View Single Post
Old 21st August 2011, 02:59 PM   #1744
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by mrkinnies View Post
What a worthless question. I'd consider CTBUH to be intelligent, sane and certainly not 'in on it'. Then again they don't give an explanation for the symmetry of collapse.

But the simple fact is, they don't agree WTC7 collapsed due to the failure of one column. Oooops!
They dont agree about column 79 but they think WTC7 was a progressive collapse that occured because of thermal expansion because of the fires, they praise the NIST report and denounce AE911 and 911 conspiracies as "preposterous". On the other side, AE911claim that explosives and thermite were used, that thermal expansion is nonsence, that progressive collpase would be impossible.

Here's some more quotes from David Scott, Chairman of CTBUH:

Quote:
The ae911truth movement is not interested in truth. It presents one side of the argument and ignores all the facts that indicate that they may be wrong
Quote:
I do not know anyone or organization in the Council that supports the controlled demolition theory. The ASCE has an engineering membership of 120,000 and they participated in the production of the NIST report. NIST itself employs about 2,900 scientists, engineers, technicians, and support and administrative personnel and hosts about 2,600 associates.
Quote:
Some people will never believe we landed on the moon and some people will never believe that the planes that crashed into the towers, eventually brought them down. From my perspective both of these statements are equally preposterous

And yet you claim David Scott to be "intelligent, sane and certainly not 'in on it'"

So I ask you again, how can he be competent engineer if he believes in everything you claim shows the NIST report to be frauds? He is either dangerously incompetent or he is insane or he is in on the coverup.

This is the reason REAL engineers debate the NIST report, from David Scott again:
Quote:

My main concern is that the debate is that the CD theory is a distraction. 9/11 raises many issues about building performance, terror attacks and how structural steel behaves in extreme fire conditions. These issues need to be properly discussed and debated and every time the conversation starts, then CD takes us wildly of course.
Quotes from his post here:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...8&postcount=30

Last edited by Edx; 21st August 2011 at 03:24 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top