The NIST 9/11 Scam Exposed in All Its Glory

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, May 30, 2016.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gravity is indeed predictable, and it is not capable of moving things horizontally, yet we are supposed to believe no explosive devices were involved.
     
  2. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    .The towers fell into their own footprint. Atta was very successful. He tuned up every conspiracy nut on the planet, made Bush invade Iraq and made every one hate Muslims.
     
  3. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't work for the government.. Hulsey is a con artist no different than the late Ron Wyatt.
     
  4. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nothing was moved/blown sideways/horizontal due to "explosive force from explosions". Give one example with a picture or video?
     
  5. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The buildings didn't fall OVER.. they fell down.
     
  6. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Correct,

    I believe Eleuthera, with her comment I quoted above, is claiming that there were heavy structural elements/structural assemblies that were ejected horizontal/sideways and that this could only occur if explosives were used. That's why I asked for pictures or video of what exactly is being talked about.
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  7. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Legitimate eh Bobby?

    Let's look at Hulsey's objective's as stated in his report.
    First two question regarding the above objectives.
    1. Did Hulsey correctly model the fires that may have occurred in WTC7? Why did he only model floors 12 and 13?
    2. Did Hulsey identify the types of failures and their locations that may have caused the total collapse? Why did he just "remove" columns? That's not "identifying" a type failure.
     
  8. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why the World Trade Center Towers Fell on 9/11 - ThoughtCo
    www.thoughtco.com/why-world-trade-center-towers...
    Before the terrorist attack, the twin towers were 110 stories tall. Constructed of lightweight steel around a central core, the World Trade Center towers were about 95 percent air. After they collapsed, the hollow core was gone. The remaining rubble was only a few stories high.

    Are you familiar with any of the other buildings Minoru Yamasaki designed?

    The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey added to the height.
     
  9. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Was this response mistakenly directed at me instead of someone else? If not, I'm not sure what it has to do with what I posted regarding Hulsey's report on WTC7.
     
  10. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Were you ever in the tower? It was open space not brick and mortar and it swayed as much as five feet.
     
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What in the world does this have to do with anything you quoted from me regarding Hulsey and his WT7 report?
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not going to quote all your pathetic OCT groveling nonsense so I'll just make it a generic response, more or less.

    The only thing embarrassing is your own posts pretending you have any standing to criticize Hulsey and his work.

    Any fool with minimal intellectual capacity who has ever seen a CD would (or should) know that WTC7 was CD'd the first time he/she saw the video, it's not rocket science. Any fool who knows the least bit about CDs would know that to make a building such as WTC7 fail globally and drop into its footprint symmetrically at free fall would require that ALL its columns be removed simultaneously. Any fool with minimal logical capability would know that fire in a large steel frame high rise can never duplicate a CD. And any fool with minimal intellect should know that to try to model a global collapse of WTC7 in the manner seen in videos using fire (or fires) as the primary cause would likely require infinite (or nearly infinite) iterations and may never achieve such a result. OTOH one would likely not even need a computer to model what happened to WTC7 is the result of having all its columns removed simultaneously. In fact, there are real world modelS (plural emphasized) that have achieved that very same thing.

    I personally never needed Hulsey to tell me what happened to WTC7, I KNEW (I didn't just suspect) that WTC7 was control demolished the very first time I saw it on video, in 2004. All Hulsey did with his 4 year study is scientifically PROVE that NIST's hypothesis was not only impossible but also based on scientific fraud and PROVE that a computer model can be constructed such that it replicates the global collapse of WTC7.

    His draft paper will be peer reviewed and fully endorsed by the scientific community, perhaps with some tweaks. They are the ones who will sort this out and they are the ones who matter. Of that I'm fully confident because there is NO other valid scientific explanation. And that will become THE industry wide accepted standard. Are Hulsey's paper and methodology perfect? Perhaps not, but then again no one else has done anything close to what he's done and NIST's garbage is just that. The vast differences are that there is nothing valid out there that replicates or supports NIST's conclusions and there can never be because NIST denied public access. Hulsey's work, once the data is available, can be replicated all day long and confirmed. Even if let's just say it might take years to find the flaws, it will always be available for scrutiny. Peer review is actually not the end all, it is a starting point. That's why it's a standard that anyone can work from. So people such as Mick West, you and ALL other fanatical 9/11 "debunkers" can spin your wheels 24/7/365, you are all irrelevant and just a propaganda distraction.

    Instead of bitching and moaning, do the work and the modeling yourself and see if you can come up with a different result. I'm sure that will never happen because even if you had the expertise and the facilities, I'm 100% sure you won't be able to.
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not that it matters, but no one who counts disputes Hulsey's expertise and you are certainly in no position to do so. The best example of his expertise is the study and draft paper he produced. It follows all accepted scientific standards to my knowledge, but I'll let the experts review that for me since I make no claims as to my limited level of expertise on forensic investigation standards. Compared to NIST, well there is no comparison.

    PEER REVIEW, you understand what that is, right? Any half-assed forensic structural engineer worth his salt should be able to figure out if anything was tweaked once given the data and methodology. If Hulsey was caught "tweaking", that would be quite damaging to his career and reputation. An error is one thing, tweaking is something else altogether. NIST was ALL ABOUT tweaking, yet I never, ever saw you raise any concerns about that. You even deliberately avoided that discussion for months when I asked you for your opinion on tweaking (to be kind) by NIST.

    Absolutely, 100%.

    You obviously either didn't read the draft report or don't have any clue what you read. Hulsey used NIST's own false data and the correct data to model what SHOULD have happened (or not) in both cases.

    To put it in elementary terms for you, because that's how modeling works, trial and error. You remove some columns (including those claimed by NIST), see if the model replicates the actual collapse, then you remove others, then you remove them all to see what might replicate the actual collapse. And presto, magic, the one that works best is the one where all the columns are removed simultaneously. Hulsey does not say it means CD, but then again he doesn't have to, any idiot knows it means CD.

    If you had to ask the 2nd question in #2 above, you obviously are in no position to make that fallacious claim. What "type" of failure do you know of that removes all the columns simultaneously? Fire?

    You really are a piece of work. You're beginning to sound like Margot and that's not a compliment.
     
  14. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Atta was a coke-snorting whore monger, and nothing more than a character in a morality play which you consider to be true life.

    The aircraft that struck the towers were NOT AA11 and UA175. There were no hijackings that day. There was a ruse, and you fell for it.
     
  15. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And what "fool" COMPLETELY ruled out fire? Thanks for reinforcing my point about Hulsey and his report.
     
  16. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Did you read his report Bobby? Obviously you didn't because you missed this sentence on page 63:
    Why only two floors Bobby? I thought you said he used NIST's own data? NIST did fire simulations for more than floors 12 and 13.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  17. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Can you point me to the part of the report where Hulsey did calculations for the type and amount of explosives used and where they were placed? Magically removing columns doesn't cut it Bobby. I wonder why Hulsey didn't mention "controlled demoltion" in his report?
     
  18. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You describe Hulsey's reason for removing/failing the columns perfectly!!! Thanks!

    All column were removed simultaneuosly? You better go read his report again and view the video of his model. Then come back here and explain how you came up with "all the columns are removed simultaneously". Here's the video from the UAF site.


    How does removing all columns simultaneously result in the structure collapsing in three different stages? Good luck.
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We already know it was tweaked to give AE9/11 the results they paid for. Look at the collapse of the east penthouse in the video above? Since when did the east penthouse collapse like what is shown? Wheher are the structural members below the east penthouse? It just magically stops descending a few floors down? Where's the kink that was seen? Where's the rotation of the building?
     
  20. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOLOLOL..... whatever.
     
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're asking the wrong question, it should read "What fool wouldn't completely rule out fire?". Oh yeah NIST and you. Go back and read Hulsey's draft where he shows in no uncertain terms what didn't happen because of fire.

    You never had any point about Hulsey and his report, same with NIST and their report. You just keep embarrassing yourself trying to defend an impossibility and a massive fraud and keep pretending there's somehow an alternate reality where fire does the exact same thing as a controlled demolition.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  22. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is that a joke? The NIST report claims the failure occurred at those floors, so why on earth would Hulsey model simulations at other floors when his objective was to focus on NIST's collapse initiation claims?

    Again, you either have no clue what the draft report is all about or you're pretending to be clueless. Hulsey's study has nothing to do with explosives.

    Yeah it doesn't cut it for YOU because you can't possibly walk away from NIST's IMPOSSIBLE claim that only fire could have been the root cause of WTC7's global destruction.

    I don't.

    Yeah, CDs are magic, just remove all the columns and presto, magic happens, buildings drop at free fall. But in your world fire can do that too. That's why CD experts never blow all the columns simultaneously and always use fire to bring buildings down, right?

    It doesn't. The only 3 stages are planning, rigging and triggering. Only in your world does the free fall drop of a building happen in 3 stages because NIST said so.

    Go back and read Hulsey's draft report or watch the video, I already explained it but you ignored it. I'm not Hulsey nor did I write the draft report.

    What about NIST's "tweaking" to give the US government the results they paid for? Oh yeah it was ok for you because it made sure to yield the result you swear by. Only Hulsey showed that NIST's tweaking couldn't possibly have yielded what NIST claims it did.

    You keep asking ME the most idiotic questions when all you need to do is do the research, wait for the data and do the modeling yourself to either confirm or reject Hulsey's hypotheses (one for NIST's garbage and one for reality). You don't have to take my word for anything, I certainly don't take your word for anything, it makes zero sense. All you do is try to defend NIST's impossible hypothesis no matter how much it's proven that it is impossible.

    "The evidence is dispositive" - David R. Meiswinkle
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  23. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
  24. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Eyewitness accounts, per AE9/11, go against Hulsey's claim of "all columns being simultaneously removed". "Immediately before and during" the destruction does not equal "simultaneous removal of columns" due to demolitions.

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/explosions
     
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The eyewitness account below does not agree with Hulsey's "simultaneous removal of all columns" conclusion.

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/explosions
     

Share This Page