Political Talks Archive

1st page | 2nd page | 3rd page | 4th page | 5th page | 6th page | 7th page | 8th page | 9th page | 10th page | 11th page | 12th page | 13th page | 14th page | 15th page | 16th page | 17th page | 18th page | 19th page | 20th page | 21th page | 22th page | 23th page | 24th page | 25th page





Subject:
Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11

investigation !!

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:19:36 -0700 (PDT)

Organization: http://groups.google.com

Lines: 10

















On Mar 30, 6:22=A0pm, Henry <9...(at)insidejob.gov> wrote:



> =A0 I notice that you`re again trying to avoid the facts and

> evidence by impotently "attacking" the messenger. Apparently,

> the founder ofhttp://ae911truth.org/and the 300 plus members

> haven`t written anything that you can quote as misleaidig or

> innaccurate.



I`m suggesting that the people you present as

"experts" aren`t.









Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
GO >>>

From: Rob Kleinschmidt
Subject: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
investigation !!
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 53








On Mar 30, 7:47=A0pm, Henry wrote:
> Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:

> > People like Quintierre will find problems with parts of the
> > analysis and sugest alternatives.
>
> > Start with the credentials of the nist team
> >http://wtc.nist.gov/pi/
>
> =A0 Why aren`t Thomas Eagar`s blatant errors mentioned by
> his peers on the NISTY team?

I think the NIST team was tasked with a report
on the collapse, not on an investigation of Eager.

Their report has also been reviewed by faculties
and working engineers all over the world. Eager
is a straw man.

> > and compare them with this guy Gage, whose
> > career seems to be building sandwich shops
> > and gymnasiums.
>
> =A0 Does Gage provide any facts or evidence as blatantly
> wrong as Eagar`s? Does he provide any facts or evdidence
> that you disagree with? If so, what?
>

The accusation that the ISCE is participating in a
conspiracy. This would pretty much require world
wide assistance from their colleagues and peers
as well as their entire membership.

Questioning an analysis is how we learn. Making
wildass conspiracy accusations is not. When
the people making these accusations don`t have
the credentials that would get them a job or permit
a reasonable analysis, I would call that irresponsible.

> > I would not attempt to explain the exact causes of the
> > collapse, though perhaps somebody in the Cornell
> > school of engineering might walk you through it if
> > you asked nicely.
>
> =A0 I already tried. They won`t discuss it. But that was last year.
> I`ll try again.

I think we can safely assume they don`t agree with
you or take you seriously, possibly because they
see you as accusing their friends and colleagues
of a coverup with no reasonable basis for that accusation.


Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
GO >>>

From: "S`mee"
Subject: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
investigation !!
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 06:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 61









On Mar 30, 9:51=A0pm, Henry wrote:
> S`mee wrote:
> > Henry bring those loons ALL 300 with you. I`ll use small words that a
> > 8th grader will understand.
>
> =A0 Use them here and now to explain the sudden explosive
> disintegration of the undamaged side of WTC2`s perimeter
> frame.
>
> =A0 Observe the rotating and disintegrating block on the South
> Tower.
>
> =A0http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp4.html

Yep typical when you loose STRENGTH in more than one pillar on one
side. At which time structures typically twist and collapse. Heat
causes steel to loose strength...

> =A0 Notice that the corners are curved, as the block`s internal
> destruction is already taking place. If it had not been destroyed
> through demolition, it would have continued to rotate and fall off
> the building as an intact block. Also, notice that the block is
> tilting towards the corner where it was impacted. The opposite
> corner was undamaged by impact or fire, as proved by photo
> evidence.
>
> =A0http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp1.html

See my above answer.

> =A0 As the top section of that tower is rotating, the high strength,
> fire resistant perimeter columns on one side of the building are
> being compressed, and on the opposite side, where the building
> was not damaged by fire or impact, the weight above them is greatly
> reduced.


Actually they are not only compressing they are DEFLECTING to the side
IF you could see you`d note most collums bend the same direction.

> =A0 Why do you think the undamaged steel perimeter frame with reduced
> weight above it is exploding and collapsing at the same rate as
> the fire and impact damaged side that has most of the weight of the
> rotating block on it? Seems more than a little odd, doesn`t it? Here`s
> some information on the perimeter columns.
>

What reduced weight? Were did it go? It was all still THERE.

> =A0http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html

So? Their research never has involved any practical exercises on a
true full scale. Not only that...the perimeter beams all performed
exactly to specification at which point the failure state kicked in
and everything fell down much like these rather specieous claims from
the truth nutters.

--
Keith S
Sorry about your invisible friend and the straw man...everybody has to
grow up.




Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
GO >>>

From: Rob Kleinschmidt
Subject: Re: !! Architects and Engineers expose cover-up and request new 9-11
investigation !!
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 38









On Mar 31, 5:45 pm, Henry wrote:
> Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 6:22 pm, Henry wrote:
>
> >> I notice that you`re again trying to avoid the facts and
> >> evidence by impotently "attacking" the messenger. Apparently,
> >> the founder ofhttp://ae911truth.org/andthe 300 plus members
> >> haven`t written anything that you can quote as misleaidig or
> >> innaccurate.
> > I`m suggesting that the people you present as
> > "experts" aren`t.
>
> Not one of the many hundreds, eh? They`re all kooks and liars,
> and only the "experts" like your guy Eagar, who agrees with
> the Bush regime know what they`re talking about, right?

You asked if I still believed that nobody in the
structural engineering community believed your
bullshit. After examining the resumes of your "experts",
my answer is yes I still believe that.
Which of your guys would qualify in court as an
expert witness ? Which of them could get a lead
job on a high rise project.

You`ve got the NIST team and qualified engineers
all over the world in agreement with them that your
demolition theory doesn`t work.

I said a few posts back, that a smart person can change
their mind while a stupid one continues to try to argue
non-facts into existence. As everybody expected, you
continue to argue.

Several months back, you predicted a groundswell
of public opinion. How are you doing on that anyway ?

Carry on.




Title: Fundamentalism check.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 05:40:33 +0000
Author: Glen

Secret Service investigating Facebook poll on “should President Obama be assassinated?”

Maybe this should go without saying to the Christians who read this blog, but I think if this were a Jeff Foxworthy sketch where he’d say “If you voted yes in the “Should Obama be assassinated” Poll, you might be a fundamentalist.” And that would probably be true.


More on: http://hiddennessofblog.wordpress.com/2009/09/29/fundamentalism-check/











Powered by Lv501.com