 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Show us the 'explosives' money. If you are unable to do so, then consider yourself broke.
I can't show you explosives, because they were never looked for...lol

But I can show you plenty of people who witnessed explosions....lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1425    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,006 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:09 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 March 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

Not all structual and civil engineers and demolition companies have concluded that.


Yes indeed! Apparently, you failed to read the conclusions in their reports.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users