Conspiracy Theory 9/11 and the Europhysics News - Controlled Demolition

[Exe Gesis]

This ex-Army Chief General of Strategy confirms what i posted before....the exercise of a mock terrorist attack was not a regular thing, but rare, even unique.

Also, says the pentagon was clearly a missile, and the engine photographed inside the hole was not a boeing engine but an engine from a missile.

The fact they disarmed all alarm systems in that eastern region of the US is unheard of, and on that particular day too. The VP would only do such a thing if he wanted it to happen.

Goes into how the inner core of WTC 1/2 cannot be melted by a temperature from jet fuel + office furniture, gas tanks etc. Impossible. Only a CD military grade chemical can reach the temps needed to melt steel.

Etc

All these bits of suspicious information are dots and you can connect them and see a real picture....thats how Intelligence works. And it was clearly an inside job.

 

[BustedWing]

UAF showed that the NIST report did not take into account the upper and lower supports or stiffeners welded from each girder to each column. They also incorrectly measured the seat the girder was sitting on and failed to consider 2 inch lip which would also stop the girder from coming off its column.

They also omitted 3 lateral support beams which would make it impossible for the floor beams to buckle with the heat and theoretically “pull” the girder off the column.

It wasn't UAF that used incorrect modelling. NIST has kept many of it's modelling and simulations secret so what are you comparing this to?

I’m comparing the NIST report that UAF reference in their report. I didn’t say UAF used incorrect modelling, I’m saying they referenced the wrong models when trying to claim NIST got their analysis wrong.

NIST put together multiple models to illustrate specific pieces of the event. Two of them were (1) a global model (the entire building) and (2) a cross section model of a floor plan (16 floor model).

UAF reference one alleging it failed to show something, when said model was never built to illustrate it- that was the other model (global model)

It was a misunderstanding on UAFs front.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Zidane98]

I’m comparing the NIST report that UAF reference in their report. I didn’t say UAF used incorrect modelling, I’m saying they referenced the wrong models when trying to claim NIST got their analysis wrong.

NIST put together multiple models to illustrate specific pieces of the event. Two of them were (1) a global model (the entire building) and (2) a cross section model of a floor plan (16 floor model).

UAF reference one alleging it failed to show something, when said model was never built to illustrate it- that was the other model (global model)

It was a misunderstanding on UAFs front.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

NIST also spent significant time & money modelling the fire, how it spread and how it affected the structure.

AE911 truth study did no such thing.

 

[Nothing]

The UAF report was done by 1 academic and 1 post graduate (the second one left a year after the start, in 2016). Hulsey has expensive experience in bridges (an expert) but I haven't been able to find another academic paper by him on buildings. Can someone point me in the direction of why he is credentialled (moreso than the dozens of others who have looked at this) to be lead on researching a building? Xiao has been working with Hulsey for a while, both have the same 3 projects (and only 3 projects) on researchgate. 2 reports in bridges and the WTC7 one.

Further, with 1 professor and a student as the only ones actively doing the research, there seems to be a limit of the capacity of those to effectively model all the events on WTC7 from that day. The result is that they had to limit the inputs to model the scenarios (like discounting penthouse collapse, fire spread, etc).

I've read through the report. I'm not going to be able to determine what they've done wrong, I'm not a structural engineer. What I can do is look at ethics, standards and conflicts. There's a few.

Even with all that, the report states on page 16:

The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7

Ok

We cannot completely rule out the possibility that an alternative scenario may have caused the observed collapse

even with the qualifier that

however, the near-simultaneous failure of every column is the only scenario we identified that was capable of producing the observed behavior

It does not state that controlled demolition was the reason for collapse, they even say there might be another reason but the two bridge engineer academics couldn't find it.

 

[Crankitup]

Answering a question with a question is a sure sign of a bs artist.

Based on his reply to my post at #1,942 do you think your good friend Busted is a BS artist then?

 

[BustedWing]

Based on his reply to my post at #1,942 do you think your good friend Busted is a BS artist then?

Perhaps he should just say it’s “an interesting post”... that’s enough for you isn’t it???


Shaking my head....


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[BustedWing]

This ex-Army Chief General of Strategy confirms what i posted before....the exercise of a mock terrorist attack was not a regular thing, but rare, even unique.

Also, says the pentagon was clearly a missile, and the engine photographed inside the hole was not a boeing engine but an engine from a missile.

The fact they disarmed all alarm systems in that eastern region of the US is unheard of, and on that particular day too. The VP would only do such a thing if he wanted it to happen.

Goes into how the inner core of WTC 1/2 cannot be melted by a temperature from jet fuel + office furniture, gas tanks etc. Impossible. Only a CD military grade chemical can reach the temps needed to melt steel.

Etc

All these bits of suspicious information are dots and you can connect them and see a real picture....thats how Intelligence works. And it was clearly an inside job.

Anyone who is pro conspiracy here....

Anyone want to be honest and truthful and call GG out for some of the nonsense he has just said here?

Or are you going to remain silent and implicitly endorse this crap?




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Exe Gesis]

Yo GG.exe that be half truths you posted, cos my man Busted Wing called your ass out.

 

[BustedWing]

Yo GG.exe that be half truths you posted, cos my man Busted Wing called your ass out.

Half truths would be charitable at best.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Zidane98]

This ex-Army Chief General of Strategy confirms what i posted before....the exercise of a mock terrorist attack was not a regular thing, but rare, even unique.

Also, says the pentagon was clearly a missile, and the engine photographed inside the hole was not a boeing engine but an engine from a missile.

The fact they disarmed all alarm systems in that eastern region of the US is unheard of, and on that particular day too. The VP would only do such a thing if he wanted it to happen.

Goes into how the inner core of WTC 1/2 cannot be melted by a temperature from jet fuel + office furniture, gas tanks etc. Impossible. Only a CD military grade chemical can reach the temps needed to melt steel.

Etc

All these bits of suspicious information are dots and you can connect them and see a real picture....thats how Intelligence works. And it was clearly an inside job.

- Explain how the alarns systems were supposedly "disarmed". Who did it and why.
- WTC 1/2 are steel frame buildings. Nobody has ever claimed steel melting in these buildings. Do some research and look up how much strength steel loses at temperatures of just 500 degrees centigrade & higher. The WTC fires exceeded this easily.
- Cruise missiles have engines that cant be mistaken for passenger jet engines. Rubbish claim not to mention the hundreds of witnesses that saw a commercial jet hit the Pentagon.


Try and look at things logically and you'll soon conclude that 911 conspiracy theories have no veracity.

 

[BustedWing]

- Explain how the alarns systems were supposedly "disarmed". Who did it and why.
- WTC 1/2 are steel frame buildings. Nobody has ever claimed steel melting in these buildings. Do some research and look up how much strength steel loses at temperatures of just 500 degrees centigrade & higher. The WTC fires exceeded this easily.
- Cruise missiles have engines that cant be mistaken for passenger jet engines. Rubbish claim not to mention the hundreds of witnesses that saw a commercial jet hit the Pentagon.


Try and look at things logically and you'll soon conclude that 911 conspiracy theories have no veracity.

I’d like someone to explain if it was a missile at the pentagon, then how...

Did they manage to plant all the plane wreckage inside the pentagon, and all over the lawn.

And the bodies of real human beings that were registered as being on the flight in question

And get everyone to say they didn’t see a missile but instead saw a plane

And get it done inside 20 minutes

In broad daylight

In front of a godddamn freeway

At peak hour.

I haven’t even gotten to convincing the airline to just...you know....vanish a plane given it was a missile instead.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Exe Gesis]

Quoting the ex-Army Chief General of Strategy from that video. Lol that you two clowns are going to discredit his statements.

He even said....since the age of 5 all the way thru till his retirement years he was a gungho american patriot and would never have imagined his own govt doing something like this. When it happened he just accepted the OS for many years until he started connecting the dots of what didnt make sense....and then he finally realized it was an inside job.

Maybe you two should take a leaf out of his book.

 

[BustedWing]

Quoting the ex-Army Chief General of Strategy from that video. Lol that you two clowns are going to discredit his statements.

On 9/11...

(a) he was retired. so NO LONGER in the military
(b) he was in HAWAII.
(c) his wife sees conspirscy crap on the internet, and shows him
(d) his wife shows him a picture of the pentagon
(e) he says "that hole looks funny to me", I dont think a plane did that.
(f) he goes public - the military are embarrassed that one of their own bought into conspiracy crap.


Then, there is this lovely little tid bit about his state of mind:

A key sponsor of the Stargate Project (a remote viewing project) at Fort Meade, Maryland, Stubblebine was convinced of the reality of a wide variety of psychic phenomena. He required that all of his battalion commanders learn how to bend spoons in the manner of celebrity psychic Uri Geller, and he himself attempted several psychic feats, in addition to walking through walls, such as levitation and dispersing distant clouds with his mind.

Albert Stubblebine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'll be honest with you GG - I need something better than this guys say so on what happened from a hotel room in Hawaii...

 

[Exe Gesis]

The US/CIA and USSR/KGB have long been convinced of the reality of psychic phenomena. Experiments done etc. What that has to do with 9/11 no idea

 

[BustedWing]

The US/CIA and USSR/KGB have long been convinced of the reality of psychic phenomena. Experiments done etc. What that has to do with 9/11 no idea

Tell you what,

Show me someone walking through a wall, dispersing clouds with their minds and levitating, and you’ll have my full support!


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Exe Gesis]

Tell you what,

Show me someone walking through a wall, dispersing clouds with their minds and levitating, and you’ll have my full support!


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Lets assume that that tidbit you pulled discredits his opinion on 9/11. Would it not be similar to discredit NISTs findings given they are funded by the govt purportedly involved in a cover up? And that some of the govts evidence is as magical as walking thru walls....like the passport at shanksville

 

[Zidane98]

Quoting the ex-Army Chief General of Strategy from that video. Lol that you two clowns are going to discredit his statements.

He even said....since the age of 5 all the way thru till his retirement years he was a gungho american patriot and would never have imagined his own govt doing something like this. When it happened he just accepted the OS for many years until he started connecting the dots of what didnt make sense....and then he finally realized it was an inside job.

Maybe you two should take a leaf out of his book.

An ex-army general who was into a batshit crazy psyhic warfare fantasy.

Logically how can you give this guy more credence than the witness accounts from those who were there in cars that witmessed the plane impact the Pentagon.

A cruise missile has a ballistic arc. Wheres all the witnesses in DC calling 911 saying theres a cruise missile heading into Washington?

Rembember this happened in broad daylight on a clear morning.

There are no dots, your assertions are incorrect, there was no cruise missile.

 

[BustedWing]

Lets assume that that tidbit you pulled discredits his opinion on 9/11. Would it not be similar to discredit NISTs findings given they are funded by the govt purportedly involved in a cover up? And that some of the govts evidence is as magical as walking thru walls....like the passport at shanksville

It’s not just that he is a little coo coo.

It’s the fact that all we have is his word.

He wasn’t there
He wasn’t employed by them
He had no special access to any info we don’t have




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[BustedWing]

Lets assume that that tidbit you pulled discredits his opinion on 9/11. Would it not be similar to discredit NISTs findings given they are funded by the govt purportedly involved in a cover up? And that some of the govts evidence is as magical as walking thru walls....like the passport at shanksville

He also retired in 1984.....that’s SEVENTEEN YEARS before 9/11.

It’s hardly like he was just out.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Exe Gesis]

It’s not just that he is a little coo coo.

It’s the fact that all we have is his word.

He wasn’t there
He wasn’t employed by them
He had no special access to any info we don’t have




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I understand that part. But he still had 40 odd years of experience in military operations etc and was a firm believer in the OS.

 

[BlueE]

Its not my opinion. It is factual born out by the figures. 28 years old is not aging for a high rise office building.

Shouldn't have been but during construction of the World Trade Center in the late 1960s and early 1970s, developers commonly used asbestos in construction materials to make them stronger and heat resistant with a variety of asbestos-containing products incorporated in both tower.

For example, spray-on asbestos fireproofing material was applied to steel beams along the first 40 floors of the north tower. Amid construction, the builders discontinued using asbestos because stricter regulations on the mineral were expected in the near future.

An estimated 400 tons of asbestos was released in collapse.

Health Effects of 9/11 Dust Exposure for Survivors & First Responders

Nearly half a million people were exposed to the toxic dust that covered Manhattan after 9/11. The deadly health effects of that exposure are just starting to be seen.

www.asbestos.com

Estimates were that removal would have cost $1.5 bil in 2001.

My estimates of Silversein's net income from WTC 1 and 2 is extremely generous and is more likely to be almost zero if in those 13 years that the WTC 1 and 2 were being rebuilt and were standing and Silverman had to complete repairs and removal of asbestos.

He never lost out at the time with 5.5 billion of insurance, public funds and litigation and he's not missing out financially now, profiting at least 500 mil a year from his 4 complete WTC buildings. He also did a sneaky deal renegotiating the lease and seceding WTC 2 but building an 80 story tower for WTC 2
3 which almost replicated the second tower.

$14 mil investment is now $4 bil.

 

[Exe Gesis]

He also retired in 1984.....that’s SEVENTEEN YEARS before 9/11.

It’s hardly like he was just out.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Thats irrelevant. Anyone is allowed an opinion of something. His opinion carries some weight simply due to his military background. He wasnt fired or let go due to any mental illness or criminal act -- those things could help discredit him. Him believing in weird things isnt either. Eg i believe in god but not aliens, some people believe in aliens but not god. Etc. Thats all beside the point.

 

[Zidane98]

It’s not just that he is a little coo coo.

It’s the fact that all we have is his word.

He wasn’t there
He wasn’t employed by them
He had no special access to any info we don’t have




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Confirmation bias at work here. CT believers generally only want to listen to views that support their beliefs.

Even though the above is all factual they accept it as gospel while completely ignoring witnesses and the impossible logistics of a cruise missile in broad daylight not being witnessed by thousands.

A logical person looks at the above and comes to the conclusion that the retired general is not a reliable source of evidence.

 

[Zidane98]

Shouldn't have been but during construction of the World Trade Center in the late 1960s and early 1970s, developers commonly used asbestos in construction materials to make them stronger and heat resistant with a variety of asbestos-containing products incorporated in both tower.

For example, spray-on asbestos fireproofing material was applied to steel beams along the first 40 floors of the north tower. Amid construction, the builders discontinued using asbestos because stricter regulations on the mineral were expected in the near future.

An estimated 400 tons of asbestos was released in collapse.

Health Effects of 9/11 Dust Exposure for Survivors & First Responders

Nearly half a million people were exposed to the toxic dust that covered Manhattan after 9/11. The deadly health effects of that exposure are just starting to be seen.

www.asbestos.com

Estimates were that removal would have cost $1.5 bil in 2001.

My estimates of Silversein's net income from WTC 1 and 2 is extremely generous and is more likely to be almost zero if in those 13 years that the WTC 1 and 2 were being rebuilt and were standing and Silverman had to complete repairs and removal of asbestos.

He never lost out at the time with 5.5 billion of insurance, public funds and litigation and he's not missing out financially now, profiting at least 500 mil a year from his 4 complete WTC buildings. He also did a sneaky deal renegotiating the lease and seceding WTC 2 but building an 80 story tower for WTC 2
3 which almost replicated the second tower.

$14 mil investment is now $4 bil.

Youre wrong. WTC 2 - zero asbestos. WTC 1 - encapsulated asbestps to floor 38 only. It was not a concern.

You can have all the estimates you like but the fact is Silverstein was not better off financially with 911.

And you offer no explanation for his under insurance, still being in negotiations for a new insurance policy when 911 happened and the fact that he tried tp purchase 1.55 billion in coverage but was not allowed to by the PA.

 

[Zidane98]

Also asbstos is not removed from buildings until they are demolished. It is harmlessin a non dust state.. Many school buildings today have it.