for geggy

[Kulturkampf]

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....i?u=911_morons

[mburbank]

Snake Pliskin. I thought you were dead.

[Geggy]

That website is junk, it doesnt cover all the aspect of other stuff regarding wtc

Like WTC 1 was ridiculously insulated with asbestos from bottom to top and in WTC2 it was from bottom to 64th floor. The level of asbestos exceeded the meeting standard level and were very harmful and dangerous. The previous lease holder was forced to either condemn or strip the asbestos both which are very exspensive procession so he decided to put the lease up for bidding years before 9/11 because he couldn't afford it. Lo and behold, larry silverstein came along and decided to lease the complex 6 weeks prior to 9/11. And the towers collasped on 9/11, solving all silverstein's asbestos worries! Talk about luck! After the attacks. He argued that the wtc attack were 2 seperate incidents and the judge ruled it that it indeedy were. Because of that Silversteing ended up making 2 billion dollars profit in insurance claim, lucky guy!

Since Wtc7 housed several government agencies including the IRS, SEC and EEOC, all of which stored nearly 4000 documents in their files ranging from illegal activities, corruptions, scandals, and bankrupties by countless companies such as citibanks and worldcom. There were a total of 45 investigations going on at the time and all documents and data file sharing into these investigations had been destroyed due to the collapsing of WTC7. There are overwhelming evidence there were abnormal activities of short stocks being sold just a week prior to 9/11 that proves foreknowledge and using the attacks for profits. These stocks included united airlines, american airlines, morgan stanley, raytheon and 34 other companies. Due to the collpasing of WTC7, it forced SEC to delay and slow down their investigation into these suspicious insider tradings and needed to rely on back up files. The destruction of WTC7 benefited a lot of people and companies, talk about luck!

Maybe you can explain to me why severely damaged WTC5 didn't collapse despite it being built with thinner steel beams than WTC7, stood closer to WTC1 and 2 and the inferno was much more intense, larger and longer?

[kahljorn]

actually that site is calling people who believe the 9/11 conspiracy theory idiots

according to this there's also a point by point rebuttal for the "Other aspects". GOOD OL MADDOX

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

That's pretty interesting so far.

[Geggy]

It doesn't say why NIST has delayed the final report on wtc7 for the 4th time til spring 2007

[kahljorn]

It's part of the conspiracy.

I don't know geggy maybe it's a hard or long report, or maybe they are gathering more information or experimenting.

[AChimp]

Geggy just doesn't understand Maddox. And KKK is stupid for citing Maddox as a valid argument.

[El Blanco]

Maddox sucks.

David Wong is better.

And geggy, I still don't know what you think happened 9-11.

And you aren't the same Geggy from the JREF forums, are you?

[kahljorn]

maddox just cites that nist site anyway so it's not so much his argument as somebody else's argument ;9

[El Blanco]

Maddox wasn't really going for a rational argument. That was more of him just yelling at the dopes.

Because, lets be honest, are any of the deniers really looking for rational arguments? How many times can the crap Geggy cut-n-pastes be refuted? All that is ever proven is that he doesn't have a clue as to what he is talking about (or rather what others are talking about that he is plagerising.)

[Geggy]

Too bad NIST doesn't have physical evidence to support their hypothesis as to why WTC7 fell down as it's already been quickly gathered and shipped to china within weeks of the attacks. Bastards. I don't understand why the controlled demolition hypothesis is asinine when every character of the way it fell shows controlled demolition. There was an asymmetrical damage on the south side of the building yet it fell symmetrically. How ya explain that

[kahljorn]

"Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. "

Just for relevance purposes

"The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers. "

And to answer your question from earlier, Geggy:

"When NIST initiated the WTC investigation, it made a decision not to hire new staff to support the investigation. After the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. With the release and dissemination of the report on the WTC towers in October 2005, the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed. Considerable progress has been made since that time, including the review of nearly 80 boxes of new documents related to WTC 7, the development of detailed technical approaches for modeling and analyzing various collapse hypotheses, and the selection of a contractor to assist NIST staff in carrying out the analyses. It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007."

"This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."

At the very bottom of the nist page is their hypothesis

[El Blanco]

Originally Posted by Geggy

Too bad NIST doesn't have physical evidence to support their hypothesis as to why WTC7 fell down as it's already been quickly gathered and shipped to china within weeks of the attacks. Bastards.

If by "china", you mean "Hangar 7 at JFK International Airport", yes, those pieces are in "China".

I don't understand why the controlled demolition hypothesis is asinine when every character of the way it fell shows controlled demolition.

No. Right oiff the bat, CDs happen from the bottom up.

There was an asymmetrical damage on the south side of the building yet it fell symmetrically. How ya explain that

Load bearing. In case of a major fire, a plane crash or other major disaster, if one or more columns were taken out, the remaining columns were meant to pick up the slack until emergency measures could be taken.

And are you Geggy from JREF? Come on, fess up if you are. I just found that place about a weak ago and apparently someone named Geggy is a legendary Conspiracy Theorist there.

[kahljorn]

yea i think they are saying the way the building fell worked on the same premise as a demolition basically. The structural intergrity was warped due to the fire melting the steel, it wasn't from the small chip in the side. Since it was an overall weakening it made it "Buckle" on top of itself like if your knees give out sort of. Same concept with controlled demolitions I'd imagine.

One game I'd reccomend geggy is Janga you can learn all kinds of dynamics of things falling.

[Geggy]

Kahl

The 236 pieces of steel they had retrieved from the rubble only represent .25 of the 200,000 tons worth of steel from both towers. The highest temprature point in any of the steel they had in their hands were 250 degrees. So they had to rely on computer models of the towers further their analysis in which they've refused to release to the public and I find it suspicious. They've also found sulfur oxide on some of the steel they had retrieved. They also refused (or forced not) to release that info to the public. Luckily some silly 911 conspiracy kook websites cached the links of nist's findings of sulfur oxide that only explosives could have possibly produced before it was taken off the www.

I would read nist's final report but I heard it's 10 thousand pages long. I was all like, "fuuuck that!" But I did read some of the footnotes of their findings. They admit they didn't know how much damage was done to the core columns in both towers. Because the planes were made of alumnium, it would shred into pieces once they made impact into the towers. They concluded the damages to the trusses were at least minimum because the planes acted as a pin and as it entered the towers horizonally, the fuel bursted in flames outward of the towers. this is especially true for the south tower since the plane went 100 mph faster than the planw that hit north tower. The small amount of fuel that had gone inside the towers couldn't have burned for a long period of time because fuel would usauslly vaporize quickly. I guess luckily for larry silverstein, the carpets, furnitures, etc went up in flames which produced enough heat to cause the steel to lose half it's strength. Nist came to conclusion that it was the fire proofing that had been knocked off during the impact was the primrary reason for the towers giving away. I had a lot of problems with their report because they didn't cover a lot of things that characterized controlled demolition ie puff of smokes ejecting demostrating squibs, insane amount of dust produced in beginning of collapse, the complete and total collapse indicating core columns were ripped into pieces, no resistence, etc and a lot of questions were raised.

I think the steel in the wtc were grade A certified steel and it wouldn't have had mattered if the fireproof had been knocked off because grade A steel melts at 2750-3000 degrees.

I know for a fact that a lot of structiral/civil engineers who have come by 911blogger expressed their disbelief in the comment section that planes couldn't have possibly had brought down the towers alone. I believe they were legit because it looked as they knew what they were talking about. They were afraid to publicly speak out. I would be too if I knew the government was hiding something from the public and suspect that they were responsible for the murder of the thousands.

Edit: blaco yes I'm from jref and they suck. Try debatin with 50 people agaisnt you. Will come back later with more and will try find that link of nist's finding on sulfer oxide

[El Blanco]

I know for a fact that a lot of structiral/civil engineers who have come by 911blogger expressed their disbelief in the comment section that planes couldn't have possibly had brought down the towers alone. I believe they were legit because it looked as they knew what they were talking about.

You realize your statments contradict each other, right?


And who says the plane crashes alone brought down the towers?

Do these people have credentials?

They were afraid to publicly speak out. I would be too if I knew the government was hiding something from the public and suspect that they were responsible for the murder of the thousands.

I nerver got this. "I won't speak out because they might murder me or my family." The government just obliterated 3000 American people in one shot and tons others in the militatry actions stemming from the faked attack.

Wouldn't one assume your family is in danger anyway?

I would read nist's final report but I heard it's 10 thousand pages long. I was all like, "fuuuck that!"

I have been looking for a new sig. Nah, it would need an explanation.

[Spectre X]

I'm too tired of Geggy's insane rants to read this thread, but Geggy, you do know that neither WTC tower was properly insulated against heat, right? I mean, they did a really, really bad haphazard job insulating it against heat. It was disgraceful, there was a report about it and everything. Several key points weren't even heat-proofed at all.

You god damned sub-human troglodyte delusional schizophrenic conspiracy nut jackass.

[kahljorn]

Geggy so far through my reading alot of what you've said has been false. Also I'm pretty sure you didn't read my post.

So they had to rely on computer models of the towers further their analysis in which they've refused to release to the public and I find it suspicious.

As far as I can tell the following link is their computer models and simulations:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/r...simulation.htm

They've also found sulfur oxide on some of the steel they had retrieved.

I'll get back to you on this since the metalurgy reports are making my computer freeze up.

The highest temprature point in any of the steel they had in their hands were 250 degrees.

I don't know geggy if you had a 250 degree piece of steel in your hand I think it would burn alot. haha just kidding wanted to see if you were paying attention.

"I had a lot of problems with their report because they didn't cover a lot of things that characterized controlled demolition ie puff of smokes ejecting demostrating squibs,"

actually they did detail this and I was waiting for you to ask:

These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed... they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building.... Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses..."

I think the steel in the wtc were grade A certified steel and it wouldn't have had mattered if the fireproof had been knocked off because grade A steel melts at 2750-3000 degrees.

Right but if you read the report it also says that when steel is heated to 2000 degrees is loses 90% of it's structural integrity. If you think about it that actually makes alot of sense. Have you ever tried to melt metal or something before? It's funny when things melt they go through various stages of melting, kind of like an icecube, at some states they are entirely solid, and at others they are half liquid half solid. So if the steel columns were half liquid and half solid they wouldn't be able to support the building anymore.

Some other things for you to consider:

(1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large, jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires weakened the now susceptible structural steel. No building in the United States has ever been subjected to the massive structural damage and concurrent multi-floor fires that the towers experienced on Sept. 11, 2001.

Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

[kahljorn]

all i have to say after reading portions of this geggy is that the people who wrote this are smarter than you and probably the Engineers with an associates or whom graduated from the bottom of the class who correspond with you.

I don't really think they care about political association or anything. This report has no political affiliation whatsoever. It's an engineering site. What they care about is that the building was part of a progressive engineering/architectural "Experiment", which is why there was claims it would be able to stand up to the impact of a plane, which was addressed in the FAQ if you care to read it.

What they are interested in doing is finding out what happened and why the building collapsed and how to build it next time so that it won't collapse. Also they are interested in any other data they can use to improve their building abilities.
That's why the report is so big, because it's written to encompass every single aspect of what happened which means they need every detail of the building and every detail of what happened inside to all the people; then they incorporate it into their future buildings.

[Ant10708]

Well how do you prove this

and that

and this!!!

[Geggy]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Geggy so far through my reading alot of what you've said has been false. Also I'm pretty sure you didn't read my post.

This is exactly why i copy and paste and provide links in my posts but then blanco bitch and whine about it. It's harder now to find links because links have been dissappearing over time, revealing links are pressed down in the last page of google search, and...

I'll get back to you on this since the metalurgy reports are making my computer freeze up.

If you want me to start posting copy and paste, and links, I will do that because I know where to look.

[quote]actually they did detail this and I was waiting for you to ask:

These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed... they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building.... Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses..."

This is absurd and total junk science. If this was true, windows all around would have blown out and cracks around the concrete of the building would have been more visible. The puff of dust that shot out was total clean cut, high speed and right in center spots of the building. Also each of the puff of dust ejected at exactly 20 floors apart, well not exactly but thats my estimation.

(1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large, jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires weakened the now susceptible structural steel. No building in the United States has ever been subjected to the massive structural damage and concurrent multi-floor fires that the towers experienced on Sept. 11, 2001.

Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

Still doesnt explain how core columns below the impact failed and was completely pulverized into small pieces. The puff of clouds were most likely squibs that did the job of cutting the core columns below the impact to allow each falling blocks of the building to fall on top of one and another.

Please watch this video. This demolition expert from www.jowenko.nl has never heard of WTC7 and has no idea it fell on the same day of the attacks before he was told

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uqrn5x2_f6Q

[kahljorn]

I'll admit that one does fall differently, but who's to say it was terrorists who were demolating it? So if no plane struck the tower what are they officially saying happened? That the ground or ground supports were weakened by the other two falling?


"This is absurd and total junk science. If this was true, windows all around would have blown out and cracks around the concrete of the building would have been more visible."

Not really air has a habit of escaping at the easiest point possible. Where it shot out could've been a ventilation shaft, which would explain the "Every 20 floor levels" or so...

"Still doesnt explain how core columns below the impact failed and was completely pulverized into small pieces."

A buiding fell on them.

"The puff of clouds were most likely squibs that did the job of cutting the core columns below the impact to allow each falling blocks of the building to fall on top of one and another. "

Well they have that simulation check it out, I'm sure it shows how they were weakened and then the falling force of the collapse. I mean, I saw you clearly state that the simulation wasn't ever released which probably means that somewhere some conspiracy theororist engineer has been fronting that rather than analyzing it.

[Ant10708]

Well how do you prove this

and that

and that still doesn't explain this!