Conspiracy Theory 9/11 - Part 3

[BlueE]

 

[BlueE]

Interview 1835 – COVID-911 Watch Along with James, Broc and Ryan | The Corbett Report

www.corbettreport.com

 

[BlueE]

A reminder about this detailed report from 4 years of analysis of engineers at University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), linked and discussed in detail on this thread.

It says the World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 collapse was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building” and dismissed the NIST finding that heat from the fire caused beams to “walk off” their moorings.

World Trade Center 7 building did not collapse due to fire: Report - Daily Commercial News

A group of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel suppor

canada.constructconnect.com

 

[SaintsSeptember]

A reminder about this detailed report from 4 years of analysis of engineers at University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), linked and discussed in detail on this thread.

It says the World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 collapse was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building” and dismissed the NIST finding that heat from the fire caused beams to “walk off” their moorings.

World Trade Center 7 building did not collapse due to fire: Report - Daily Commercial News

A group of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel suppor

canada.constructconnect.com

Has it been peer reviewed yet?
One professor and two former students acting on behalf of a group that wanted the answer not the methodology.
They gave them the answer they asked for.

 

[ferball]

View attachment 1800570

There was an interview with one of these guys in the Jerusalem Post in 2004 if you feel like trying to track it down.

 

[Zidane98]

A reminder about this detailed report from 4 years of analysis of engineers at University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), linked and discussed in detail on this thread.

It says the World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 collapse was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building” and dismissed the NIST finding that heat from the fire caused beams to “walk off” their moorings.

World Trade Center 7 building did not collapse due to fire: Report - Daily Commercial News

A group of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel suppor

canada.constructconnect.com

You're at the stage where you are citing debunked crap from years ago:

Debunked: UAF Study Shows WTC7 Could Not Have Collapsed from Fire

This thread was to discuss the 2017 presentation by Hulsey, and has been superseded by the publication of the draft report, discussed here: https://www.metabunk.org/sept-3-2019-release-of-hulseys-wtc7-draft-report-analysis.t10890/ The Claim Being Debunked Here In a Sept 8 2017 article...

www.metabunk.org

This study uses incorrect values for column displacement. Has zero modelling for fire progression / temperatures. It doesn't account for other unkown variables like falling WTC 1 debris which severely damaged WTC 7 and started the fires.

It also was not open to peers or anyone for that matter. It is a study commissioned by conspiracy theory believers giving them the answer that they wanted.



9/11 CT theories are virtually dead. Even nutters like Alex Jones have mostly given up on them.

 

[Exe Gesis]

5 hour documentary on Rumble that deep dives into both sides of the debate evenly...the CT and the Debunk.

 

[BlueE]

5 hour documentary on Rumble that deep dives into both sides of the debate evenly...the CT and the Debunk.

Thanks CG. This was posted seperated into its parts early in this or another thread. However, some seems to have disappeared or I haven't been able to finish find it again.

Part 3 The Airplanes: "What happened to the passengers?" at 1 hour 37 min seems to be edited, lasting only a few minutes, finishing 1 hour 38.38, instead of at least 15 to 20min in the original.

There was detailed evidence of actual (different from planned) flight departures of the 4 aircraft, plus some other unusual flights and the eyewitness and published news and audio of two if the alleged hijacked flights llanding and him counting passengers disembarking into the NASA facility at Ohio airport.

Do you know if this still exists on here?

 

[Exe Gesis]

Do you know if this still exists on here?

How long was the original video? I can try to find another version of this on bitchute/rumble that may not be edited.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Just had a look on bitchute and rumble ... the full length ones are all still 4:52 long, and the segmented part 3 are all 1:27

 

[BlueE]

Has it been peer reviewed yet?
One professor and two former students acting on behalf of a group that wanted the answer not the methodology.
They gave them the answer they asked for.

Yes it was independently peer reviewed.

Three main researchers and two Departments involved.

UAF did not sign the contract to undertake the research without the conditions that it be completely independent peer review study, no interference from AE or anyone else.

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

You can have all the estimates you like but the fsct is Silverstein was better off financially with 911. Correct!

www.bigfooty.com

The three objectives of the study were:

1. Examine the structural response of WTC 7 to fire loads that may have occurred on September 11, 2001

2. Rule out scenarios that could not have caused the observed collapse

3. Identify types of failures and their locations that may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed.

They used fabrication drawings prepared by Frangle Steel Fabricators and Erectors. These are the drawings from which Building #7 was built. The original steel design drawings were also available for review. All of the above is on line for public review.

Yet you reply on propaganda and smears.

Expected better from you Saints

 

[BlueE]

Just had a look on bitchute and rumble ... the full length ones are all still 4:52 long, and the segmented part 3 are all 1:27

All the segmented Part 3's only 1 min 27 seconds?

There was alot more and I thought it was on one of these threads that I first saw it.

It went into detail about the departure times of the 4 planes with very compelling evidence for the reason one was delayed 30 or 40 min.

I think it was around 15 to 20 min.

 

[Zidane98]

Yes it was independently peer reviewed.

Three main researchers and two Departments involved.

UAF did not sign the contract to undertake the research without the conditions that it be completely independent peer review study, no interference from AE or anyone else.

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

You can have all the estimates you like but the fsct is Silverstein was better off financially with 911. Correct!

www.bigfooty.com

The three objectives of the study were:

1. Examine the structural response of WTC 7 to fire loads that may have occurred on September 11, 2001

2. Rule out scenarios that could not have caused the observed collapse

3. Identify types of failures and their locations that may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed.

They used fabrication drawings prepared by Frangle Steel Fabricators and Erectors. These are the drawings from which Building #7 was built. The original steel design drawings were also available for review. All of the above is on line for public review.

Yet you reply on propaganda and smears.

Expected better from you Saints

There are numerous problems with the claim that the study shows that WTC7 could not have collapsed from fire:

• The study is unfinished. Nothing has been published other than Dr. Hulsey giving a presentation on YouTube, and a pdf file of the slides for that presentation.
• The study is largely not new. While there is some new material, the bulk of the slides were used by Dr. Hulsey nearly a year ago, in October 2016. Most importantly the "UAF conclusions" slide is totally unchanged.
• The study only focuses on one connection. Dr. Hulsey focuses on the connection that NIST identified as a "probable initiation event" in some of its reports, but in fact NIST identified several potential connection failures. This particular connection was not the initiating one in NIST's global collapse models.
• The study makes incorrect displacement comparisons. In both 2016 and 2017 Dr. Hulsey made much of a difference in the displacement at column 79 (5.5" west vs. 2" east). But he appears to be comparing the wrong values — global instead of local displacements. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study makes incorrect temperature related buckling comparisons. Dr. Hulsey claims (slide 82) his study shows col 79 did not buckle due to temperature. He lists this as a point of comparison with NIST. However NIST explicitly makes the exact same observation. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study does not model fire progression. Dr. Hulsey only used one static temperature distribution, where the actual fires moved around heating unevenly.
• The study mischaracterizes NIST's modelling of the exterior. Dr. Hulsey claims the exterior columns were fixed when they were not. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study mischaracterizes NIST connection modeling in the LS-DYNA model. Dr. Hulsey claims that volumes of the full-building LS-DYNA model did not have connections modeled, but his evidence for this is a misrepresentation of a different model, the ANSYS model. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study was not open. At the start of the study we were told "WTC 7 Evaluation is a completely open and transparent investigation into the cause of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted here and on the university's website so that the public can follow its progress." The last such release was in 2015. Nothing has been released since then except videos of Dr. Hulsey giving versions of this slideshow.
• The study neglects unknowns. Impact damage from falling WTC1 debris, the actual fire spread and temperatures, the state of the insulation at every spot, and differences between drawings and constructions are all factors that are unknown, and make it impossible make a determination of the exact cause of the collapse.

While it is possible that Dr. Hulsey's study will eventually yield some interesting results, it is factually incorrect to say that it proves that fire could not have caused the collapse.

 

[BlueE]

There are numerous problems with the claim that the study shows that WTC7 could not have collapsed from fire:

• The study is unfinished. Nothing has been published other than Dr. Hulsey giving a presentation on YouTube, and a pdf file of the slides for that presentation.
• The study is largely not new. While there is some new material, the bulk of the slides were used by Dr. Hulsey nearly a year ago, in October 2016. Most importantly the "UAF conclusions" slide is totally unchanged.
• The study only focuses on one connection. Dr. Hulsey focuses on the connection that NIST identified as a "probable initiation event" in some of its reports, but in fact NIST identified several potential connection failures. This particular connection was not the initiating one in NIST's global collapse models.
• The study makes incorrect displacement comparisons. In both 2016 and 2017 Dr. Hulsey made much of a difference in the displacement at column 79 (5.5" west vs. 2" east). But he appears to be comparing the wrong values — global instead of local displacements. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study makes incorrect temperature related buckling comparisons. Dr. Hulsey claims (slide 82) his study shows col 79 did not buckle due to temperature. He lists this as a point of comparison with NIST. However NIST explicitly makes the exact same observation. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study does not model fire progression. Dr. Hulsey only used one static temperature distribution, where the actual fires moved around heating unevenly.
• The study mischaracterizes NIST's modelling of the exterior. Dr. Hulsey claims the exterior columns were fixed when they were not. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study mischaracterizes NIST connection modeling in the LS-DYNA model. Dr. Hulsey claims that volumes of the full-building LS-DYNA model did not have connections modeled, but his evidence for this is a misrepresentation of a different model, the ANSYS model. AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project
• The study was not open. At the start of the study we were told "WTC 7 Evaluation is a completely open and transparent investigation into the cause of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted here and on the university's website so that the public can follow its progress." The last such release was in 2015. Nothing has been released since then except videos of Dr. Hulsey giving versions of this slideshow.
• The study neglects unknowns. Impact damage from falling WTC1 debris, the actual fire spread and temperatures, the state of the insulation at every spot, and differences between drawings and constructions are all factors that are unknown, and make it impossible make a determination of the exact cause of the collapse.

While it is possible that Dr. Hulsey's study will eventually yield some interesting results, it is factually incorrect to say that it proves that fire could not have caused the collapse.

Metabunk from 2017 addressing the March 2020, UAF Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering College of Engineering and Mines Institute of Northern Engineering Final Report on A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7, sits on a throne of lies.

Already dealt with on the appropriate 9/11 thread.

https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf

 

[BlueE]

 

[Exe Gesis]

Quota question....What is the one single most damning evidence that 9/11 was a false flag attack?

Don’t tell me that the evidence is not proven. Don’t take my word for it. The University of Alaska Fairbanks (yes, a US institution) spent a good deal of time and money researching WTC7’s collapse and came to the conclusion that it could not have happened without the simultaneous failure of all of the support columns which obviously could not have taken place other than by design and planning. There is a complete report that you can download of their methods and conclusions that is a whopping 632Gb. So it is fair to say that they were thorough. Needless to say that their findings entirely contradict the NIST so called “report.”

World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) University of Alaska Fairbanks

The principal conclusion of the University of Alaska Fairbanks WTC 7 study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7...

ine.uaf.edu

Surely, that being the case, every single aspect of the official narrative has to be called into question.

Of course, the result of this research was never seen in the mainstream media. Stop expecting to find out the facts about this without researching it. An immense amount of time and energy has been invested into making sure that any dissenting voice is ridiculed and/or silenced. The facts are there aplenty if you take the time to look for them. So much material is available, presented by exceptionally qualified scientists who have nothing to gain but trying to expose this fraud for what it is, the most dastardly and cynical crime that has ever been commited with complete disregard for human lives, the majority of whom were compatriots of the likely perpetrators.

Why do so many of you still choose to believe the impossible? As long as you do that, the real criminals behind 9/11 will never be exposed and held accountable. It is the biggest mass deception in human history which was designed to change the world we live in. In that respect, it certainly achieved its aims, much to the detriment of humanity. Everything changed for the worse on that day and yet so many of you still cling to the completely unfeasible explantions that you have accepted as being true.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Quora

There are several really huge, gaping holes in the official conspiracy theory. Rob Hilleary has one here, the collapse of Bldg. 7.

To me the most conclusive evidence of controlled demolition is the fact that all 3 towers went down at free fall speed. That could only happen if the supporting pillars were blasted away at the base and all the way up.

Also, the sheer mass of the towers was about 5000 times greater than that of the airplanes. The kinetic impact on the towers was practically nil, and jet fuel is just kerosene, it has no effect on steel and concrete - except in the movies.

Another good one is that the alleged hijackers - the conspirators in the government theory - were not even on the passenger lists.

There are plenty of books full of such “damning evidence.” For instance, 9/11 Synthetic Terror. Or JFK-9/11, 50 Years of Deep State. David Ray Griffin has written several. If you prefer video, there are many DVDs, for instance, by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

The truth about 9/11 is actually quite obvious, but it’s very difficult for people to accept, because it would upset their world view. Right off, you have to ask, how could the media cover up such glaring facts? How could Larry Silverstein, the owner of Bldg. 7 - who leased the Twin Towers for a $1 million down payment a few months before 9/11 - collect $3.5 Billion in insurance payout after they were destroyed - and get away with it? There is only one way to square these facts - to realize that our society is run by totally corrupt and immoral cliques. That can be too big of a shock for a lot of people. You’re not in Kansas anymore, and it’s hard to go back.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I’ll give you two, pick the one you like.

Bldg. 7 of the WTC, an almost 50 story bldg. of steel and concrete that was not hit by a plane collapsed into its own footprint just a few hours after the other two. The only possible explanation for that was controlled demolition.

In DC that morning, a news crew from CNN was on their way back to the office when they heard about the Pentagon attack and since they were close, decided to investigate. Obviously, they weren’t told what REALLY happened so they just reported what they saw. The reporter said no plane hit the Pentagon. There was damage to the building, but no evidence it was a plane. No bodies, no luggage, no large sections of a plane, no engines, just a relatively small hole in the building.

There used to be tons of videos on youtube of news footage that verified all that, but lately, youtube has attempted to remove or hide most of them. You can still find some if you look hard enough. The entire mainstream media is guilty of accessory after the fact to this act of treason and I hope that someday they get prosecuted!

 

[Exe Gesis]

Note that not a single ‘hijacker’ was caught on a security cameras. That means that 19 hijackers went through 3 world class airports, got on four commercial aircraft, all totally unobserved by security systems.

It’s a friggining miracle!

And our lap dog lying media didn’t say a peep!

 

[Exe Gesis]

In politics and war, events don’t unfold by happenstance, but are manufactured to achieve goals and agendas. Although many do not think of war as a purely profit-making venture, in fact, war produces more profit than almost any other endeavor, typically around 17 times the profit produced during peacetime by related industries.

One of the most highly decorated American soldiers, Major General Smedley Butler, wrote an illuminating book titled, War is a Racket. Read it and consider some of the suspicious elements of 9/11: 1) the immediate destruction of the crime scene before forensic evidence could be collected; 2) the free-fall of three steel buildings into their own footprint, one of which was not hit by an airplane; 3) the immediate rush to two wars with prepared-in-advance invasion plans; 4) suspicious trading on airline stock prior to the event; 5) the prepared-in-advance Patriot Act stripping away the Bill of Rights; 6) refusal of the President and Vice President to testify under oath, or even be questioned separately; 7) the assassination of the alleged culprit who could have easily been brought back to stand trial; 8) the refusal to track the funding trails into Saudi Arabia and Pakistan; 9) the handcuffing of the CIA and FBI who were tracking terrorists prior to the event; 10) flight training of some of the alleged hijackers who lived inside US military facilities; 11) the Pentagon was running massive war game simulations that included a fake hijacking during the event, and these clouded radar screens with fake blips. Over a hundred thousand lives were likely lost after 9/11, and the dead bodies are still piling up, and while the official story is Osama bin Laden engineered this attack, zero real evidence has been produced. In planning and executing a project on this scale, a vast amount of evidence is created. This evidence should have been presented to the public, but instead we have only one confession achieved after hundreds of hours of waterboarding, a confession not legal in an American court.

Osama bin Laden was initially created by the CIA to conduct war on the Soviets in Afghanistan. After the Soviet withdrawal, many of his mercenaries were moved to the Balkans. After the Balkan wars, they were deployed to Iraq and became the backbone of ISIS, thanks to an immense stockpile of armament and weapons left behind by American forces, which just happened to fall into their hands. None of this occurred by happenstance.

Finally, the USA has a pattern of creating false flag attacks to foment war, one that includes the sinking of the Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin incident, so any time there is a rush to war, the possibility of a false flag manipulation must be considered and investigated, and anyone who dismisses the possibility out-of-hand with no research to back up their point of view is being naive.

 

[Exe Gesis]

 

[owen87]

In politics and war, events don’t unfold by happenstance, but are manufactured to achieve goals and agendas.

This is one of the stupidest statements I've ever read.

 

[Johnny_Dogg4]

This is one of the stupidest statements I've ever read.

Nah, you’re just stupid

 

[owen87]

Nah, you’re just stupid

The idea that everything that ever happens in the world is an orchestrated event by some kind of global conspiracy is moronic.

Sorry.

 

[simba_]

The idea that everything that ever happens in the world is an orchestrated event by some kind of global conspiracy is moronic.

Sorry.

how did you interpret "politics and war" as "everything that ever happens"? very closed minded mate

not everyone has the same upbringing, some people don't "wake up" until their 40s or 50s or later, but it's important to always remain open minded and never make those definitive statements like "oh anyone who says X is Y", that's just closing off your own capacity to learn beyond what you currently think