Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 678910111219 ... LastLast
Results 73 to 81 of 204

Thread: Bilderberg Group

  1. #73
    Olympic Champ r.payton@att.net's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Danville .Indiana
    Posts
    8,718

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    http://www.ae911truth.org/- Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth--a website with thousands of scientists and demoliton experts-
    Once again, nothing we say or do or think is going to bring anyone back to life or send anyone to jail.
    You know, I think I would rather be a man than a god . We don't need anyone to believe in us. We just keep going anyhow. It's what we do.

  2. #74

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Your link is broken, I assume you want to link to main page? AE911Truth.org

    1500 architects and engineers is still a minuscule minority and their writings have been thoroughly debunked anyway. What is that 0.2-0.5% of the people in those professions? Not very impressive considering a higher percentage than that of the American public believe in conspiracy theories. More importantly, their evidence is hand-picked to support their argument and they've yet (to my knowledge) to publish anything official or remotely approaching the scholarship of a peer-reviewed report. 1500 random architects and engineers signing a petition isn't as impressive as detailed evidence of report I cited that you've still yet to address, nor have they.

  3. #75
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Quote Originally Posted by bwh27 View Post
    9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Popular Mechanics

    9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Pentagon - Popular Mechanics

    Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Free Fall

    Something tells me you all haven't bothered to research the (thoroughly documented) debunking side nearly as thoroughly as you have the conspiracy theory side..

    And to clarify by "dismissed" I don't mean that every scientist has written extensively on why they don't believe the conspiracy, but that the overwhelming majority don't take the specific claims seriously including those in relevant fields of expertise. This despite the fact that they would stand to gain a lot more financially by writing a book with conspiracy theories.
    1) Pop Mech piece published by Hearst corp. Nov 2006 Hearst was convicted of Anti-trust law violations. In the 1930s William Randolph Hearst was paid by Hitler to interview him & run it in all the newspapers Hearst had around the world. The List goes on...

    2) Pop Mech piece senior researcher was Benjamin Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. BC tried to play this connection down despite the fact that his mother fully admitted it. MC later would be doing interviews about how we need the new TSA SCANNERS on TV when he in fact was a paid consult for the SCANNER manufacturer. Something stinks here...

    3) Much of that bloggers research is based upon Dr Greening's research however what he fails to mention is that Greening HIMSELF has stated publicly that ..."the NIST Report is seriously flawed"...

    a) It is inconsistent and contradictory in the way it treats the tipping of the upper section of each tower.
    b) It assumes that global collapse ensues without modeling the collapse.
    c) Its fire simulations generate such a wide array of temperature profiles as to be essentially useless.
    d) Its assumptions about the loss of thermal insulation are mere speculation.
    e) It ignores the important effects of massive releases of corrosive gases in the fires.
    f) Its metallurgical analysis of the steel is perfunctory.
    g) It ignores evidence (micron sized spheres) for the presence of molten iron in the towers prior to collapse.
    h) It mentions sulfidation, which it does not explain, while ignoring chlorination.
    i) And finally, NIST still cannot explain the collapse of WTC 7 after 6 years of trying...

    About 2 years after my early retirement I began researching 9/11 and became fascinated by the collapse of WTC 1 & 2. I realized that it would be of great interest to calculate the collapse times for a gravity driven collapse and compare the result with observations. This I did, and wrote up my findings in the ?Energy Transfer? article that was subsequently posted on the 911Myths website. I was quite surprised at the response to my work: the calculations were well received by some but scorned by others.

    The model I based my calculation on was indeed quite crude, so I have endeavored to improve it by including the effects of variable column strength and mass shedding. I tested the improved model and found that the towers always exhibited a self-sustaining collapse for realistic values of the various input parameters. Nevertheless, while my model appeared to show that a gravity driven collapse of the Twin Towers was physically possible, I still had some doubts about collapse initiation. These doubts stemmed from the fact that my model assumes that the upper block of floors above the impact zone descends one story under free fall, thereby providing more than enough energy to destroy the columns supporting the floor below and initiate a progressive collapse.

    But did the collapse of each tower really begin with such a single floor failure? I studied the appropriate sections of the NIST Report seeking an answer to this question. It soon became apparent that the tipping of the upper section of each tower was a key feature of the collapse. Thus I began studying the tipping of WTC 1 & 2 and ultimately wrote two articles on this topic that were posted on 911Myths.

    The research described in these articles showed that WTC 1 required almost 2 meters of downward displacement in the upper section of the building to initiate collapse. This is about two times the downward displacement required for the collapse of WTC 2, and six times NIST?s estimate of Dd(WTC 2) of about 30 cm based on its finite element computer model. In contrast, a simple energy analysis of the collapse shows that NIST?s small downward displacements lead to inferred collapse energies that are too low to be acceptable ? we know the Twin Towers would not collapse that easily.

    Further, the geometry of a ?Leaning WTC Tower? with an asymmetric downward displacement of 30 cm implies a tilt angle of less than ? degree. Remarkably, however, NIST suggest that tilt angles before collapse initiation were more than 4? for WTC 1 & 2. Thus the NIST Final Report first underestimates the downward displacements within the Twin Towers, only to later overestimate the initial tilt angles to justify the collapse.

    A close look at the failure of WTC 2 shows that the collapse began with a tilting or rotational motion of the upper section of the Tower about a ?hinge? at the 80th floor. This rotational motion, which commenced at a tilt angle ~ 2?, was caused by an almost instantaneous multi-column failure that eliminated the structural support on one side of WTC 2 near the impact zone. Once set in motion, the upper block moved with a nearly ?free? rotational trajectory of a body pivoting under the constant force of gravity. This behavior was sustained at tilt angles up to about 20?. Thereafter the motion of the block changed somewhat although the suggestion that the tilting suddenly stopped is not correct. What appears to happen is that the upper section was continuously crushed near the 80th floor by its own momentum so that the rotation was no longer that of a rigid body. Eventually the "hinge" at the northeast corner failed and the descending block took on a more vertical motion. Interestingly, once the hinge failed, and the pivot became frictionless, the motion of the center of gravity is predicted to become vertical, causing a shift in the rotational axis, as observed.

    For most of 2006 I switched my attention to two important aspects of the collapse of WTC 1 & 2:
    i) the pulverization of concrete and
    ii) the sustained high temperatures of the rubble pile.

    First, I carried out an energy balance analysis of the collapse of WTC 1 that included the energy consumed in crushing concrete on one floor (234 MJ) and compared this to other contributions to the energy dissipated by the collapse. As expected, the plastic strain energy dissipated by the buckling of columns (284 MJ) was confirmed to be the largest drain on the kinetic energy driving the collapse, but the energy to pulverize the concrete was clearly an important additional energy sink. However, I also concluded that such energy sinks should be summed over two WTC floors per impact to allow for the simultaneous destruction of the uppermost floor of the lower fixed section, and the lowest floor of the descending section. Such an assumption leads to an energy decrement that still assures a self-sustaining progressive collapse of WTC 1 if the input kinetic energy is derived from a one-storey free fall of the upper block- a condition that must be modified in a tipping scenario.

    The sustained high temperatures of the rubble pile proved to be more problematic. The NIST Report indicates that about 100 tonnes of burning material and smoldering ?embers?, at 500 - 700? C, fell into the rubble pile when the Twin Towers collapsed. Propagation of smoldering combustion within the rubble pile was sustained by the indigenous supply of live load ?fuel?- consisting of office furniture, paper, textiles and plastic materials - and oxygen.

    Setting aside the issue of oxygen availability, let us consider how long the available fuel could last. The heat flux of a smoldering fire is typically ~ 8 kW/m2 from which we may calculate the average fuel consumption rate within the rubble pile. NIST estimate that there was initially about 50,000 kg of combustible material on each floor of WTC 1 & 2. If we assume that material from about 5 floors was consumed before the Towers collapsed, about 5,250,000 kg of ?fuel? was initially available within the rubble from each Tower. It is a simple matter to show that this fuel would be able to sustain the rubble pile fires for no more than about 30 days. However, it was not until December 19th 2001, or 100 days after 9/11, that the Governor of New York, George Pataki, officially declared the WTC fires to be totally extinguished. We are left wondering what ?stoked? the rubble pile fires beyond the expected 30 days.

    Thus, by the start of 2007, I still had plenty of questions about the official version of the collapse of the Twin Towers. And this is essentially where I stand today...I remain a 9/11 agnostic. And as a scientist I believe there is always room for doubt and for more research. In fact, that?s how I see research ? a process of re-searching, of looking again. The NIST Report is a great start, but only that. It leaves some unanswered questions...And my work experience in the Canadian nuclear industry has taught me to be skeptical of the ?official? view - the consensus view - because it is usually politically motivated!
    Last edited by kr1963; 07-06-2011 at 06:02 PM.

  4. #76
    National Finalist leglace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    992

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    I would not say they are 0.5% at all. I assure you that 1,500 architects and engineers is a higher number of those who would sign off in agreement that the 3 collapses were from (2) planes alone. Ask the question correctly and you would find most of them are suspicious about the buildings having help to be taken down.

    I don't care about this being a conspiracy. Thats not my concern. I just can't stomach the explanation that a failure of a single column happened on both towers and caused 10" thick composite decking/reinforced concrete over 24" deep bar joists tied down to multiple supports to fail on every floor with such little resistance. And the plumes of smoke from the lower floors occurred well before the collapse, even though each floor is capable of a 4-hour fire rating prescriptively. And that the fire was so unique on building 7 that the entire building collapsed so evenly from fire. Too many coincedences for me.
    I pictured you as that guy Gaylord in Showboat, passing up taxis to walk because he's broke and playing it off as if it's the doctor's advice. - Clmetal

  5. #77
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Quote Originally Posted by bwh27 View Post
    Your link is broken, I assume you want to link to main page? AE911Truth.org

    1500 architects and engineers is still a minuscule minority and their writings have been thoroughly debunked anyway. What is that 0.2-0.5% of the people in those professions? Not very impressive considering a higher percentage than that of the American public believe in conspiracy theories. More importantly, their evidence is hand-picked to support their argument and they've yet (to my knowledge) to publish anything official or remotely approaching the scholarship of a peer-reviewed report. 1500 random architects and engineers signing a petition isn't as impressive as detailed evidence of report I cited that you've still yet to address, nor have they.
    This is all your opinion. Nothing you say here is factual.

    9/11 report itself was overseen by a close friend of Condoleeza Rice & served in the Bush Administration. I would say that getting 1500 people to put their necks on the line & disagree with the official story is a more heroic act then anything anyone ever did in the Bush White House, where the top 2 execs never served in the Military. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence to know that saying something politically unpopular can cost you your job, your career.

  6. #78
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Dailymotion - Senator Mark Dayton on 911 Commission Testimony - a News & Politics video

    The 9/11 official story is a tale of outlandish incompetence. We are led to believe that Al Qaeda successfully evaded a multi-billion-dollar defense establishment including NORAD, standard FAA intercept procedures, US airbases,the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, international intelligence agencies and more, without any significant or effective resistance. However, Name one single person fired or reprimanded within the U.S. government (FBI, CIA, NORAD, FAA, NSA, or Bush Administration) for the 9/11 attacks. WTF. But then Richard Myers, in charge of NORAD on 9/11 was promoted 3 days after the attack. And the MASS MEDIA NEVER talked about any of this.

    Dailymotion - Who was the Decider on 9/11? - a News & Politics video

    In 2003, Former Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission regarding an unknown standing order from Dick Cheney. His story is different on camera then from the 9/11 commission.

  7. #79
    National Finalist leglace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    992

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Quote Originally Posted by bwh27 View Post
    Assuming you're right that nobody can measure the time accurately then why are you guys inferring so much? The NIST report rejects the hypothesis that the building were felled by controlled demolition for a variety of reasons including that the window breakages and blast sound that would have occurred if explosives were used were not observed.

    David Ray Griffin is a retired professor of philosophy and religion, whereas the report that I cited http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf is written by a credentialed scientist Frank Greening. Can you all please point out to me what specifically is inaccurate from that report? Naming a book by someone with no expertise in the relevant fields is not evidence. And NIST re-writing their findings isn't evidence either. You guys have some seriously thin stuff here, be more specific.

    Fair enough. I will look at the collapse again and see if the window breakage is consistent with a demolition. I know that there were blasts heard, which led many to believe it was blasted down to begin with. Finally a sensible rebuttle from NIST.
    I pictured you as that guy Gaylord in Showboat, passing up taxis to walk because he's broke and playing it off as if it's the doctor's advice. - Clmetal

  8. #80
    National Finalist leglace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    992

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    Below is lots of footage I have never seen. This solidifies my thoughts that there were explosions in different parts of the building that contributed to the collapse. I do not speculate who planted them, for all we know, terrorists had them planted years ago.

    I pictured you as that guy Gaylord in Showboat, passing up taxis to walk because he's broke and playing it off as if it's the doctor's advice. - Clmetal

  9. #81

    Default Re: Bilderberg Group

    "and that anybody putting together ALL OF THE FACTS come to a conclusion that there is a great probability that we were lied to on the chain of events."


    If the above is true, then it follows, that, according to some on here:

    If you DO believe that OBL and his followers were solely reponsible for 9-11, then you have been incorrectly influenced by folks who simply have been either unable or unwilling to PUT ALL OF THE FACTS together.


    And how are we being asked to judge whether someone or some group has succeeded in putting all of the facts together (re: chain of events)? By their conclusion!!

    America Coast-to-Coast logic.

    Somewhere out there, in some dimension of time and space, Art Bell is smiling.
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

Tags for this Thread

admiral byrd deathbed confessions, biderberg wrestler, bilderberg, bilderberg group, bilderberg group chain of command, bilderberg group labor unions, bilderberg group larry silverstein, bilderberg group silverstein, bilderberg group twin towers, bilderberg net worth, bilderburg group mark nists, eugenics nazi party bilderberg group, faa is so corrupt, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-23.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post411535.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post411856.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post412986.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post414102.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post414328.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post414576.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post419161.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post425927.html, http:www.politics-and-religion192724-bilderberg-group-post425981.html, i caught my man wrestling naked with another guy, is larry silverstein a member of the bilderberg group, is mark dayton part of the bildeberg group, larry silverstein bilderberg group, mark dayton bilderberger group, powered by vbulletin affordable group health, powered by vbulletin group health, powered by vbulletin group health see, powered by vbulletin history channel ufos in the bible, powered by vbulletin history of enron, powered by vbulletin mental institution conditions, powered by vbulletin my group health, powered by vbulletin politics of anthony flew, ras kass the line forum, spy on the bilderberg group, war is a racket bo gritz, wrestling bilderberger

View Tag Cloud

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •