• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

9-11 Presentation at NMSR, May 19 2010

DaveThomasNMSR

Muse
DaveThomasNMSR
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
877
I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason.

My slides are online here.

The slides explain a physics model for the twin towers collapse; the video of the comparison of model results to actual is online here:

Dave Thomas's physics model of the tower collapse, compared to actual.The two small red squares falling on the right represent objects dropped from the top (110th) and impact-level (96th) stories, and these are in true freefall. The towers are clearly falling at less than freefall speeds in this physics analysis. The horizontal red lines (top of WTC1, top of WFC3, top of WTC7, and ground level) were used to calibrate the scale of the plot.
Click to expand...


The PDF has results, compares them to Bazant, etc.

Comments welcomed!

Cheers, Dave Thomas
 
I've just one (somewhat unrelated) comment to make:

Dave was my skeptic catalyst, and is responsible for me joining JREF all those years ago.

Cheers, Dave! :th:

And now, on to NMSR!
 
Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason.

My slides are online here.

The slides explain a physics model for the twin towers collapse; the video of the comparison of model results to actual is online here:




The PDF has results, compares them to Bazant, etc.

Comments welcomed!

Cheers, Dave Thomas
Click to expand...
Thanks Dave much appreciated.
 
PDF Updated - AE911 and Incompetence

I've updated the post, including some new clarifying points, and have added a couple of new slides about Truthers' criticism during the Q&A. This was about my supposedly being unfair to say that the architects and engineers behind AE911Truth.org are incompetent.

I contend they are incompetent, and offer proof in slide # 42.

Cheers, Dave
 
cyclonic said:
Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.
Click to expand...

You know that this argument can be picked apart quite easily:
The fire rating does not apply to the entire building, but to individual structural elements. Fires burning for 7 hours *not equal to* any individual member exposed to more than x°C for 7 hours.
 
I can only find one error in your slides.

You didn't capatalize Pentagon.

That is it!

Very informative!
 
Thanks for the kind words!

One thing we noticed during the evening was that the truthers wanted to quibble about everything I said, but when audience members or I asked what they thought the answer was, they became silent.

Cheers, Dave
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
I've updated the post, including some new clarifying points, and have added a couple of new slides about Truthers' criticism during the Q&A. This was about my supposedly being unfair to say that the architects and engineers behind AE911Truth.org are incompetent.

I contend they are incompetent, and offer proof in slide # 42.

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...
Come on! Are you seriously proposing that it is possible to change/edit a power point presentation? You would have to click on things and type and all that. If it was possible, Gage could have fixed his years ago by highlighting the file and pressing delete. :)
 
Wolrab said:
Come on! Are you seriously proposing that it is possible to change/edit a power point presentation? You would have to click on things and type and all that. If it was possible, Gage could have fixed his years ago by highlighting the file and pressing delete. :)
Click to expand...

I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy.

Cheers, Dave ;)
 
I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations.

Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across.

Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.

our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy.

You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal.
 
Telltale Tom said:
I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations.

Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across.

Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.

our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy.

You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal.
Click to expand...

Well, as if there was any doubt before, it is conclusive that you have a wonderful talent for parody.

Nicely done sir, especially this part....
we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.
Click to expand...
:D:D:D
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy.
Click to expand...

For Windows users, a program that works beautifully is PDF Creator - any program that can print, can make PDFs. The PDF Creator program is a virtual printer - in any application, you go through the steps to print, and "PDF Creator" appears as one of your printer selections. Choose that, choose Print, and then it prompts you for a few more details like file names etc., and presto, you get a PDF file.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy.

Cheers, Dave ;)
Click to expand...

Freeware called PDF995 has woked for me for years on countless machines. It creates a psedo-printer that any Windows app can print to..
 
cyclonic said:
Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.
Click to expand...

:jaw-dropp how could the fire burn so long at one place?
 
Last edited:
How does 911 truth remain dumb over 8 years with no end in sight? They can't answer their own questions. Given all the answers on 911 and 8 years to gain knowledge, they ask moronic smart alec questions and can't figure out 911.

Here is a parody of AE911truth on how stupid AE911truth is as they spew lies about 911.
... ae911truth presentations.

Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across.

Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.

our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy. ...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Telltale Tom said:
I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations.

Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across.

Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.

our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy.

You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal.
Click to expand...
SOMEBODY owes me a new keyboard. And a Mojito-fresh made, not bottled mix. Damn it, those were the last mint leaves I can take and keep the damn plant alive!
Not naming any names, but...
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy.

Cheers, Dave ;)
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm....I use CutePDF regularly.....I thought it was pretty good actually....
 
Calling A Few Good Experts

The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks.

Here's a snippet:
Mr. Thomas:
We'd like to have you on Coast to Coast AM for a 9/11 truth debate
with Richard Gage on Saturday, June 19, for the full 4 hour program.
You and Mr. Gage will be the point persons for either side of the
debate, which will go for as long as 4 hours. You may bring on
experts of your choosing to bolster your side. Are you interested?
Thanks for your time,

Chris Boros
Assistant Producer - Coast to Coast AM
Click to expand...

I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue.

Cheers, Dave
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks.

Here's a snippet:


I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue.

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

I hope you enjoy. So what do you think will be more effective for ae911truth.?

If the top engineers like Les Robertson, Ramone Gilsanz, David Scott, Ron Hamburger plus top academics like Bazant, Toreo, plus the top NIST people like Shyam Sunder and John Gross, all line up to speak to the Architect of Destruction, and to repeat their previous statements that Richard does not know what he is talking about.

Or if nobody shows up, except truthers and we re-run the Q&A we had at the last joint ae911 and Firefighters911. Its not difficult for us to fill 4 hours with soft questions.

I don't think that the establishment really cares what Richard Gage thinks.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks.

Here's a snippet:


I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue.

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

OMG! you need an all-star cast! here are my dream teams:

Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti

rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey
 
Telltale Tom said:
more exclamation marks
Click to expand...

I think you've hit on something here. Someone should start an "Exclamation Marks for 9/11 Truth" organization.

I bet it gets to 1000 members faster than the A&E for 9/11 Truth group.
 
grandmastershek said:
OMG! you need an all-star cast! here are my dream teams:

Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti

rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey
Click to expand...

Add Mark I. to our side, I'd love to see this go down, it would be an ass kicking of epic proportions.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks.

Here's a snippet:


I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue.

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

Sweet....

I would love to see another debate between some experienced debunkers and the "truth" movement....maybe you can sway some fence sitting truthers of the errors of their ways....

Hopefully you can convince Mark Roberts and Ryan Mackey to join you...plus there are several others here who would be a good fit especially in the sturctural engineering area like "Newtons Bit" and "TFK"....

Either way I say go for it Dave....what you have done so far was excellent work.
 
Last edited:
Mr.D said:
I think you've hit on something here. Someone should start an "Exclamation Marks for 9/11 Truth" organization.

I bet it gets to 1000 members faster than the A&E for 9/11 Truth group.
Click to expand...

i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks.

Here's a snippet:


I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue.

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

Dunno if I'll join you for the full show but I might consider calling in if I can stay up late enough to listen to it. I'd actually like to confront the guy on a few points that have had me concerned for a while. Mackey and a few others would be more qualified participants if they chose to join in since they have much more comprehensive knowledge on the stuff than I do.
 
cyclonic said:
Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.
Click to expand...


2 relevant points to add to this:

1) IIRC when WTC7 was built UL wasn't actually testing 30ft+ spans were they?
When the original fire rating of 2 hrs was given, was that theoretical or actual?

2) A certain amount of spray foam fire-proofing was knocked off the structural steel, as witnessed in the other WTC buildings. This would affect the ability of the structure to withstand a fire, and obviously invalidate the fire-rating.

3) Other WTC buildings, notably building 5 suffered structural collapses due to fire. This is well documented in Structure Magazine, for example:
http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=525

http://www.structuremag.org/images/0208-sf-1.jpg

4) Thermal expansion is understood to be the major culprit in the collapse of WTC 7, which is different from the failures of the towers, which experienced sagging trusses and commensurate inward bowing of the perimeter columns.

So you have clear, documented evidence of both fire-induced failures and loss of fire-proofing materials. See FEMA, 2002, p. 4-19 for actual samples of failed connections. Nowhere was any evidence found to indicate cutter charges, or demolition artifacts of any kind - that's just not the way the buildings failed.
 
alienentity said:
4) Thermal expansion is understood to be the major culprit in the collapse of WTC 7,
Click to expand...

In addition to this point, don't forget that:

1- The insulation is estimated to have done its job - the steel prolly didn't get all that hot - 250-300C (?)

2- thermal expansion of floor beams and girders wasn't considered as a part of the design criteria. Not sure if it is NOW, but I believe it was recommended by NIST as a result of their investigations.

3- ditto for the connection - never a part of the design criteria and not considered.
 
grandmastershek said:
i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS.
Click to expand...

What if we've got it backwards? Maybe there's a causative relationship; Hitting CAPS causes you to believe in CTs!
 
Debate Postponed

Looks like Gage needs more prep time! We've been delayed until July 10th. :rolleyes:
Cheers, Dave
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
Looks like Gage needs more prep time! We've been delayed until July 10th. :rolleyes:
Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

He's likely reading the JREF threads about thermite and trying to understand why no one thinks Jones paper is "proof" of anything besides a bad peer review process for that paper....

Or maybe he is looking at the energy calculations that have been done on the towers and trying to understand the math.....

Who knows really.....there are so many things that Richard needs to learn....like the difference between Newtons third law and the conservation of momentum.....give the man some time Dave ;)
 
Well, it's been delayed again - this time to July 31st.
:jaw-dropp

Oh well, more time to complete some experiments dropping things on scales, to quantify the old dynamic versus static load albatross hanging round Gage's and Bjorkman's necks.

Cheers, Dave
 
Forgot to mention, there has been nary a peep about Coast -to-Coast AM from AE911.

(TBD = To Be Determined; TBA = To Be Announced)
No Current or Upcoming Interviews
Click to expand...

Quite different from our NMSR 9-11 page.

I'm just saying. We're looking forward to kickin' some butt.:D

Cheers, Dave
 
Hey Dave,

Points they will undoubtably bring up...

1. Iron microspheres
2. Molten steel
3. Red chips

Just sayin be prepared ;) I've seen people caught off guard with their nonsense.

Good luck in the debate, do you know if there is any other debunkers joining you? According to the truthers its going to be a "team" debate.
 
Edx said:
Hey Dave,

Points they will undoubtably bring up...

1. Iron microspheres
2. Molten steel
3. Red chips

Just sayin be prepared ;) I've seen people caught off guard with their nonsense.

Good luck in the debate, do you know if there is any other debunkers joining you? According to the truthers its going to be a "team" debate.
Click to expand...

There will likely be talk of "free fall" speed......"into it's own footprint" etc....

Does anyone know if this debate will be focused on science issues (like Jones et al analysis of the red/grey chips) or will it be a broad overview of topics (like eyewitnesses hearing explosives, lack of videos of the pentagon crash etc)?

You just never know what wild and wacky theories those truthers will bring up......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom