9-11 Presentation at NMSR, May 19 2010

DaveThomasNMSR · 20th May 2010, 08:00 AM

I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason.

My slides are online here.

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

Quote:

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

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

Comments welcomed!

Cheers, Dave Thomas

ElMondoHummus · 20th May 2010, 08:02 AM

Hello, Dave. Thank you for this. I'll definitely look those over when I get a chance.

EvilBiker · 20th May 2010, 08:59 AM

I've just one (somewhat unrelated) comment to make:

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

Cheers, Dave!

And now, on to NMSR!

cyclonic · 20th May 2010, 11:46 AM

Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.

Baylor · 20th May 2010, 09:16 PM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason.

My slides are online here.

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

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

Comments welcomed!

Cheers, Dave Thomas

Thanks Dave much appreciated.

DaveThomasNMSR · 20th May 2010, 09:18 PM

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

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

Cheers, Dave

Oystein · 21st May 2010, 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by cyclonic

Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.

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

triforcharity · 21st May 2010, 05:45 AM

I can only find one error in your slides.

You didn't capatalize Pentagon.

That is it!

Very informative!

DaveThomasNMSR · 21st May 2010, 09:39 AM

Thanks for the kind words!

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

Cheers, Dave

grandmastershek · 21st May 2010, 10:14 AM

i would also recommend including that thermite, of any sort, in and of itself is not explosive.

Thunder · 21st May 2010, 10:19 AM

isn't "fire proofing" more correctly known as "thermal insulation"?

Seymour Butz · 21st May 2010, 10:38 AM

Heh.

Bjorkman.

Wolrab · 21st May 2010, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

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

Cheers, Dave

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

DaveThomasNMSR · 21st May 2010, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Wolrab

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

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

Cheers, Dave

Telltale Tom · 21st May 2010, 07:19 PM

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

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

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

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

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

triforcharity · 21st May 2010, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by Telltale Tom

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nicely done sir, especially this part....

Quote:

we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.

CurtC · 24th May 2010, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy.

For Windows users, a program that works beautifully is PDF Creator - any program that can print, can make PDFs. The PDF Creator program is a virtual printer - in any application, you go through the steps to print, and "PDF Creator" appears as one of your printer selections. Choose that, choose Print, and then it prompts you for a few more details like file names etc., and presto, you get a PDF file.

BigAl · 24th May 2010, 08:09 AM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Cheers, Dave

Freeware called PDF995 has woked for me for years on countless machines. It creates a psedo-printer that any Windows app can print to..

bio · 24th May 2010, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by cyclonic

Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.

how could the fire burn so long at one place?

beachnut · 24th May 2010, 09:38 AM

How does 911 truth remain dumb over 8 years with no end in sight? They can't answer their own questions. Given all the answers on 911 and 8 years to gain knowledge, they ask moronic smart alec questions and can't figure out 911.

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

Quote:

... ae911truth presentations.

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

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

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

rwguinn · 24th May 2010, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Telltale Tom

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

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

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

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

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

SOMEBODY owes me a new keyboard. And a Mojito-fresh made, not bottled mix. Damn it, those were the last mint leaves I can take and keep the damn plant alive!
Not naming any names, but...

newton3376 · 25th May 2010, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Cheers, Dave

Hmmmmm....I use CutePDF regularly.....I thought it was pretty good actually....

DaveThomasNMSR · 26th May 2010, 03:49 PM

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

Here's a snippet:

Quote:

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

Chris Boros
Assistant Producer - Coast to Coast AM

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

Cheers, Dave

Telltale Tom · 26th May 2010, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Here's a snippet:

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

Cheers, Dave

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

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

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

I don't think that the establishment really cares what Richard Gage thinks.

grandmastershek · 26th May 2010, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Here's a snippet:

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

Cheers, Dave

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

Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti

rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey

Mr.D · 26th May 2010, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by Telltale Tom

more exclamation marks

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

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

ProBonoShill · 26th May 2010, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by grandmastershek

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

Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti

rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey

Add Mark I. to our side, I'd love to see this go down, it would be an ass kicking of epic proportions.

newton3376 · 27th May 2010, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Here's a snippet:

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

Cheers, Dave

Sweet....

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

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

Either way I say go for it Dave....what you have done so far was excellent work.

grandmastershek · 28th May 2010, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Mr.D

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

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

i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS.

Grizzly Bear · 28th May 2010, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

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

Here's a snippet:

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

Cheers, Dave

Dunno if I'll join you for the full show but I might consider calling in if I can stay up late enough to listen to it. I'd actually like to confront the guy on a few points that have had me concerned for a while. Mackey and a few others would be more qualified participants if they chose to join in since they have much more comprehensive knowledge on the stuff than I do.

alienentity · 28th May 2010, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by cyclonic

Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.

2 relevant points to add to this:

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

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

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

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

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

So you have clear, documented evidence of both fire-induced failures and loss of fire-proofing materials. See FEMA, 2002, p. 4-19 for actual samples of failed connections. Nowhere was any evidence found to indicate cutter charges, or demolition artifacts of any kind - that's just not the way the buildings failed.

Seymour Butz · 29th May 2010, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by alienentity

4) Thermal expansion is understood to be the major culprit in the collapse of WTC 7,

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

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

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

3- ditto for the connection - never a part of the design criteria and not considered.

DaveThomasNMSR · 31st May 2010, 05:52 PM

These are awesome points! Thanks!

Cheers, Dave

Mr.D · 31st May 2010, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by grandmastershek

i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS.

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

DaveThomasNMSR · 4th June 2010, 11:26 AM

Looks like Gage needs more prep time! We've been delayed until July 10th.

Cheers, Dave

newton3376 · 4th June 2010, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

Looks like Gage needs more prep time! We've been delayed until July 10th.

Cheers, Dave

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

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

Who knows really.....there are so many things that Richard needs to learn....like the difference between Newtons third law and the conservation of momentum.....give the man some time Dave

DaveThomasNMSR · 15th June 2010, 09:58 PM

Well, it's been delayed again - this time to July 31st.

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

Cheers, Dave

DaveThomasNMSR · 15th June 2010, 10:14 PM

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

Quote:

(TBD = To Be Determined; TBA = To Be Announced)
No Current or Upcoming Interviews

Quite different from our NMSR 9-11 page.

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

Cheers, Dave

Edx · 28th June 2010, 05:46 AM

Hey Dave,

Points they will undoubtably bring up...

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

Just sayin be prepared

I've seen people caught off guard with their nonsense.

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

newton3376 · 28th June 2010, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Edx

Hey Dave,

Points they will undoubtably bring up...

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

Just sayin be prepared

I've seen people caught off guard with their nonsense.

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

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

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

You just never know what wild and wacky theories those truthers will bring up......

20th May 2010, 08:00 AM	#1
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	9-11 Presentation at NMSR, May 19 2010 I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason. My slides are online here. The slides explain a physics model for the twin towers collapse; the video of the comparison of model results to actual is online here: Quote: Dave Thomas's physics model of the tower collapse, compared to actual.The two small red squares falling on the right represent objects dropped from the top (110th) and impact-level (96th) stories, and these are in true freefall. The towers are clearly falling at less than freefall speeds in this physics analysis. The horizontal red lines (top of WTC1, top of WFC3, top of WTC7, and ground level) were used to calibrate the scale of the plot. The PDF has results, compares them to Bazant, etc. Comments welcomed! Cheers, Dave Thomas
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

20th May 2010, 08:02 AM	#2
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 12,282	Hello, Dave. Thank you for this. I'll definitely look those over when I get a chance.
	__________________ "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."

20th May 2010, 08:59 AM	#3
EvilBiker Spectral Challenger Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Berlin Posts: 1,574	I've just one (somewhat unrelated) comment to make: Dave was my skeptic catalyst, and is responsible for me joining JREF all those years ago. Cheers, Dave! And now, on to NMSR!
	__________________ Flat Earth Theory: The unfortunate result of ordering pizza to satisfy munchies after smoking way too much weed to bring you down from that hectic acid trip.

20th May 2010, 11:46 AM	#4
cyclonic Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 975	Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours.
cyclonic Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 975

20th May 2010, 09:16 PM	#5
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR I gave a 9-11 presentation last night at the monthly meeting of NMSR, New Mexicans for Science and Reason. My slides are online here. The slides explain a physics model for the twin towers collapse; the video of the comparison of model results to actual is online here: The PDF has results, compares them to Bazant, etc. Comments welcomed! Cheers, Dave Thomas Thanks Dave much appreciated.
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394

20th May 2010, 09:18 PM	#6
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	PDF Updated - AE911 and Incompetence I've updated the post, including some new clarifying points, and have added a couple of new slides about Truthers' criticism during the Q&A. This was about my supposedly being unfair to say that the architects and engineers behind AE911Truth.org are incompetent. I contend they are incompetent, and offer proof in slide # 42. Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

21st May 2010, 04:10 AM	#7
Oystein Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 18,611	Originally Posted by cyclonic Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours. You know that this argument can be picked apart quite easily: The fire rating does not apply to the entire building, but to individual structural elements. Fires burning for 7 hours *not equal to* any individual member exposed to more than x°C for 7 hours.

21st May 2010, 05:45 AM	#8
triforcharity Banned Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 13,961	I can only find one error in your slides. You didn't capatalize Pentagon. That is it! Very informative!
triforcharity Banned Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 13,961

21st May 2010, 09:39 AM	#9
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	Thanks for the kind words! One thing we noticed during the evening was that the truthers wanted to quibble about everything I said, but when audience members or I asked what they thought the answer was, they became silent. Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

21st May 2010, 10:14 AM	#10
grandmastershek Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,461	i would also recommend including that thermite, of any sort, in and of itself is not explosive.

21st May 2010, 10:19 AM	#11
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 34,918	isn't "fire proofing" more correctly known as "thermal insulation"?
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 34,918

21st May 2010, 10:38 AM	#12
Seymour Butz Muse Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 884	Heh. Bjorkman.
Seymour Butz Muse Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 884

21st May 2010, 12:43 PM	#13
Wolrab Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 4,832	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR I've updated the post, including some new clarifying points, and have added a couple of new slides about Truthers' criticism during the Q&A. This was about my supposedly being unfair to say that the architects and engineers behind AE911Truth.org are incompetent. I contend they are incompetent, and offer proof in slide # 42. Cheers, Dave Come on! Are you seriously proposing that it is possible to change/edit a power point presentation? You would have to click on things and type and all that. If it was possible, Gage could have fixed his years ago by highlighting the file and pressing delete.
Wolrab Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 4,832

21st May 2010, 02:20 PM	#14
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	Originally Posted by Wolrab Come on! Are you seriously proposing that it is possible to change/edit a power point presentation? You would have to click on things and type and all that. If it was possible, Gage could have fixed his years ago by highlighting the file and pressing delete. I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy. Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

21st May 2010, 07:19 PM	#15
Telltale Tom Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 384	I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations. Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across. Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy. our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy. You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal.
Telltale Tom Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 384

21st May 2010, 09:01 PM	#16
triforcharity Banned Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 13,961	Originally Posted by Telltale Tom I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations. Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across. Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy. our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy. You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal. Well, as if there was any doubt before, it is conclusive that you have a wonderful talent for parody. Nicely done sir, especially this part.... Quote: we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy.
triforcharity Banned Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 13,961

24th May 2010, 08:00 AM	#17
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,785	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy. For Windows users, a program that works beautifully is PDF Creator - any program that can print, can make PDFs. The PDF Creator program is a virtual printer - in any application, you go through the steps to print, and "PDF Creator" appears as one of your printer selections. Choose that, choose Print, and then it prompts you for a few more details like file names etc., and presto, you get a PDF file.
	__________________ Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.

24th May 2010, 08:09 AM	#18
BigAl Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,397	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy. Cheers, Dave Freeware called PDF995 has woked for me for years on countless machines. It creates a psedo-printer that any Windows app can print to..
BigAl Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 5,397	__________________ ------ Eric Pode of Croydon Chief Assistant to the Assistance Chief, Dept of Redundancy Dept.

24th May 2010, 08:22 AM	#19
bio Muse Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by cyclonic Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours. how could the fire burn so long at one place?
bio Muse Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 883	__________________ January 10, 2003, Senator Charles Grassley (R): "not only has no one in government been fired or punished for 9/11, but several others have been promoted." Last edited by bio; 24th May 2010 at 08:28 AM.

24th May 2010, 09:38 AM	#20
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 26,120	How does 911 truth remain dumb over 8 years with no end in sight? They can't answer their own questions. Given all the answers on 911 and 8 years to gain knowledge, they ask moronic smart alec questions and can't figure out 911. Here is a parody of AE911truth on how stupid AE911truth is as they spew lies about 911. Quote: ... ae911truth presentations. Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across. Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy. our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy. ...
	Last edited by beachnut; 24th May 2010 at 09:45 AM.

24th May 2010, 05:41 PM	#21
rwguinn Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 11,098	Originally Posted by Telltale Tom I think you have a long way to go before your powerpoints are up to the quality of the ae911truth presentations. Look at our fonts, we have much fewer words, more exclamation marks, clearer font, so we can get the message of conspiracy across. Our movies are integrated into the presentations much more effectively and we have a quiet voice-over on top of chilling music that heightens the expectation of fear and conspiracy. our meticulously careful extracts of eyewitness statements simply reinforces the sense of doom combined with expert testimony from oh, err a physics teacher really helps to explain the conspiracy. You need a much better production manager if you expect to get a decent book deal. SOMEBODY owes me a new keyboard. And a Mojito-fresh made, not bottled mix. Damn it, those were the last mint leaves I can take and keep the damn plant alive! Not naming any names, but...
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275

25th May 2010, 10:14 AM	#22
newton3376 The Truth Movement.....still not at 1% Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,320	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR I swear, I really did edit and update the presentation! One thing in my favor is that I have OpenOffice, which lets you export a Powerpoint file to PDF quite nicely. I tried CutePDF too, but that was pretty crummy. Cheers, Dave Hmmmmm....I use CutePDF regularly.....I thought it was pretty good actually....
	__________________ AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%

26th May 2010, 03:49 PM	#23
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	Calling A Few Good Experts The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks. Here's a snippet: Quote: Mr. Thomas: We'd like to have you on Coast to Coast AM for a 9/11 truth debate with Richard Gage on Saturday, June 19, for the full 4 hour program. You and Mr. Gage will be the point persons for either side of the debate, which will go for as long as 4 hours. You may bring on experts of your choosing to bolster your side. Are you interested? Thanks for your time, Chris Boros Assistant Producer - Coast to Coast AM I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue. Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

26th May 2010, 05:06 PM	#24
Telltale Tom Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 384	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks. Here's a snippet: I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue. Cheers, Dave I hope you enjoy. So what do you think will be more effective for ae911truth.? If the top engineers like Les Robertson, Ramone Gilsanz, David Scott, Ron Hamburger plus top academics like Bazant, Toreo, plus the top NIST people like Shyam Sunder and John Gross, all line up to speak to the Architect of Destruction, and to repeat their previous statements that Richard does not know what he is talking about. Or if nobody shows up, except truthers and we re-run the Q&A we had at the last joint ae911 and Firefighters911. Its not difficult for us to fill 4 hours with soft questions. I don't think that the establishment really cares what Richard Gage thinks.
Telltale Tom Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 384

26th May 2010, 05:34 PM	#25
grandmastershek Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,461	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks. Here's a snippet: I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue. Cheers, Dave OMG! you need an all-star cast! here are my dream teams: Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey

26th May 2010, 08:14 PM	#26
Mr.D Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,178	Originally Posted by Telltale Tom more exclamation marks I think you've hit on something here. Someone should start an "Exclamation Marks for 9/11 Truth" organization. I bet it gets to 1000 members faster than the A&E for 9/11 Truth group.
	__________________ GENERATION 3: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and kill the great-great-great-great-grandfather of the person you copied it from. Time travel experiment.

26th May 2010, 10:42 PM	#27
ProBonoShill Master Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 2,323	Originally Posted by grandmastershek OMG! you need an all-star cast! here are my dream teams: Kooks: gage, s jones, griffin, szamboti rationalists: thomas, gravy, robertson, mackey Add Mark I. to our side, I'd love to see this go down, it would be an ass kicking of epic proportions.

27th May 2010, 11:41 AM	#28
newton3376 The Truth Movement.....still not at 1% Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,320	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks. Here's a snippet: I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue. Cheers, Dave Sweet.... I would love to see another debate between some experienced debunkers and the "truth" movement....maybe you can sway some fence sitting truthers of the errors of their ways.... Hopefully you can convince Mark Roberts and Ryan Mackey to join you...plus there are several others here who would be a good fit especially in the sturctural engineering area like "Newtons Bit" and "TFK".... Either way I say go for it Dave....what you have done so far was excellent work.
	__________________ AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1% Last edited by newton3376; 27th May 2010 at 11:43 AM.

28th May 2010, 08:03 AM	#29
grandmastershek Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,461	Originally Posted by Mr.D I think you've hit on something here. Someone should start an "Exclamation Marks for 9/11 Truth" organization. I bet it gets to 1000 members faster than the A&E for 9/11 Truth group. i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS.

28th May 2010, 12:05 PM	#30
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 7,866	Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR The game is afoot! Gage wants to debate me on Coast-to-Coast AM in a few weeks. Here's a snippet: I've told them I am interested. Any skeptics out there feel like bellying up to the bar with me? Send me a message, or a nomination of someone particularly up on their Gage knowledge and with glib tongue. Cheers, Dave Dunno if I'll join you for the full show but I might consider calling in if I can stay up late enough to listen to it. I'd actually like to confront the guy on a few points that have had me concerned for a while. Mackey and a few others would be more qualified participants if they chose to join in since they have much more comprehensive knowledge on the stuff than I do.
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 7,866	__________________ Current Set:http://i.imgur.com/IoqiUdK.jpg

28th May 2010, 09:39 PM	#31
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,325	Originally Posted by cyclonic Very good dave! the only thing i would add is that the fire proofing on the steel in WTC 7 was rated for 2 hours and the fires burned for 7 hours. 2 relevant points to add to this: 1) IIRC when WTC7 was built UL wasn't actually testing 30ft+ spans were they? When the original fire rating of 2 hrs was given, was that theoretical or actual? 2) A certain amount of spray foam fire-proofing was knocked off the structural steel, as witnessed in the other WTC buildings. This would affect the ability of the structure to withstand a fire, and obviously invalidate the fire-rating. 3) Other WTC buildings, notably building 5 suffered structural collapses due to fire. This is well documented in Structure Magazine, for example: http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=525 http://www.structuremag.org/images/0208-sf-1.jpg 4) Thermal expansion is understood to be the major culprit in the collapse of WTC 7, which is different from the failures of the towers, which experienced sagging trusses and commensurate inward bowing of the perimeter columns. So you have clear, documented evidence of both fire-induced failures and loss of fire-proofing materials. See FEMA, 2002, p. 4-19 for actual samples of failed connections. Nowhere was any evidence found to indicate cutter charges, or demolition artifacts of any kind - that's just not the way the buildings failed.
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,325	__________________ Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!' 000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.' mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

29th May 2010, 11:30 AM	#32
Seymour Butz Muse Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 884	Originally Posted by alienentity 4) Thermal expansion is understood to be the major culprit in the collapse of WTC 7, In addition to this point, don't forget that: 1- The insulation is estimated to have done its job - the steel prolly didn't get all that hot - 250-300C (?) 2- thermal expansion of floor beams and girders wasn't considered as a part of the design criteria. Not sure if it is NOW, but I believe it was recommended by NIST as a result of their investigations. 3- ditto for the connection - never a part of the design criteria and not considered.
Seymour Butz Muse Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 884

31st May 2010, 05:52 PM	#33
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	These are awesome points! Thanks! Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877

31st May 2010, 07:37 PM	#34
Mr.D Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,178	Originally Posted by grandmastershek i've considered doing a study on the correlation between the tendency towards believing CT's and the compulsion of hitting CAPS. What if we've got it backwards? Maybe there's a causative relationship; Hitting CAPS causes you to believe in CTs!
	__________________ GENERATION 3: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and kill the great-great-great-great-grandfather of the person you copied it from. Time travel experiment.

4th June 2010, 11:26 AM	#35
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877	Debate Postponed Looks like Gage needs more prep time! We've been delayed until July 10th. Cheers, Dave
DaveThomasNMSR Muse Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 877