IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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.
Tags Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl , astaneh , steel , steel wastage , wastage , wpi , wtc 1 , WTC 2 , wtc 7

Reply
Old 25th February 2008, 04:13 PM   #41
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Is this an admission that all the steel wasn't immediately shipped to China?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:16 PM   #42
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Sorry RedIbis, you quoted a structural engineer who not only supports the NIST's conclusions, but in fact contributed to the investigation. And now you want us to debunk it?




Man, it's funny when truthers step in it and can't shake it off!
I want you to debunk his observations. Short of that, another laughing dog gif is the level of discourse I expect from you.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis 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 25th February 2008, 04:18 PM   #43
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
I want you to debunk his observations.
Why? Just call/email him yourself and get the answer from the "horse's mouth". He's an educator, I'm sure he will be glad to give you a direct answer to any questions you have regarding his research and conclusions.
Alt+F4 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 25th February 2008, 04:19 PM   #44
cisco
Muse
 
cisco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 709
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The point being, are you honest enough to admit that you are not 100% sure of the official story?

I know I am. I don't pretend to know the twoofy twoof.
I can say with 100% honesty and integrity that I have never seen or heard any factual, logical, or evidentiary data that makes me suspect anything other than the popular account of the events of 9/11 took place. Scouts honor. I'd swear and sign my name to it.

Can you say the same about the trooth?
__________________
"Another super dumb post! How can you be so consistently wrong with the real dumb posts? BUSTED, your posts are all totally wrong. The dumbest collection of stupid posts ever, by you. How are you so good at getting every single fact wrong." - beachnut

"If you torture data sufficiently, it will confess to almost anything." - Fred Menger
cisco 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 25th February 2008, 04:20 PM   #45
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
wildcat wrote:

Quote:
Sorry RedIbis, you quoted a structural engineer who not only supports the NIST's conclusions, but in fact contributed to the investigation. And now you want us to debunk it?
Are you sure about that?

Quote:
“When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle. When the columns buckled, the top portion of the building, losing its supports, was pulled down by gravity and dropping on the floors below, pancaking the floors one after another and leading to progressive collapse in an almost perfect vertical direction of the pull of gravity force.”
Isn't this the exact opposite of what the NIST report concluded?

This reminds me of the Lee report in so many ways.
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:21 PM   #46
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
It's time to cut the BS. Astaneh-Asl does not support the truther side:

Quote:
Some, wondering how buildings that easily withstood fierce wind gusts for decades were so quickly brought down by airplanes, argue that explosives planted before the attacks must also have been involved. Even some college professors have advanced such theories, though they have largely been dismissed (The Chronicle, June 23).

Mr. Astaneh-Asl also rejects such alternative theories. "I certainly don't buy into any of the conspiracy stuff," he says.

"Those are lightweight buildings," he adds. "There was no need for explosives to bring them down."
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/20...for-truth.html

His complaint regarding the WTC tragedy is related to building codes:

Quote:
As Mr. Astaneh-Asl examined the construction documents, however, he was horrified by aspects of the design. He says the structure essentially threw out the rule book on skyscraper construction. "This building was so strange, and so many violations of practice and code were introduced," he says...

He sounds exasperated by what has come to be the accepted wisdom among engineers: that there was nothing wrong with the buildings. "I cannot see why the entire profession has agreed to sit in this convenient seat of saying that there is nothing wrong with our work," he says.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus 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 25th February 2008, 04:22 PM   #47
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by T.A.M. View Post
There is MORE THAN ENOUGH proof that the 19 Arab Hijackers carried out 9/11.
Opinion

Quote:
The majority of people on the planet believe it,
argumentum ad populum

Quote:
the evidence points to it.
What evidence? On the whole the physical evidence is extremely limited. As a way to redirect to the topic, even NIST admitted it did not observe a single core column sample that exceeded 250C.

Quote:
Because yourself and a small minority chose to believe otherwise, does not mean it has not been proven....you can't convince everyone, no matter how much proof, no matter how strong the case.
Just the reverse of the fallacy you committed above. Just because a position is held by the minority, doesn't make it wrong.

Quote:
So with that said, the burden of proof is now, once again, back on the disbelievers to prove that this man's findings are not explainable through the impacts and subsequent collapse of the buildings.
The challenge of this thread is to debunk his personal observations at the WTC.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis 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 25th February 2008, 04:23 PM   #48
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
It's interesting what you choose to focus on since it's usually the narrative as opposed to his actual quotes. The only quote in your post is:

"When the plane hit," he says, "the walls around the elevator shaft were gone, just thrown away."

Ok, so?

Try to stick to his actual quotes.


Quote:
He came across "severely scorched [steel] members from 40 or so floors below the points of impact [by the planes]." [9]
He also came across severely scorched members from 40 or so floors below the points of impact. He believes that the planes obliterated the elevator walls, allowing burning fuel to pour down into the building, igniting blazes hundreds of feet below the main fire. "When the plane hit," he says, "the walls around the elevator shaft were gone, just thrown away." These lower-floor fires may have contributed to the collapse, and certainly added to the death toll.

Way to "Stick to his actual quotes"!
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail

Last edited by 332nd; 25th February 2008 at 04:25 PM.
332nd 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 25th February 2008, 04:24 PM   #49
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Why? Just call/email him yourself and get the answer from the "horse's mouth". He's an educator, I'm sure he will be glad to give you a direct answer to any questions you have regarding his research and conclusions.
Good idea! Here ya go Red: astaneh@ce.berkeley.edu
__________________
Vive la liberté!

Last edited by WildCat; 25th February 2008 at 04:24 PM.
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:25 PM   #50
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The point being, are you honest enough to admit that you are not 100% sure of the official story?

I know I am. I don't pretend to know the twoofy twoof.
Easy one. Yup, I can guarantee you that I am not 100% of the entire official story. I have no doubt that in 20 years the official story will have changed in many minor details. What I will also tell you, is that 50 years from now the who, how, when, and why of the attacks WILL NOT HAVE CHANGED.

Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
I want you to debunk his observations. Short of that, another laughing dog gif is the level of discourse I expect from you.
There is nothing to debunk Red. Who here has DENIED the presence of HIGH TEMPERATURES with regard to the WTC attacks??

TAM
T.A.M. 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 25th February 2008, 04:25 PM   #51
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The challenge of this thread is to debunk his personal observations at the WTC.
Well it seems obvious to me that you have no true concern for the truth but rather just want to argue with folks on an insignificant Internet sub-forum.

Again, please explain why you or any "truther" refuse to contact him directly?

Last edited by Alt+F4; 25th February 2008 at 04:26 PM. Reason: typo
Alt+F4 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 25th February 2008, 04:25 PM   #52
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Wil cat:address thread 45
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:26 PM   #53
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Isn't this the exact opposite of what the NIST report concluded?
Why don't you ask him? It sure as hell doesn't support bombs or thermite, does it?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:27 PM   #54
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Well it seems obvious to me that you have no true concern for the truth but rather just want to argue with folks on an insignificant Internet forum.

Again, please explain why or any "truther" won't contact him directly?
Stop derailing this thread please....
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:28 PM   #55
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
Opinion



argumentum ad populum



What evidence? On the whole the physical evidence is extremely limited. As a way to redirect to the topic, even NIST admitted it did not observe a single core column sample that exceeded 250C.



Just the reverse of the fallacy you committed above. Just because a position is held by the minority, doesn't make it wrong.



The challenge of this thread is to debunk his personal observations at the WTC.
When it comes to burden of proof, argumentum ad populum works just fine for me. Especially when the vast majority of people in the legitimate scientific and engineering community concur.

As I said earlier, you cannot DEBUNK observations...they are what they are, observations. Why don't you try and debunk the CONCLUSIONS this same engineer has made after making his OBSERVATIONS!!!

TAM
T.A.M. 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 25th February 2008, 04:28 PM   #56
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Stop derailing this thread please....
Sorry that you think finding out the truth is a derail. It is the truth you're seeking, right?
Alt+F4 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 25th February 2008, 04:28 PM   #57
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
that isn't a derailment sizzler. its a legitimate question
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 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 25th February 2008, 04:28 PM   #58
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Why don't you ask him? It sure as hell doesn't support bombs or thermite, does it?
Who said anything about bombs or thermite?

You said he supported the findings of NIST, but his opinion of collapse initiation clearly doesn't.

Point made, and I assume point taken
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:29 PM   #59
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Wil cat:address thread 45
Sorry Sizzler, I don't see how this is mutually exclusive to what NIST concluded. You do realize that the columns buckling (as can be seen where they're being pulled in) is exactly what NIST said preceded the collapse, don't you?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:30 PM   #60
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Who said anything about bombs or thermite?
You agree that bombs or thermite/ate had nothing to do with the collapses? Yes or no will do.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:30 PM   #61
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by Arus808 View Post
that isn't a derailment sizzler. its a legitimate question
I agree. It must also be a legitimate addmission too then.
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:31 PM   #62
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
You agree that bombs or thermite/ate had nothing to do with the collapses? Yes or no will do.
This is off-topic. Start a new thread and I will answer your question
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:33 PM   #63
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Sorry Sizzler, I don't see how this is mutually exclusive to what NIST concluded. You do realize that the columns buckling (as can be seen where they're being pulled in) is exactly what NIST said preceded the collapse, don't you?
Quote:
In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle.
Yes but the mode of buckling is different. NB just posted a fabulous model.
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:34 PM   #64
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
This is off-topic. Start a new thread and I will answer your question
It's not off-topic. If you think that bombs and/or thermite/ate was involved then you don't agree with Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl and are just trolling by posting in this thread.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:39 PM   #65
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
It's not off-topic. If you think that bombs and/or thermite/ate was involved then you don't agree with Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl and are just trolling by posting in this thread.
I believe his findings contradict certain aspects of the official hypothesis. Therefore I belong in this thread.

Please address my thread just before this one, thanks
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 04:42 PM   #66
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
I believe his findings contradict certain aspects of the official hypothesis.
But you reject his findings. Therefore you cannot use them to support your theory of bombs/thermite/space beams/mini-nukes or whatever the hell you believe.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 04:43 PM   #67
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
Why, too, does 9/11 blogger choose his earlier assessment of the WTC, instead of the later one??

SFGate, Oct. 22, 2001

Quote:
The twin towers were exceptionally well designed and built, Astaneh said, calling the trade center "the best-designed building I have ever seen."
Compare to his opinion after he received the design documents from FEMA in 2002:

Quote:
As Mr. Astaneh-Asl examined the construction documents, however, he was horrified by aspects of the design. He says the structure essentially threw out the rule book on skyscraper construction. "This building was so strange, and so many violations of practice and code were introduced," he says.
9/11 Blogger misrepresents his opinion by selectively quoting an early analysis, prior to his actual study of the towers. His later opinion was formed after study, and thus carries more validity than the early one.

People need to stop misrepresenting his work. His suspicions vis-a-vis the Twin Towers collapse are that the building codes were insufficient. There's no conspiracy fantasy there in his work. Again, he has come out and said he does not support any narrative other than that involving impacts and fires. In fact, he like NIST and other researchers, believes that if it weren't for the fires, the buildings would have remained:

Quote:
The buildings simply redistributed their loads onto the intact columns when the airplanes hit. But as the fires burned, the floor joists were the first elements of the buildings' structures to fail. Their failure pulled the buildings' exterior columns inward, initiating complete collapse of the structures.

"If you didn't have the fires you would be fine,'' Astaneh-asl said.
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2007/04/frederick-w-mowrer.html
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus 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 25th February 2008, 04:44 PM   #68
VespaGuy
Graduate Poster
 
VespaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,034
RedIbis -

Could you please explain what needs to be debunked and why?
__________________
"You are claiming it wasn't one. That is a positive claim." - Russell Pickering
VespaGuy 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 25th February 2008, 05:00 PM   #69
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Based upon the chemical content of the thinned-out metal of WTC 7, one can concluded that the damage was done by sulphuric acid. There was a lot in the environment of the rubble pile. It was abundant in the building before the attack.

Not a thing in the report even suggests thermite of explosives. He would have mentioned the signitures of explosives had he seen them.

It is possible for a Class A fire to achieve 2000F locally.

So, what's to denunk about the report?

What needs debunking is 911 Boogger.
leftysergeant 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 25th February 2008, 05:09 PM   #70
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
I think Jharrow's question is perfectly legitimate. What explains Astaneh-Asl's observations?
Astaneh-Asl's observations were that fire after the jets impacts caused failure of the structure.

Quote:
“When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle. When the columns buckled, the top portion of the building, losing its supports, was pulled down by gravity and dropping on the floors below, pancaking the floors one after another and leading to progressive collapse in an almost perfect vertical direction of the pull of gravity force.”
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/20...ing-do-it.html

His argument is that the structure should have been better designed.

Quote:
"This building was so strange, and so many violations of practice and code were introduced..."
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/20...for-truth.html

There's nothing to debunk. He agrees with the NIST narrative of fires leading to structural failure. If anything, truthers are missing something to investigate right there in what he asks! Was the towers' design faulty? Did the designers violate "practice and code"?

Why do truthers insist on missing the point of these researchers work? Quintierre discusses a glossing over of defects in the building fire codes. Astaneh-Asl discusses potential issues with the design. I don't have the architectural knowledge to know if either researcher is on base or not, but why do people who think they're obsessed with discovering truth continually miss the truth of these researchers work? If there are questions to ask, the ones those researchers ask are the ones! Not this continual purporting of steel melting, or this obsession with the fact the steel was supposedly shipped out too quickly.

Jesus, people, Quintierre and Astaneh-Asl do not support the so-called "Truth" movement. Read their work. Understand what it is they're truly challenging.

-----

Aside from the rant, do any of the engineering or architectural gurus here (Architect, Newton's Bit, rwguinn, R.Mackey, and others) have any opinion over the real questions Astaneh-Asl raises? I do not have the knowledge to analyze his charge that the actual implementation of the Twin Towers design violated codes and practices. Do you guys have any commentary?
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus 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 25th February 2008, 05:10 PM   #71
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
This is what the "movement" is left with? Pretty sad.
Wolrab 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 25th February 2008, 05:19 PM   #72
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
What needs debunking is 911 Boogger.
Funniest typo ever!

But 9/11 Blogger debunks itself.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 25th February 2008, 05:28 PM   #73
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
And why did 9/11 Blogger juxtapose Astaneh-Asl with the argument that the steel was shipped off too quickly? Yes, I know that CBS is the source of the quote, "As a result, Astaneh has almost certainly missed seeing crucial pieces before they were cut up and sent overseas...", but 9/11 Blogger tries to use Astaneh-Asl as proof that there was insufficient investigation of the steel debris.

Funny, but he doesn't agree:

Quote:
I wish I had more time to inspect steel structure and save more pieces before the steel was recycled. However, given the fact that other teams such as NIST, SEAONY and FEMA-BPAT have also done inspection and have collected the perishable data, it seems to me that collectively we may have been able to collect sufficient data. The main impediments to my work were and still are:

1. Not having a copy of the engineering drawings and design and construction documents.
2. Not having copies of the photographs and videotapes that various agencies might have taken during and immediately after the collapse.
(Bolding mine, for emphasis)

Does he know for certain if all the investigations "have been able to collect sufficient data"? No; that's why he says "may". But he doesn't say that the shipping out was an impediment to his investigation; he instead says that his lack of access to documents - remedied in 2002 - was the real problem.

Again, his work is being misrepresented. His complaints and challenges do not point at a conspiracy. He supports the narrative of impacts + fires = collapse. There's just nothing to debunk there. Nothing at all. What needs debunking is the fantasists interpretation of his work.

I'm done. It's dinnertime where I'm at. I'll check back later to see if any of the truthful, rational, sane architect-ing/engineering heads here have anything to say about Astaneh-Asl's charge. Until then, I think we can put to rest any notion that his work somehow supports the conspiracy fantasy.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus 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 25th February 2008, 05:28 PM   #74
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
But you reject his findings. Therefore you cannot use them to support your theory of bombs/thermite/space beams/mini-nukes or whatever the hell you believe.
Again, where did the "bombs/thermite/space beams/mini-nukes " come from?

Unless you address my questions in this thread, about this thread, you are temporarily on ignore for this thread because you just can't seem to stay on topic.
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 05:28 PM   #75
HeyLeroy
Vegan Cannibal
 
HeyLeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,567
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
(snip)
What evidence? On the whole the physical evidence is extremely limited. As a way to redirect to the topic, even NIST admitted it did not observe a single core column sample that exceeded 250C.
Are you saying that you really believe that those fires, which covered several acres, didn't even get as hot as a tea-light candle?

Quote:
The present work examines the increase in temperature of the aluminium casing of night lights, when burned in still air and in an air flow, with the single existing candle wick and with a second-introduced double wick. In double-wick cases, the temperature rise is often rapid, easily achieving temperatures of over 200°C.
Source
__________________
Cows are in large numbers, and do not serve any other purpose, other than to eat grass, and moo -- makaya325
I my kids.
I ♠ my dog.
I ♣ my baby Harp Seal.
HeyLeroy 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 25th February 2008, 05:29 PM   #76
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: 34,249
Just out of interest, were the samples Astaneh-Asl commented on exposed to high temperatures before or after the collapses? Remember, RedIbis, those inconvenient fires that burned for weeks in the rubble piles. How hot did they get? And also out of interest, how many of these "evaporated" samples were the same ones that were then analysed and found to have been eroded by eutectic reactions with sulphur, which proceed at a much lower temperature than the melting point of structural steel?

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers 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 25th February 2008, 05:30 PM   #77
Sizzler
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Based upon the chemical content of the thinned-out metal of WTC 7, one can concluded that the damage was done by sulphuric acid.
Well why don't you write a journal article and have it published. It seems you solved the mystery.

All those stupid experts called in an anomaly. Geesh.....
Sizzler 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 25th February 2008, 05:34 PM   #78
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Again, where did the "bombs/thermite/space beams/mini-nukes " come from?

Unless you address my questions in this thread, about this thread, you are temporarily on ignore for this thread because you just can't seem to stay on topic.
From the article linked to the OP.
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
332nd 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 25th February 2008, 05:34 PM   #79
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,871
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
Well, here's what he said in 2007:

In an interview in 2007, Astaneh-Asl recalled, "I saw melting of girders in [the] World Trade Center." [7]


He used the word, "melting."
Red, you're really running on empty, aren't you?

You're quoting an engineer who supports the OS as proof of an inside job.

I can't decide if this is hilarious or sad.
CHF 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 25th February 2008, 05:34 PM   #80
Good Lt
Graduate Poster
 
Good Lt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,498
Originally Posted by Sizzler View Post
Well why don't you write a journal article and have it published. It seems you solved the mystery.

All those stupid experts called in an anomaly. Geesh.....
And where, pray tell, can we find articles by 9-11 Twoof scholars in reputable mainstream, peer-reviewed journals?

Oh, that's right. There are none.

Not. One.
__________________
Sorrowful and great is the artist's destiny.
- Liszt

Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful.
- Ian Faith
Good Lt 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

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 10:42 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.