- This topic has 424 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Node, thanks for that personal revelation; it gives me some insight into your anger. I lost a five digit Maplin customer number which they refused to restore, and I was actually gleeful the day they went bust.
However, your second paragraph is also pretty much a list of how you have treated me, for, apparently, working out the natural collapse times of the Twin Towers and thereby revealing pre-rigged demolition as pointless, and gathering evidence that WTC7 was possibly rigged for emergency demolition on the afternoon of 9/11.
There certainly is a pro-war lobby, partly covert; Craig reveals more of them and their activities in post after post. And they continue to fool the people, and crucially, the UN Security Council.
By contrast with Craig’s ongoing and diligent work, despite the high hopes of the 9/11 “Truth” movement, Twin Tower demolition theory has revealed precisely nothing in nineteen years.
I understand the desire for a quick fix; one world-shaking, indisputable fact that changes everything and wakes people up to the distortions of the pro-war corporate media. Unfortunately, or rather thankfully, the reality we live in is more subtle and complicated than that. We live in a diverse and interesting universe that is hard to fathom.
I ask you to consider the possibility that Twin Tower demolition theory is itself part of the psi-op. Please re-read my earlier link which I shall post again here, not as an insult but as a humorous anecdote carrying a vital message:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/hkBp6a5RCDNedo6Wy/the-9-11-meta-truther-conspiracy-theory
– “One reason our fine fraternity has controlled the world for hundreds of years is that we’ve managed to make “conspiracy theories” look stupid. You know how often you’ve ever heard someone suggest that possibility? None. You know why? Because it would be a conspiracy theory.”
The 9/11 Truth Movement loses credibility with the vast majority of the technical community by insisting upon Twin Tower demolition theory. I know why, because I did the maths. You watched me develop that theory piecemeal, attracting ridicule and insult from a dozen commenters the whole time. It is much clearer in my mind now, so if you’d like to go through it and check it with me, I will do that with you. I shall repost my list of evidence for emergency demolition of WTC7 in my subsequent comment; I can find the original sources for each point but some may take me some time and effort.
My evidence for emergency demolition is mostly human rather than physical:
* Silverstein’s “pull it” interview,
* A news story of Silverstein desperately making ‘phone calls to arrange a demolition,
* Firefighters on video moving people away from WTC7 saying it’s about to “blow up”,
* Multiple firefighters saying that WTC7 would either fall down, or would be taken down,
* News crews and spectators seem to have been told to watch WTC7 because it would collapse,
* John Kerry said he thought so.One non-human point:
* The necessity of removing this unstable burning building to prevent proliferation of destruction and fire; WTC7 couldn’t be permitted to topple randomly because it had other tall buildings in all directions but south, which was a rescue and recovery zone.
My precedent for emergency demolition is military demolition, performed in hours, behind enemy lines. Can it be done fast? Listen to Danny Jowenko (link), deceased Dutch demolition designer. He says that each demolition charge can be placed in minutes, and that the weeks or months of preparation are to strip the building of all hazardous materials including asbestos, arrange inspections so as to obtain a certificate, and then obtain a demolition license from the local authority.
I’d have thought New York would have been an ideal place to assemble a suitable demolition team; there’s a lot of crossover between demolition teams and military explosive handlers, and between firefighters and military lower ranks. There’s a huge naval base, and a massive population. There seem to be several demolition companies in New York.
Node
Nobody has actually denied that 911 happened and with all the deficiencies of air defence and so on. But what we have been arguing here is that Covid-19 is a serious disease that needs to be taken seriously. I get the impression that some people deny that this is a serious virus on the basis of some rather shaky information gleaned from various non-scientific, as well as some scientific sources, mostly theoreticians who are not at the coal face. The way the epidemic evolved is not in any way similar to 911 or liable to the same manipulation and selective data release by one government. The sources of the data are multiple and involve countries of different political hues as well as many official, international and national organisations, research groups and clinicians. The message coming out of these sources quite clearly point out as to why this virus is different from Influenza viruses that cause the annual flu. There are some similar features and the major danger is to the elderly and those with co-morbidities, but the spectrum stretches to greater severity and even deaths amongst younger healthier individuals. Because we have no effective treatment (you can use Tamiflu for influenza with some success in severe cases) and because we understand much less about the immunity to the virus, and because of its high rate of transmission, a factor estimated as 1:2.4 (that is one infected person will infect 2.4 individuals on average) which leads to rapid exponential rise, this virus is particularly dangerous. It does not matter how many get mild infections because firstly many get severe disease, and secondly we cannot say who gets the severe disease.
I am sorry I have not linked to any references because they are many but if you want to debate any particular point you do not like then please ask and I will supply a link.
So the next question is how this is to be dealt with and that may be the subject of discussion of how different governments have taken this opportunity to do something or another to limit our freedom, but unless we agree on the first point, that it is a serious disease, then we cannot continue in a sensible way. I do not in any way underestimate your concern that the disease may be exaggerated and even our government and that of the US did that with disastrous results. Incidentally, I did go through this process with you before but we stumbled on some questions which you did not answer.Dave, I don’t support Israel. I’m very much of the same opinion as Craig; Israel is an apartheid state inflicting slavery upon Palestinians, and indescribable horror upon Gaza. A single secular state in which all are equal is my preferred solution. Please stop claiming otherwise about me; I find it insulting.
Node, 13:32, 3rd para: – “To this day, many don’t know that 3 towers fell.”
Funnily enough, I do remember it being announced on TV news on the day. It wasn’t the Jane Standley piece. It was just a newscaster in a newsroom announcing it, beginning with “apparently…” and concluding with a facial expression like a shrug.
I know it’s true that many don’t know. I remember years later saying to one friend, “have you seen what Building 7 did?”, and she hadn’t known. She couldn’t believe it was natural when she saw the collapse.
@ Clark
“I know it’s true that many don’t know. I remember years later saying to one friend, “have you seen what Building 7 did?”, and she hadn’t known. She couldn’t believe it was natural when she saw the collapse”.
What was her view of the twin towers?
Oh, after that she explored some of the conspiracy sites and for a while she thought the towers must have been pre-rigged with explosives. She’s ambivalent now.
But why should that matter? People believe all sorts of odd things. One old chap I knew would tell me of his UFO sightings. He said one went past him so close he could see the rivets. Rivets? More likely a memory from his WWII childhood. The entire multi-billion industries of advertising and PR are dedicated to spreading false beliefs. One PR company landed a half-billion Pentagon contract to create ‘fake’ al Qaeda recruitment videos; I’m sure the idiots who set it up believed they were doing something helpful. Many people believe that mass surveillance keeps them safe from terrorists. People believe that antibiotics will treat a cold. Some think that an electrolytic foot bath will remove toxins via the soles of their feet.
This is why we need science.
Science is public; it’s not hidden. Well, there are problems with private research; Goldacre’s written a whole book about distortion of research in the pharmaceutical sector. But it’s individual results that get distorted, not the principles, the cutting edges of which are thrashed out in the scientific journals and discussion forums, which are public.
The collapses of the Twin Towers are among the most studied building failures in history, and the technical community essentially all agree; structural failures started progressive collapses. The American Society of Civil Engineers alone has 150,000 members. Even A&E9/11Truth has far more architects than engineers. Twin Tower demolition theory just looks dumb in the technical community.
Try starting at the link below and look around. The collapses were and are publicly discussed and debated by the global professional community, and virtually everyone agrees it was structural failure and progressive collapse, all discussed and agreed in public journals:
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2007/06/some-journal-papers-about-wtc-on-911.html
On the other hand, WTC7 was a mystery from the start and has been ever since. FEMA said so, NIST said they were “having trouble getting a handle on 7”. Two technical reports for a court case and appeal which contradicted each other, and now the UAF report. The bewilderment started almost immediately:
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2007/04/engineers-are-baffled-over-collapse-of.html
@ Clark
“Ambivalent”. Meaning, being unable to chose between two (usually opposing) courses of action/ideas!
So mixed feelings between destroyed with explosives and spontaneous combustion due to shock theory? I think she is just being polite!
Dave, you have to be blind to not see what happened to both of the Twin Towers. They each failed at their damaged zone, permitting the part above to fall onto the rest. Clear as day. WTC1 is the more conservative case, the part above was over ten storeys. What do you think’ll happen to a building if you drop another ten storey building on top of it?
Still, who cares what my friend thinks? She’s a photographer and boat trip host, not an engineer. If you want to fix your computer, do you ask your hairdresser? If you want fish and chips, do you call an electrician? I gave you a link to what engineers think; here’s another:
https://sites.google.com/site/911science/
Oh but of course; engineers, virologists, epidemiologists, statisticians and according to you climate scientists all just lie; they all know what to say to advance their careers, so Node tells us. All except Hulsey’s team, obviously. Not that Node would ever cherry-pick, eh? No way he got chucked off a forum for that.
Funny, init? We’re surrounded by fantastic technology; we can search out anything on the Internet and it’s on our screens in a second. Buildings continue to stand, aircraft circle the globe, and satellites in orbit transmit television to our living rooms. Yet this is all put together by supine kowtowers who get their jobs by arse-licking, not competence, and that’s the economy you say matters more than lives.
Dave, you’ve said some stuff in the past, and there’s some above; do you think I’m Jewish?
Clark
“Science is public”
Unfortunately some people have taken that to mean that you can now google anything and cherry pick your way through any ‘facts you chose. Because a lot of science depends on interpretation Which needs training but also integrity. It is this lack of integrity in some and biased interpretation that has divided people against science with the proliferation of anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers and so on, and natural medicine nutters.
Some also don’t seem to distinguish between pronouncements made by journalists, politicians and scientists.@ Clark
“Dave, you’ve said some stuff in the past, and there’s some above; do you think I’m Jewish”?
Is Blair a Catholic?
@ SA
“has divided people against science with the proliferation of anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers and so on, and natural medicine nutters”.
aka, has divided people between Ecologists and Climate Change Jehovah’s and drug pushers.
Clark: Oh but of course; engineers, virologists, epidemiologists, statisticians and according to you climate scientists all just lie; they all know what to say to advance their careers, so Node tells us. All except Hulsey’s team, obviously. Not that Node would ever cherry-pick, eh? No way he got chucked off a forum for that.
Funny, init? We’re surrounded by fantastic technology; we can search out anything on the Internet and it’s on our screens in a second. Buildings continue to stand, aircraft circle the globe, and satellites in orbit transmit television to our living rooms. Yet this is all put together by supine kowtowers who get their jobs by arse-licking, not competence, and that’s the economy you say matters more than lives.
This is why it is impossible to have a fruitful discussion with you. I say something and you reply to something I never said.
Node, sorry if I’ve gained an inaccurate impression, but I have been asking you, for a few years. Please clarify. Change my mind.
Dave, are you incapable of a straight answer? Do you think I’m Jewish?
And as I’ve repeatedly pointed out, the childhood indoctrination of me as a Jehovah’s Witless was a trauma I will never recover from. You’ve descended to the level of jeering “cripple” at people in wheelchairs. You should be banned from Craig’s site.
Clark.
“My evidence for emergency demolition is mostly human rather than physical:* Silverstein’s “pull it” interview,
* A news story of Silverstein desperately making ‘phone calls to arrange a demolition,
* Firefighters on video moving people away from WTC7 saying it’s about to “blow up”,
* Multiple firefighters saying that WTC7 would either fall down, or would be taken down,
* News crews and spectators seem to have been told to watch WTC7 because it would collapse,
* John Kerry said he thought so.”All of your evidence except “A news story of Silverstein desperately making ‘phone calls to arrange a demolition” can equally well be evidence of pre-planned demolition. I’ve never heard of this Silverstein interview. Can you provide a link?
SA “Incidentally, I did go through this process with you before but we stumbled on some questions which you did not answer.”
If the questions were about ‘covid19 vs flu’ or ‘justify the x8.5 claim.’ I did answer them but a moderator deleted it. I’m not going to be allowed to write frankly about the covid situation at the moment so I’d rather not discuss it all.
If you want a discussion I’m happy to explore your ideas about conspiracy theories. Let’s start from “Can a conspiracy theory be true?”
—
{ Mod: If you can explore those ideas without insulting people or impugning motives, then your comments would be welcome. ]Clark
“What I did with the Twin Tower collapses was to calculate the lower bound of the collapse time, taking momentum transfer between floor assemblies into consideration but not mechanical resistance, because the latter was beyond my expertise. The collapse times were well above this limit.”
“But I did these calculations with simple O Level physics, so Twin Tower demolition theories just look silly to mechanical engineers…”
Are your calculations available online?
Thanks
@ Clark
Are you playing the victim again?
Node
Could I have a polite and referenced answer to my question before we prevaricate to some other subject? Thank you in advance.@ Clark
And/or could you show a copy of the back of the envelope?
Dear Clark,
It wasn’t anything personal, but I’ve coined the phrase “Climate Jehovah’s” to describe disciples of the new Climate Change religion, because its shares an “end of the world is nigh” message with the JW’s.
Node
Could I have a polite and referenced answer to my question before we prevaricate to some other subject? Thank you in advance.I’ve explained the problem. If you don’t accept that let’s not discuss anything.
