ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th October 2017, 01:02 PM   #281
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
It's almost as if MicahJava was just making up whatever lie he felt like every few minutes, isn't it?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:28 PM   #282
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,417
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is no photographic evidence for fires in WTC 7 until 12:10 PM
How many photographers were allowed into the area before that time? Surely you're not claiming without a picture the eyewitness accounts are false.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 20th October 2017 at 01:29 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:42 PM   #283
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
The source for that time, let me remind you, is your own conjecture; nowhere in the quotes you've posted is there any definite statement of when this prediction was made.



Jesus Christ. You can't even count to six.

Dave
OH. MY. GOD. Just check the reddit post I linked. The spokesman of the FDNY literally said that the first evacuation of WTC 7 due to concerns of structural failure was at 11:30 AM.

5:21 PM - 5 hours = 12:21 PM
5:21 PM - 6 hours = 11:21 AM
5:00 PM - 5 hours = 12:00 PM
5:00 PM - 6 hours = 11:00 AM

Last edited by MicahJava; 20th October 2017 at 02:47 PM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:42 PM   #284
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...the special engineer, but his advise is the reason why WTC 7 was evacuated...
You keep saying this despite having been schooled that this is essentially WRONG.

You are thus lying.
Stop that.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:46 PM   #285
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I think it is wrong of you to insult other people's intelligence. ...
Whose intelligence are you talking about here specifically? Don't say yours??
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:46 PM   #286
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,160
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
OH. MY. GOD. Just check the reddit post I linked. The spokesman of the FDNY literally said that the first evacuation of WTC 7 due to concerns of structural failure was at 11:30 AM.
reddit is not a source of anything beyond idle entertainment. Why this evades you is anyone's guess.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:47 PM   #287
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Say what?

Are you talking about engineer Mike Catalano?

If so, you're grossly misrepresenting his statements to the Commission.
The vents on the top of the building and on the 5th floor sucked in the air and jammed the generators and caused them to burn.

He went to the 4th floor cafeteria where he knew there was an emergency door. In fact, there were two emergency exits. The one door had a broken handle so it couldn't be used. The other door, when opened was full of fire and smoke (colored). He also looked out the window to see if they could jump onto the ConEd building but there was a huge fire there. So they chose to wrap their heads in wet towels and make the escape through the smoky stairwell. The stairwell was below the generators that were burning. They went through the stairwell and made it to the street. They climbed up to Barclay Street when the second tower fell and chased them through the streets. He said large debris, the size of buses, was following them down the street.

[...]

Mike [who is an engineer, remember - pgimeno] said that WTC7 would have collapsed even if the other towers had not collapsed because of the fires. He said there were 50,000 gallons of diesel fuel and 20,000 gallons of coolant. This was a huge fire.
He wasn't talking about a small fire on one floor that someone extinguished.
Am I misremembering that somebody in WTC 7 did extinguish a fire that they saw? And are you saying that you accept that a fire occurred in WTC 7 before the North Tower fell?
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:48 PM   #288
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
You keep saying this despite having been schooled that this is essentially WRONG.

You are thus lying.
Stop that.
What are you talking about? What about the statements of Peter Hayden?
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:50 PM   #289
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,160
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Am I misremembering that somebody in WTC 7 did extinguish a fire that they saw? And are you saying that you accept that a fire occurred in WTC 7 before the North Tower fell?
Wow. That is so spectacularly wonky that I can't find the first wonk. When may we expect you in the moon hoax threads?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:50 PM   #290
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What are you talking about? What about the statements of Peter Hayden?
You misrepresent them. You lie.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:51 PM   #291
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
OH. MY. GOD. Just check the reddit post I linked. The spokesman of the FDNY literally said that the first evacuation of WTC 7 due to concerns of structural failure was at 11:30 AM.
Which has nothing to do with when anyone spoke to a hypothetical engineer. Have you actually got any idea what this discussion's even about?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 01:52 PM   #292
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What are you talking about? What about the statements of Peter Hayden?
I posted them, and they don't say what you say they do.

This is getting seriously weird.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:00 PM   #293
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
You misrepresent them. You lie.
"Chief of Department Peter Hayden consulted with an engineer:

We posed to him the question that considering the structural damage that was obvious to the – to the building on the southwest corner, and the amount of fire damage that was occurring within the building, could we anticipate a collapse and if so, when. He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon
"

https://web.archive.org/web/20150802154917/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/a3c33b98-9cbf-4b82-b557-6088e207c8f6/1/doc/11-4403_complete_opn.pdf

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...013-12-04.html

Peter Hayden on BBC's 2008 program The Conspiracy Files: The Truth Behind The Third Tower:

"We were concerned of the possibility of collapse of the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, 'if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?' And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’"
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:01 PM   #294
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Which has nothing to do with when anyone spoke to a hypothetical engineer. Have you actually got any idea what this discussion's even about?

Dave
Shyam Sunder, spokesman of NIST, confirmed the existence of the special engineer in his 2008 talk with Graeme MacQueen. Peter Hayden, Frank Fellini, and Michael Currid have talked about this person (or, as the statements of Frank Fellini vaguely suggest, more than one person).
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:06 PM   #295
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,417
What do you think makes this engineer "special"? Practically all engineers since have been in agreement.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:30 PM   #296
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
You posted a link to the following report that said:

Quote:
We posed to him the question that considering the structural damage that was obvious to the – to the building on the southwest corner, and the amount of fire damage that was occurring within the building, could we anticipate a collapse and if so, when. He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon

Thanks for trashing your CD explosive claim, which explains why after 16 years, you have been unable to post any evidence that explosives were used. Additionally, it was Daniel Nigro, not Hayden, who made the decision to pull away from WTC 7 knowing that the building would collapse, which was obvious.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:35 PM   #297
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
"Chief of Department Peter Hayden consulted with an engineer:

We posed to him the question that considering the structural damage that was obvious to the – to the building on the southwest corner, and the amount of fire damage that was occurring within the building, could we anticipate a collapse and if so, when. He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon
"

https://web.archive.org/web/20150802154917/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/a3c33b98-9cbf-4b82-b557-6088e207c8f6/1/doc/11-4403_complete_opn.pdf

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...013-12-04.html

Peter Hayden on BBC's 2008 program The Conspiracy Files: The Truth Behind The Third Tower:

"We were concerned of the possibility of collapse of the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, 'if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?' And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’"
Glad that once again quote the interesting facts:
a) That this engineer was consulted at a time when the fires were already so severe that the highest FDNY officers considered the possibility of collapse.
b) That the instances of Hayden's recollection that you choose cherry-pick was recorded seven years after the fact.

These facts, in conjunction, suggest that the engineer was consulted in the early afternoon. Five hours before collapse would be somewhat after noon. I think it would be foolish to take Hayden's recollection of "five hours" as gospel.

Conerning a), you have expressed doubts that there were ANY fires before noon, so what you just quoted contradicts your interpretation that the engineer was conculted before noon AND that there were no serious fires at the time.

Thank you for disproving yourself. Job well done


[Blue phrases added on edit]
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 20th October 2017 at 02:39 PM. Reason: ETA
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:37 PM   #298
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Shyam Sunder, spokesman of NIST, confirmed the existence of the special engineer in his 2008 talk with Graeme MacQueen. Peter Hayden, Frank Fellini, and Michael Currid have talked about this person (or, as the statements of Frank Fellini vaguely suggest, more than one person).
Yes, perhaps - and?

I don't think anyone here claims there was no competent engineer that the FDNY officers consulted.

How does the existence of such a person erase the repeated lies you told - that this "mysterious" engineer's statement ALONE forced Nigro's decisions?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:46 PM   #299
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, perhaps - and?

I don't think anyone here claims there was no competent engineer that the FDNY officers consulted.

How does the existence of such a person erase the repeated lies you told - that this "mysterious" engineer's statement ALONE forced Nigro's decisions?
The engineer influenced the decision of the fire chiefs to abandon operations at WTC 7 for fear of structural failure.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:57 PM   #300
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I repeat: the special engineer predicted at about 11:30 AM that the building would collapse "in about five or six hours". The building collapsed five and a half hours later, at 5:21 PM.

Thanks for posting a link that confirms explosives were not responsible for the collapse of WTC 7.

Quote:
Who Made the Decision and Why

The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...gro_Daniel.txt


"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...C/Cruthers.txt


Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.- Deputy Chief Peter Hayden


skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 03:03 PM   #301
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The engineer influenced the decision of the fire chiefs to abandon operations at WTC 7 for fear of structural failure.
Yes, of course, just as it should be: Nigro and the other high-ranking officers had a confluence of information to assess, including what that engineer said, and all that information converged on the obvious assessment that collapse due to uncontrolled fires and structural is a very real risk and evacuation the right thing to do.

They would of course have come to the exact same decision had this paricular engineer not existed.

Allo of this is decidedly NOT what you claimed and what was, clearly, a lie.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 03:16 PM   #302
benthamitemetric
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 478
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The engineer influenced the decision of the fire chiefs to abandon operations at WTC 7 for fear of structural failure.
You have not established that timeline or chain of events. Instead, and to the contrary, we have clear testimony from multiple chiefs (Nigro, Cruthers and Fellini) stating that they consulted with each other and ordered the evacuation based on the observed damage and fires. Hayden says he consulted with an engineer at some point, but he never says he ordered the evacuation (based off of that consultation or otherwise). If you don't want people to insult your intelligence, you should actually try using it. It's really not hard to avoid conflating these two separate sets of occurrences, especially when this exact conflation has been explicitly pointed out to you.

Last edited by benthamitemetric; 20th October 2017 at 03:33 PM.
benthamitemetric is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 04:16 PM   #303
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Am I misremembering that somebody in WTC 7 did extinguish a fire that they saw?
I don't know. I'm asking if you were talking about Mike Catalano, who saw fire in the builiding before the North Tower fell, and didn't extinguish it.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
And are you saying that you accept that a fire occurred in WTC 7 before the North Tower fell?
Yes. I have no reason to doubt his timeline. If the North tower dust cloud chased him, he would remember having entered the building after that, therefore he can't have his timeline backwards. He said he saw fire before that happened, in several places (emergency stairwell, and looking down through the window to ConEd). Hard to misremember.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2017, 09:20 AM   #304
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The engineer influenced the decision of the fire chiefs to abandon operations at WTC 7 for fear of structural failure.
That's the bit that's purely your conjecture; nobody in the quotes you've posted say any such thing, and Daniel Nigro has stated clearly and unambiguously that it was his decision and it wasn't influenced by some unknown engineer's opinion. But even if it had been, all it means is that one of the many people at the time who correctly understood that there was a serious danger of WTC7 collapsing happened to be a trained engineer - hardly a startling observation in the circumstances.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2017, 10:06 AM   #305
bknight
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 452
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
That's the bit that's purely your conjecture; nobody in the quotes you've posted say any such thing, and Daniel Nigro has stated clearly and unambiguously that it was his decision and it wasn't influenced by some unknown engineer's opinion. But even if it had been, all it means is that one of the many people at the time who correctly understood that there was a serious danger of WTC7 collapsing happened to be a trained engineer - hardly a startling observation in the circumstances.

Dave
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
"Chief of Department Peter Hayden consulted with an engineer:

We posed to him the question that considering the structural damage that was obvious to the – to the building on the southwest corner, and the amount of fire damage that was occurring within the building, could we anticipate a collapse and if so, when. He said yes and he gave an approximate time of five to six hours, which was pretty much right on the money because the building collapsed about 5 o’clock that afternoon
"

https://web.archive.org/web/20150802154917/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/a3c33b98-9cbf-4b82-b557-6088e207c8f6/1/doc/11-4403_complete_opn.pdf

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...013-12-04.html

Peter Hayden on BBC's 2008 program The Conspiracy Files: The Truth Behind The Third Tower:

"We were concerned of the possibility of collapse of the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, 'if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?' And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’"
It is clear that MJ presents this engineer(s) as a pretense that he(they) was part of the conspiracy of 9/11. That the Fire Department prudently consulted with he(them) after noting multiple fires on multiple floors; creaking from the building, bulging of floors and columns missing. Nothing odd concerning the chain of events by the Fire Department. Nor is Nigro statement that he made the decision, probably based on all the knowledge of the situation.

So at the end of this we still do not have any explosions of a CD either before the collapse or during the examination of debris. The proposition of the engineer "knew" about the pending collapse because he(they) were part of the "conspiracy" is total fabrication. The engineer(s) are a moot point.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2017, 12:13 PM   #306
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,266
The fire chief was discussing the severe fire damage 60 to 90 minutes before there is photo evidence of fires?!

Is it too much to ask that the theory not contradict itself (don't answer that...)?

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 04:57 AM   #307
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, of course, just as it should be: Nigro and the other high-ranking officers had a confluence of information to assess, including what that engineer said, and all that information converged on the obvious assessment that collapse due to uncontrolled fires and structural is a very real risk and evacuation the right thing to do.

They would of course have come to the exact same decision had this paricular engineer not existed.

Allo of this is decidedly NOT what you claimed and what was, clearly, a lie.
An engineer better understands that there's a difference between "a big hole in the side of the building" in relation to the size of a human or a firetruck and the size of the whole building. Seriously, do I have to repeat this? No computer modeling project on WTC 7 has ever found evidence that the few columns missing from the southwest corner was significant. The only other evidence for columns missing are photographs of the south facade with a single vertical column missing creating a straight black line down the middle, exposing the floor sections.

Creaking? Well, creaking can come from a lot and mean a lot of things. One thing it does not mean, in a New York skyscraper the size of a football field, is "the building will collapse in about five or six hours".

The "bulge" was probably discovered a little later after they abandoned operations on WTC 7. That could be due to relatively insignificant warping of the steel perimeter from the heat of the fires on the higher floors.

There's no evidence that it was even on fire at 11:30 AM - 12:00 PM. Is there any reason at this point that we shouldn't suspect that the fires were started in a very short interval of time by arson?

Last edited by MicahJava; 22nd October 2017 at 05:11 AM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 04:59 AM   #308
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by benthamitemetric View Post
You have not established that timeline or chain of events. Instead, and to the contrary, we have clear testimony from multiple chiefs (Nigro, Cruthers and Fellini) stating that they consulted with each other and ordered the evacuation based on the observed damage and fires. Hayden says he consulted with an engineer at some point, but he never says he ordered the evacuation (based off of that consultation or otherwise). If you don't want people to insult your intelligence, you should actually try using it. It's really not hard to avoid conflating these two separate sets of occurrences, especially when this exact conflation has been explicitly pointed out to you.
Guess what? None of them have to be lying to accept the truth about the special engineer as told by Chief Peter Hayden, Michael Currid and Shyam Sunder. It's just one of many overlooked part of a chapter in history. Overlooked because piecing it all together is uncomfortable for some.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 05:02 AM   #309
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
I like how some are trying to say that I'm ignoring history when all I do is take every publicly available first responder's statements and add them together. Nothing you guys have quoted changes the significance of the special engineer on 9/11/2001 at 11:30 - 12:00 AM. Most of it was already quoted in the reddit post I linked.

https://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/co..._firefighters/

There should be a review board getting the existent first responders on record about WTC 7, they should be asked some specific questions to perhaps see if the special engineer is still around to be interviewed himself. Who knows, maybe it was more than one unidentified technical advisor.

Last edited by MicahJava; 22nd October 2017 at 05:09 AM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 05:43 AM   #310
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,417
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
An engineer better understands .....................
An engineer on scene looks at a damaged building on fire with no fire suppression at work and decides it will fail.

You find this suspicious.............
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 05:50 AM   #311
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,266
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
An engineer better understands that there's a difference between "a big hole in the side of the building" in relation to the size of a human or a firetruck and the size of the whole building. Seriously, do I have to repeat this? No computer modeling project on WTC 7 has ever found evidence that the few columns missing from the southwest corner was significant. The only other evidence for columns missing are photographs of the south facade with a single vertical column missing creating a straight black line down the middle, exposing the floor sections.

Creaking? Well, creaking can come from a lot and mean a lot of things. One thing it does not mean, in a New York skyscraper the size of a football field, is "the building will collapse in about five or six hours".

The "bulge" was probably discovered a little later after they abandoned operations on WTC 7. That could be due to relatively insignificant warping of the steel perimeter from the heat of the fires on the higher floors.

There's no evidence that it was even on fire at 11:30 AM - 12:00 PM. Is there any reason at this point that we shouldn't suspect that the fires were started in a very short interval of time by arson?
And the severe fire damage you failed to mention that was in the quote you're so focused on...?

Evidence of fire? Them discussing the fire damage.

Your argument is with your own previous statements at this point.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 22nd October 2017 at 05:53 AM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 06:13 AM   #312
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,557
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
An engineer better understands that there's a difference between "a big hole in the side of the building" in relation to the size of a human or a firetruck and the size of the whole building. Seriously, do I have to repeat this? No computer modeling project on WTC 7 has ever found evidence that the few columns missing from the southwest corner was significant. The only other evidence for columns missing are photographs of the south facade with a single vertical column missing creating a straight black line down the middle, exposing the floor sections.

Creaking? Well, creaking can come from a lot and mean a lot of things. One thing it does not mean, in a New York skyscraper the size of a football field, is "the building will collapse in about five or six hours".

The "bulge" was probably discovered a little later after they abandoned operations on WTC 7. That could be due to relatively insignificant warping of the steel perimeter from the heat of the fires on the higher floors.

There's no evidence that it was even on fire at 11:30 AM - 12:00 PM. Is there any reason at this point that we shouldn't suspect that the fires were started in a very short interval of time by arson?
Ok, let's reasen the MJ way:

There was no special engineer. Ever!
Why?
Because you have presented no photograph of him.

Case closed
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 06:59 AM   #313
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I like how some are trying to say that I'm ignoring history when all I do is take every publicly available first responder's statements and add them together.
And I like the way you continue to insist the evacuation was carried out because of the special engineer's advice and pretending the statements prove it, even though none of them actually say that. Most liars don't point to the proof that they're lying and pretend it's proof they're telling the truth.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 07:01 AM   #314
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,673
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
An engineer better understands [...]
Perhaps you'd like to post us your credentials for knowing better what engineers understand than the actual engineers posting on this forum.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 07:29 AM   #315
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Creaking? Well, creaking can come from a lot and mean a lot of things. One thing it does not mean, in a New York skyscraper the size of a football field, is "the building will collapse in about five or six hours".
If a building creaks the way buildings don't, and you're a firefighter who has learned that a building that creaks means it may collapse, you assume it may collapse. Even more so if you have seen several New York skyscrapers collapse that same day.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There's no evidence that it was even on fire at 11:30 AM - 12:00 PM.
Lie. The statements of firefighters and engineer Mike Catalano are evidence.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Is there any reason at this point that we shouldn't suspect that the fires were started in a very short interval of time by arson?
Yes. Engineer Mike Catalano attributed them to the generators burning, before the North tower collapsed. There's no reason to suspect arson.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 07:33 AM   #316
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Ok, let's reasen the MJ way:

There was no special engineer. Ever!
Why?
Because you have presented no photograph of him.

Case closed
Yeah, MicahJava plays with the advantage of having twice as many standards as others, where his standard for evidence of foreknowledge is that hearsay is solid evidence, while his standard for the presence of fire is that direct witness testimony is not valid without pictures.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:17 AM   #317
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Ok, let's reasen the MJ way:

There was no special engineer. Ever!
Why?
Because you have presented no photograph of him.

Case closed
sigh What statements from first responders do you think indicate more damage than what photographs we have of the south facade and southwest corner?
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:25 AM   #318
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
And I like the way you continue to insist the evacuation was carried out because of the special engineer's advice and pretending the statements prove it, even though none of them actually say that. Most liars don't point to the proof that they're lying and pretend it's proof they're telling the truth.

Dave
That's literally what FDNY chief Peter Hayden and firefighter Michael Currid said. Shyam Sunder talked about the special engineer publicly on a radio discussion with Graeme MacQueen. They say the special engineer had a significant influence over the FDNY chief's earliest decisions to abandon operations due to fear of structural failure. It makes total sense in the context of the rest of the day .

Also, I think some of you are interpreting quotes of first responders a certain way. I acknowledge that there are several statements from firefighters saying that they personally agreed that the building was jeopardy because of the damage and/or warning signs they observed. But you should also realize that A. These statements were made in hindsight, in some cases years later. It is important to be conscious on how hindsight can affect a witness statement. B. Within the firefighter community, and generally the community of first responders on the day of 9/11/2001, you may observe that they are more likely to talk in terms of first person "We".
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:27 AM   #319
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,349
Pgimeno and others should be reminded that the North Tower collapsed at 10:28 A.M., making the first instance of WTC 7 foreknowledge only about an hour later.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:38 AM   #320
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Pgimeno and others should be reminded that the North Tower collapsed at 10:28 A.M., making the first instance of WTC 7 foreknowledge only about an hour later.

Considering that fires raged out of control, which continued to weakened the steel structure of WTC 7 in light of the fact that WTC 7 suffered massive impact damage and as WTC 7 began to buckle, all it took was simple old-fashioned common sense. In other words, no structural experience needed to make the determination that WTC 7 would eventually collapse.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.