Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Lauren Johnson]

If you'll notice Tony ducked and ran from my posts about the "corner" jets. David Chandler gets control of the video microphone and assures us he sees evidence of corner charges in the collapse video. He intones this with the solemn voice of expertise and authority. He then tells us careful measurements were taken of the standing corner column. However Chandler failed to take basic careful measurements of the corner jets themselves. If he had he would realize there's no way they were explosions because even the naked eye can see they happen far too slowly to be blasts caused by explosives. Look at the video. The stainless steel facia falls off slowly as if it was pushed away by natural collapse. There's no doubt that if that facia was blasted by an explosives charge it would have been violently blown-off as the explosives charges in the You-Tube demolition video I posted show. Chandler speaks as if he's a credible expert informing the public but he makes a basic clownish mistake with his corner column charges claim. He's dishonest because he himself realizes this which is why he then adds that perhaps the cut was made with a thermite cutter pack. However any look at the You-Tube video of such thermite cutter packs shows that they burn with extreme intensity and sparkles. The corner columns are right flush with the facade. If such thermite packs were responsible for the corner collapse you would have seen red hot sparkling cutter burns occurring. Look at the video. They're not there.


I pointed-out that Chandler claimed the initiating impetus for the collapse were explosives charges near the 98th floor. This conflicts with Tony's claim that there were no explosives in that area and the collapse was caused by a thermite burn. Tony admitted the smoke billows in the upper section were too slow to be charges and said they were cutter packs instead. This means Tony conflicts directly with David Chandler.


You can't just ignore this stuff and still have credibility.

I will be reviewing this. I was focusing more on Jeffrey's cartoon's.

Albert, I do recall that when you, Jeffrey and I were going at it over the Banfield video, you were not able to dismiss it out of hand -- unlike Jeffrey. I give you credit for that.

Question: what is at stake for the natural vs. CD causes for the collapse of the buildings? Clearly it must be more than the disinterested search for truth. You are quite passionate in your exchanges with Tony.

Another question: here is a quote from the Albert Doyle way back machine:

I think JO should take some time off and return with a depersonalized defense of his position vs analysis of the Banfield oscilloscope. The personal stuff detracts from the arguments in my opinion and should be avoided.


I'd be interested in his answer to the booms.


I'd also be interested in NIST's answer to many emergency personnel saying they were going to bring it down.
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10762-World-Trade-Center-Buildings-(and-Others-)-Pre-Rigged-for-Controlled-Demolition-A-Hypothesis/page3

What persuaded you to so forcefully join JO side?