|
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. |
3rd May 2016, 02:39 PM | #41 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
3rd May 2016, 03:13 PM | #42 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
3rd May 2016, 06:50 PM | #43 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
|
If by "fire protection" you mean the insulation sprayed on the columns & beams, I do not believe that this is true. The impact, while causing the violent shaking that caused the stairs to collapse under Barry Jennings & (the lawyer), NISt did not estimate any SFRM loss in the northeast corner.
Originally Posted by NCSTAR1A
However, this impact DID completely incapacitate one aspect of the fire protection: it completely drained the water tanks that fed the sprinkler systems. Those water lines do not have check valves to prevent their being drained by broken pipes. The rooftop water tanks only fed the upper 27 stories or so, so this would not have affected the 5th thru 13th floor, where the lower fires were. However, the city water mains, which fed these lower floors' sprinklers, had been crushed by the collapse of the towers, so no water was available to douse the fires on these lower floors.
Originally Posted by NCSTAR1A
The collapse destroyed the water supply to the sprinklers that, to a high probability, would have put out those small fires before they grew to large ones. Without the collapse doing these two things, WTC7 would still be standing. But, in FF's imagination, the damage shown in those photos is unrelated to the collapse of WTC7... ... because "the damage shown was not the cause of the collapse." |
3rd May 2016, 06:54 PM | #44 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
|
Well, bad news, guys.
I just got a call from the AIA. After careful consideration, they have turned down my request. They were very nice about it. But my proposal didn't meet with their goals. Or some such. |
3rd May 2016, 07:12 PM | #45 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
|
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein "... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK |
|
4th May 2016, 06:31 PM | #46 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
|
Quote:
That photo, and the others, directly refute AE911T's claim that:
Quote:
BTW, while the fires in the N.E. corner around column 79 were the direct cause of WTC 7's collapse, that doesn't necessarily mean that damage and fires elsewhere couldn't have brought it down later. It's just that the N.E. fires worked first. (See also DeMentri video screencap of fires in N.E. corner) Think of an autopsy on a gunshot victim. The medical examiner observes that the victim had two gunshots through the lungs, and a third which severed the aorta. He concludes that the aorta gunshot was the cause of death. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the lung shots couldn't have accomplished the same later. More red herring there. (Maybe we need a new smilie for "red herring"?) AE911T's resolution doesn't deal with WTC 3, which BTW was struck by BOTH WTC 1 and WTC 2, but didn't burn. If you wish to debate whether or not WTC 3 was completely crushed, please start a new thread. It would help if you explain why you think it's significant. But I'll give you a better one: 90 West St. was set ablaze by WTC 2, burned for days thereafter, and did NOT collapse. Any competent structural engineer would be happy to explain to you why. You should try asking one. You can learn much by consulting people more knowledgeable than you, instead of copping an attitude. While you're at it, ask him to explain "scaling". |
4th May 2016, 08:03 PM | #47 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 24,921
|
|
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick |
|
4th May 2016, 08:11 PM | #48 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
4th May 2016, 08:45 PM | #49 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
|
|
4th May 2016, 09:34 PM | #50 |
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
|
While I was hoping it'd get approved (for guerrilla theater applications), I'm not surprised they wouldn't give you the booth next door; have you asked for another booth, one not directly confronting AE911T? It'd seem that having granted the snake oil salesman a booth to peddle political theories, they should be willing to grant you another one to present counter-arguments... but that the idea of counter-selling right next to the attention whore is what they're against because it will just create confrontation. That'd be my take on it if this was my conference. You wouldn't assign space for competing products just adjacent to each other, while you might put them in the same general area for whatever those products are.
Are they going to have the same dog-and-pony show as last time, with presenting AIA member-supporters? At what point does the AIA pass rules to stop this sort of trolling? Are we going to see another rewritten resolution every year? (Alternate question: Is this the same channel they went through last time or a different channel?) Frankly, I'd worry less about their booth than what sort of podium/dais time they get; is there going to be another fracking debate? |
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable. |
|
5th May 2016, 03:46 AM | #51 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 374
|
|
5th May 2016, 03:55 AM | #52 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
|
What did you say when you realized the Basile study made no progress in 2014? And what did you say when you realized the Basile study made no progress in 2015? And what did you say when you realized the Basile study would not be making any progress in 2016? Or 2017? Or ever?
|
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote) The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. (Gilbert Keith Chesterton) |
|
5th May 2016, 03:58 AM | #53 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,502
|
|
5th May 2016, 04:27 AM | #54 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
5th May 2016, 05:23 AM | #55 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/ - one of the dumbest web sites supporting lies of 9/11 truth and mocking the murder of thousands. Is Gage one of your prophets of lies for your faith based web site of woo?
Ouch is right. Web sites like http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/ are great examples of anti-science woo, based on overwhelming ignorance, and paranoia. Gage spread lies and fools a fringe few. Ziggi, where do you guys keep your evidence? Did your evidence get lost? Did the dog eat it? Do the lies of Gage need to be debunked? Only people like you who can't do science fall for the lies of Gage and 9/11 truth. |
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein "... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK |
|
5th May 2016, 05:34 AM | #56 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
|
Can't you ask for a booth elsewhere?
|
5th May 2016, 05:46 AM | #57 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
5th May 2016, 06:33 AM | #58 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
5th May 2016, 06:42 AM | #59 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
|
The AIA must have visited this forum and quickly realized how incredible was the notion that this would be a non confrontational space .. oh, and it must be close to AE911T.
It is easy to find anti-AE911T vitriol in this forum. The thing that the AIA do not wish/intend to risk is a confrontation between AE911T and their opponents. From previous history at this AIA event, they have established trust that AE911T will behave in a professional manner. |
5th May 2016, 07:08 AM | #60 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
5th May 2016, 07:41 AM | #61 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 374
|
|
5th May 2016, 07:48 AM | #62 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
|
|
5th May 2016, 07:53 AM | #63 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
5th May 2016, 08:05 AM | #64 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 470
|
|
5th May 2016, 08:44 AM | #65 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,502
|
Given their stance on Gage, the AIA will just want him to keep to his little truth booth and not disrupt the convention.
As mentioned above, a confrontation between angry architect(s) and fringe cultists, would only give said cultists the oxygen of publicity. |
5th May 2016, 09:09 AM | #66 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,702
|
|
5th May 2016, 09:12 AM | #67 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,702
|
|
5th May 2016, 09:16 AM | #68 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
5th May 2016, 09:17 AM | #69 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
|
5th May 2016, 09:29 AM | #70 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
|
|
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts. |
|
5th May 2016, 09:31 AM | #71 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
5th May 2016, 11:38 AM | #72 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
14 years, no evidence for Gage's claims -
AE911T, dumbed down lies which fool a fringe few who can't think for themselves. AE911T membership is a list of people who have no clue what they signed, or idiots who can't do research.
Not you, not Ziggi, not Gage, not Gage's failed petition signers can present evidence for the fantasy of CD. You never will, Gage never will. Gage is taking in over 500k/yr, and he travels the world. AE911T's only product is paying for Gage's food, travel, and suits - plus the latest equipment... a scam, or Gage believes the dumbed down fantasy he selectively plagraized from 9/11 truth nuts. Pied Piper of woo, with no evidence. It takes ignornace to believe in Gage's lies. 9/11 truth is the anti-intellectual movement of lies - where is your overwhelming evidence? Did Gage lie, where is it, the evidence? If you can't figure out Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, how can you have any credibility to defend the liar Gage? You don't know what evidence is, making it impossible to realize Gage has no evidence for his claims. Gage spreads the lie of CD for years, he has less than 0.1 percent of all engineers to sign a fake petition. That is failure. All the evidence to support Gage's claims in one simple post. Oh gosh, the dog ate it. Only the great movements based on overwhelming evidence can express that evidence so efficiently. 9/11 truth's overwhelming evidence = |
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein "... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK |
|
5th May 2016, 12:10 PM | #73 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 253
|
I am pretty sure that the AIA do not want to have an annual vote on the WTC. I think they need a resolution to stop ae911truth disrupting the convention and creating these stupid resolutions.
How about: The AIA will not consider any further resolutions about the historic events at the World Trade Centre on 9.11.2001. ... you could add without support from 300 members, which would exclude ae911truth forever. or The AIA hereby confirm that they have carefully reviewed the events on 9.11.2001 and can confirm that the collapse of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were solely a result of the plane impacts, and subsequent fires. There is no evidence whatsoever of a controlled demolition. or... what other suggestions could we make for resolutions ? |
5th May 2016, 02:23 PM | #74 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
|
AIA update.
When the person dealing with my request told me that they were turning me down, she told me that a representative from AIA was willing to give me a call & explain. At the time of the phone call, I said that I'd like to get that response, but did not emphasize it in the context of the conversation. I've just sent her a request that this person do give me a call. I've gathered up the questions asked here. If there are any more questions, please ask them quickly. I will ask him any questions that get posted before he/she calls me. |
5th May 2016, 02:31 PM | #75 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
|
|
5th May 2016, 02:39 PM | #76 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 253
|
ah yes you are correct, but it would be a simple way of avoiding another line of fund raising for ae911truth and therefore it would be quite rewarding
And Richard Gage is very proud of his AIA membership so it would be good that he was very proud of an organization who had said there was no evidence of a controlled demolition. So even more rewarding.! |
5th May 2016, 02:52 PM | #77 |
Master Poster
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,323
|
|
__________________
"CD does not prove 9/11 was an inside job. It only proves CD"- FalseFlag |
|
5th May 2016, 03:33 PM | #78 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
|
Originally Posted by Ziggi
Criteria, you are invited to do the same. Since "my forum buddies", to whomever that is supposed to refer, were not part of the picture, their "mentality" is irrelevant. I explicitly stated that I was planning to invite experienced structural engineers from the Philadelphia area. Do you have some problem with their "mentality". Perhaps you have a problem with the fact that knowledge & experience in the pertinent field (structural engineering) allows one to see thru the rampant, trivial errors of AE911T. |
5th May 2016, 04:19 PM | #79 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
|
5th May 2016, 04:30 PM | #80 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|