9/11 - WTC Building 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions

He was wrong and NIST explained what the 9 and 11 seconds were. You just want to ignore it because it proves you wrong.

 

Quit cherry picking and post the whole quote, I have you to be honest in other threads and this one is no different. You're lying and you know it. Post the whole quote.

 

BJ thinks Cole is lying?

 

No,he didn't......He only stated why he THINKS so.

 

No, I do not think Cole is lying.

 

So it was incendiaries and not explosives like YOU claim?

 

I have had no experience blowing things up. According to the dictionary an incendiary is an explosive.

 

Like I asked in the other thread, you think it was a "go boom" explosives and not a thermite, incendiary, cause fire explosive.

So you disagree with Cole?

- - - Updated - - -

Like I asked in the other thread, you think it was a "go boom" explosives and not a thermite, incendiary, cause fire explosive.

So you disagree with Cole?

 

I don't know how they blew the buildings up. I know how they didn't do it. Airplanes and office fires didn't do it.

 

According to your earlier posts, you were an expert in demolitions, having worked in the industry for years.
Were you lying then or are you lying now?

 

You should actually try and read what I write. Did I somehow get in the third grade forum?
I spent 20 years in the building industry. I earned a Class A General Contracting license. While I was qualified to pull a permit to demolish buildings I never demolished any buildings. I built many buildings. I was an expert in building buildings not in demolishing them.

 

Nice backpedal. You are certainly an expert in that.

 

well there you go, an expert in building buildings, in debunker land that means you are not qualified to build a building.

You need to be a registered debunker and certified physics failure to qualify.

shame on you backpedalling to to what you actually said not the debunker created strawman they accuse you of saying.

 

A - General Engineering ContractorBusiness & Professions Code
Division 3, Chapter 9. Contractors, Article 4. Classifications


7056. A general engineering contractor is a contractor whose principal contracting business is in connection with fixed works requiring specialized engineering knowledge and skill, including the following divisions or subjects: irrigation, drainage, water power, water supply, flood control, inland waterways, harbors, docks and wharves, shipyards and ports, dams and hydroelectric projects, levees, river control and reclamation works, railroads, highways, streets and roads, tunnels, airports and airways, sewers and sewage disposal plants and systems, waste reduction plants, bridges, overpasses, underpasses and other similar works, pipelines and other systems for the transmission of petroleum and other liquid or gaseous substances, parks, playgrounds and other recreational works, refineries, chemical plants and similar industrial plants requiring specialized engineering knowledge and skill, powerhouses, power plants and other utility plants and installations, mines and metallurgical plants, land leveling and earthmoving projects, excavating, grading, trenching, paving and surfacing work and cement and concrete works in connection with the above mentioned fixed works...

http://www.cslb.ca.gov/GeneralInfor...sifications/AGeneralEngineeringContractor.asp

interesting...

- - - Updated - - -

Being able to build a building and design a building are 2 different things, but an honest person knows that.

 

Finally somebody can read! The debunkers of truth are just full of nonsense, and it is always the exact same group.

 

I earned a Class A General Contracting license

but in debunker land that doesnt mean you are as qualified as a debunker who cant spell physics.

 

You mean like you and the brother spelling it fiziks? spelling it isn't the hard part, understanding it is. And you 2 "building contractors" have proven neither one of you grasp the concept.

 

you were not a Professional Engineer.

you did not earn a Masters degree in Civil Engineering or Architecture.

you were not licensed with the AIA.

with all due respect, you were NOT an expert in building buildings.


it is very silly & dishonest for you to claim that you were.

 

truthers come up with the right answer, high school kids come up with the right answer, debunkers well not even one has come close to the right answer!

 

Answer the Fizix problem if you can.

 

I find d j lunacee to be exactly what he calls himself.

 

I find you to be an absolute liar, and a hypocrite, your point? You have a lot of nerve asking/demanding someone to answer a problem when you refuse to do the same when asked of you. This makes you worthless. 2006 called, it wanted you to know you have been debunked for 7 years.

"A new era": The limits of engineering expertise in a post-9/11 world
Pfatteicher, S.K.A. 2007 International Symposium on Technology and Society, Proceedings, art. no. 4362228

Progressive collapse of the World Trade Center: Simple analysis
Seffen, K.A. 2008 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 134 (2), pp. 125-132

Scale modeling of the 96th floor of world trade center tower 1
Wang, M., Chang, P., Quintiere, J., Marshall, A. 2007 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 21 (6), pp. 414-421

Failure of welded floor truss connections from the exterior wall during collapse of the world trade center towers
Banovic, S.W., Siewert, T.A. 2007 Welding Journal (Miami, Fla) 86 (9), pp. 263-s-272-s

The collapse of the world trade center towers: A metallurgist's view
Gayle, F.W. 2007 MRS Bulletin 32 (9), pp. 710-716

Building code changes reflect world trade center investigation
Hansen, B. 2007 Civil Engineering 77 (9), pp. 22+24-25

The structural steel of the World Trade Center towers
Gayle, F.W., Banovic, S.W., Foecke, T., Fields, R.J., Luecke, W.E., McColskey, J.D., McCown, C., Siewert, T.A. 2006 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 6 (5), pp. 5-8

Progressive collapse of structures: Annotated bibliography and comparison of codes and standards
Mohamed, O.A. 2006 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 20 (4), art. no. 001604QCF, pp. 418-425

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics
Baum, H.R., Rehm, R.G., Quintiere, J.G. 2005 Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30 II, pp. 2247-2254

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center
Karim, M.R., Hoo Fatt, M.S. 2005 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 131 (10), pp. 1066-1072

High-fidelity simulation of large-scale structures
Hoffmann, C., Sameh, A., Grama, A. 2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3515 (II), pp. 664-671

Collapses of the world trade center towers
[No author name available] 2005 Indian Concrete Journal 79 (, pp. 11-16

Industry updates: Fireproofing, staircases cited in World Trade Center report
[No author name available] 2005 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 5 (4), pp. 34

September 11 and fracture mechanics - A retrospective
Cherepanov, G.P. 2005 International Journal of Fracture 132 (2), pp. L25-L26

Structural responses of World Trade Center under aircraft attacks
Omika, Y., Fukuzawa, E., Koshika, N., Morikawa, H., Fukuda, R. 2005 Journal of Structural Engineering 131 (1), pp. 6-15

Impact of the 2001 World Trade Center attack on critical interdependent infrastructures
Mendonça, D., Lee II, E.E., Wallace, W.A. 2004 Conference Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 5, pp. 4053-4058

Use of high-efficiency energy absorbing device to arrest progressive collapse of tall building
Zhou, Q., Yu, T.X. 2004 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130 (10), pp. 1177-1187

Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse
Marjanishvili, S.M. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 79-85

Lessons learned on improving resistance of buildings to terrorist attacks
Corley, W.G. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 68-78

Anatomy of a disaster: A structural investigation of the World Trade Center collapses
Abboud, N., Levy, M., Tennant, D., Mould, J., Levine, H., King, S., Ekwueme, C., (...), Hart, G. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 360-370

World Trade Center disaster: Damage/debris assessment
Thater, G.G., Panariello, G.F., Cuoco, D.A. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 383-392

How did the WTC towers collapse: A new theory
Usmani, A.S., Chung, Y.C., Torero, J.L. 2003 Fire Safety Journal 38 (6), pp. 501-533

Microstructural analysis of the steels from Buildings 7, & 1 or 2 from the World Trade Center
Biederman, R.R., Sullivan, E.M., Sisson Jr., R.D., Vander Voort, G.F. 2003 Microscopy and Microanalysis 9 (SUPPL. 2), pp. 550-551

Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

Analysis of the thermal exposure in the impact areas of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks
Beyler, C., White, D., Peatross, M., Trellis, J., Li, S., Luers, A., Hopkins, D. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 371-382

Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.

Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.

Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
(also available on-line)

Experts, real science, published, peer reviewed. Not paid for. Real Engineers, not general contractors who claim impossible yet can offer no proof of why it is impossible except their own disbelief. Fire experts, CD experts all telling you what exactly caused the collapse of the towers. I see your experts and raise you another 130,000 in relevant fields. Or are they all in on it? One of us is in denial, and it ain't me.

 

You are not seriously citing Thomas Eagar as a legitimate engineer, are you? He is a shill! That is at its finest. He has done more to discredit the MIT engineering department than Nathan Bedford Forrest did to keep the blacks enslaved. That is serious

 

how ironic.

- - - Updated - - -

lol!!!

nice cherry picking.

what about the many other papers?

- - - Updated - - -

good to see all the REAL experts are telling the truth about 9-11

 

You are not really citing Richard Gage as a high rise expert are you? Can you even point me to one paper, one of your experts has published in a respectable publication? Sorry, Bentham pay for publishing Journal is not respected.