21-05-2012, 08:03 PM
It was at this link @ post #64. https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...tion/page7. The referenced video is below.
I find the video very persuasive. I called on you to refute it. Over a period of weeks, you finally responded at length @ #64. I found your response to be quite revealing.
Incredible! After all the time and money it took to finally "discover" that a single beam failure led to the entire collapse, imagine if NIST had listened to your speculation. I sounds so reasonable; so simple. I would have found the whole thing much more reasonable, until a couple of seconds later I would have realized that the collapse of the beams in the substation would have had to give in all at once -- not after the ~1.5 sec. it took for the beams to break -- in precise timing -- like timed explosives. No, Jeffrey Orling (!) proclaims the collapse by gravity into the substation. The idiots at NIST were too dumb to know the truth.
At this point, it sounded like you were making it all up. The video forced you to improvise. Once again, I invite anyone here to change my mind.
I withdrew the word "disinformation" to describe you contributions despite their technological detail on the basis of JK's admonition. But I remain skeptical. Obviously.
The pattern is something like the "limited hangout" in a Sunsteinian kind of operation. You admit to a lot, just not the controlled demolition part. Chipping away and dividing the skeptics.
With regards to the e-book, the conclusion:
That's it? After all the work, nobody really knows anything? Sounds like a limited hangout to me.
Once again, that is nothing but my initial position from which I would have to be disabused. You are correct; you don't have to persuade me of anything. I just thought you would want to persuade a skeptic and thereby convince others. It took me finally 3-4 years to finally say I was convinced of the CD theory. I can have my mind changed; it would take a lot now. You are not helping your cause with all the theatrics. You know how I feel about theatre.
I find the video very persuasive. I called on you to refute it. Over a period of weeks, you finally responded at length @ #64. I found your response to be quite revealing.
Quote:How about IF the authorities were aware of the explosions in the sub station and it was their responsibility to protect the public and were exercising their franchise to keep people out of harm's way. As such they would issues comments to the press and so forth to let people know. This happened when a building was on fire this past year adjacent to the metro north rail in Harlem. The entire rail traffic on going north out of Grand Central was stopped and there were advisories issued to the press and public.
Chandler's theories about NT are complete fantasy. Explosives can't create powerful energetic blasts without extemely load percussive noise. Perhaps the mischief was quiet incendiaries.
The sounds heard just prior the the actual downward motion of the curtain wall WAS the collapse the the floors inside the bottom of the building. They likely WERE collapse down onto the sub station... at first in massive slabs... BOOM BOOM.. one after the other until the drop accelerations and the sound merged into a roar and then the curtain wall with nothing behind it collapsed rather silently... compared to what came just before.
Incredible! After all the time and money it took to finally "discover" that a single beam failure led to the entire collapse, imagine if NIST had listened to your speculation. I sounds so reasonable; so simple. I would have found the whole thing much more reasonable, until a couple of seconds later I would have realized that the collapse of the beams in the substation would have had to give in all at once -- not after the ~1.5 sec. it took for the beams to break -- in precise timing -- like timed explosives. No, Jeffrey Orling (!) proclaims the collapse by gravity into the substation. The idiots at NIST were too dumb to know the truth.
At this point, it sounded like you were making it all up. The video forced you to improvise. Once again, I invite anyone here to change my mind.
I withdrew the word "disinformation" to describe you contributions despite their technological detail on the basis of JK's admonition. But I remain skeptical. Obviously.
The pattern is something like the "limited hangout" in a Sunsteinian kind of operation. You admit to a lot, just not the controlled demolition part. Chipping away and dividing the skeptics.
With regards to the e-book, the conclusion:
Quote:How can a very small number of independent researchers map and identify the collapse movement of the WTC towers better than the NIST?
This may be the biggest mystery of the collapses. This in itself should serve as a huge wake-up call to an impartial reader.
Where did the technical records of the collapses go?
The main thesis is that there is no fact-based historic record of the collapses. The true collapse modes of the Twin Towers is not accurately determined within any academic, professional or government literature. It is described incorrectly within history as it is being written. There are, however, millions of people that are falsly certain they know what happened because they believe verifiably incorrect authoritative statements and their own pre-conceived beliefs.
Direct measurements extracted from the visual record of the collapses grossly contradict history as it is generally presented. A record of measurements and documented observables of all 3 collapsed buildings on a level far more intricate than that which previously existed has been presented. The record is verifiably superior to and grossly contradicted by the record provided by U.S. Government agencies.
In reality there is no scientific approach and, therefore, no technical history of the collapses at all. This is a verifiable statement.
That's it? After all the work, nobody really knows anything? Sounds like a limited hangout to me.
Once again, that is nothing but my initial position from which I would have to be disabused. You are correct; you don't have to persuade me of anything. I just thought you would want to persuade a skeptic and thereby convince others. It took me finally 3-4 years to finally say I was convinced of the CD theory. I can have my mind changed; it would take a lot now. You are not helping your cause with all the theatrics. You know how I feel about theatre.
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl