Bazant Misconduct website is launched[W:111]

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Track down ground zero artifact samples from museums and pay for a lab study to prove there wasn't molten steel. With the information available now, it's looking like there was. Molten steel is a sign of exotic accelerants.

You mean the unmolten object?

No. Show me the molten steel.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Audio evidence for explosions in WTC 7 has already been pointed out here.

You are correct.

Evidence of explosions.

Yep.

Explosions happened.

Indeed.

What you haven't provided is evidence of explosions consistent with explosives.

Which means you have not provided evidence of explosives.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

"Several very respected and qualified witnesses"... Are you disrespecting the over 100 first responders who described the WTC destruction as sounding like explosions? ....................

.

bold by me.

the operable word is "like"

On wildfires firefighters have described fires making a major run as sounding like a freight train, a" low flying jet". Yet there was no train near the burn, nor did any jet do a low level pass.
I have heard trees explode on fires. I have heard transformers explode. The word "explosion' comes to mind when describing the sound.

Guess a check for "explosives" should have been done. :lamo

Many "qualified" witnesses have stated that WTC7 was going to collapse due to the fires. As stated before witness statements should be backed up by other physical evidence.

What is lacking on your part is presenting the physical evidence of the "explosive".

There is ample evidence of the fire burning for hours.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Why did the building show instability hours before the imaginary CD?

It didn't.

Why did the Eastern Penthouse descend well before the imaginary CD?

It didn't. The building rocked 90 seconds and 6 seconds before the East Penthouse. Audible percussive noises occurred at least 3 seconds before the East Penthouse fell.

Who did the pre-CD preparation of the columns for your imaginary CD?

Maybe the psychic engineer had something to do with it. Otherwise, that question can be answered by a serious investigation.

Who planted the explosives for your imaginary CD?

ibid

When did the explosives get planted for your imaginary CD?

The OEM renovations in 1998-1999 is a logical place to look first.

Why didn't any of the maintenance or facilities personnel find these imaginary explosives?

How many people within maintenance actually see the naked steel columns? They don't. Also, it's called an "inside job" for a reason.

How did the imaginary explosives survive the fires?

That was answered for you here and I'm sure many times before.

Why no telltale seismic or audible signatures when the imaginary explosives went off?

Demolitions don't always produce seismic spikes like that.

"But with the charges positioned above ground instead of within the crust -- where the release of strain results in powerful earthquakes -- the Aladdin implosion didn't even register on the nearby seismograph at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, according to geology professor Dave Weide."

LAS VEGAS RJ:NEWS: If The Big One Hits Here, Will We Be Ready?

Audio evidence for explosions in WTC 7 has already been pointed out to you.

When no shattering of windows around the WTC7?

That was answered for you here and I'm sure many times before.

Why are the windows in WTC7 intact after the imaginary explosives went off?

ibid

Why no overpressure?

Elaborate?

Why no det cord found?

1. Det cord is not needed, wireless methods have been available for years

2. Det cord comes in a variety of colors and could be indistinguishable from ordinary cords found in buildings.

Why no unexpended explosives found?

1. They could've all exploded successfully

2. Who says there wasn't? Large volumes of WTC rubble was almost quite literally stolen from the fresh kills landfill, including a lot from Building 7. https://oig.justice.gov/special/0403a/index.htm

Why no physical trace of any sort found?

Too big of a can of worms. Either way, I gave you evidence that enough suspicious residues were found to warrant an investigation into insider foul play in the WTC destruction.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Make your case where it matters or get out. Its that simple.

I made my case that what happened to Ron DiFrancesco is not explainable by a natural collapse. You ignored.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

You are correct.

Evidence of explosions.

Yep.

Explosions happened.

Indeed.

What you haven't provided is evidence of explosions consistent with explosives.

Which means you have not provided evidence of explosives.

Do you think the percussive noises from WTC 7 i pointed out were from exploding transformers or from small parts of the building falling down? The first is extremely unlikely and the you didn't answer any of my points against the second.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

bold by me.

the operable word is "like"

On wildfires firefighters have described fires making a major run as sounding like a freight train, a" low flying jet". Yet there was no train near the burn, nor did any jet do a low level pass.
I have heard trees explode on fires. I have heard transformers explode. The word "explosion' comes to mind when describing the sound.

Guess a check for "explosives" should have been done. :lamo

I provided probably the most credible witness to explosions from the Twin Towers and no explanations stand up to scrutiny except for the explosive theory.

Many "qualified" witnesses have stated that WTC7 was going to collapse due to the fires. As stated before witness statements should be backed up by other physical evidence.

This has been discussed before and the only thing you guys can come up with is an explanation that involves superhuman foresight tracing back to one "engineer" from the OEM.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

MJ.

Your wrong. on scene firefighters determined wtc7 was going to fail.

Care to share your sources for your timelines? I bet I know one of them.

Since you seem to be on the mantra of no steel building has failed due to fire.
Please provide links to CD that the building burned for several hours before executing the CD? Seems WTC7 would be a world first.:mrgreen:, oh wait, if it never has happened before then it can't be true.:lamo

 

[mike2810]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

I provided probably the most credible witness to explosions from the Twin Towers and no explanations stand up to scrutiny except for the explosive theory.



This has been discussed before and the only thing you guys can come up with is an explanation that involves superhuman foresight tracing back to one "engineer" from the OEM.

Your missing the point. Lots of people use the word "explosion" to describe a boom sound.

It is you who is dismissing all the qualified witnesses that disagree with you. There is physical evidence of fire. You have none for the use of explosives used for controlled demolitions.

All you got is what you have read by DRG or some other controlled demolition support author.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

I made my case that what happened to Ron DiFrancesco is not explainable by a natural collapse. You ignored.

Yes you did, and I invoked the necessary amount of laughter reading it.

Man flees collapsing burning building, gets thrown across the street by the force of hot air and flames compressed by the building collapse, suffering a broken back, burns and other injuries. Only you could come up with the bizarre fantasy that it was (as usual, silent) explosives on the ground floor which naturally only went off after the building was already fully involved in a collapse that began 80+ floors up.

Makes perfect sense? No, that's :censored mental :roll:

Funny that Ron DiFrancesco doesn't seem to think he was injured by lobby bombs.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

MJ.

Your wrong. on scene firefighters determined wtc7 was going to fail.

Care to share your sources for your timelines? I bet I know one of them.

I'm not exactly sure when the earliest warnings were given, but for what it's worth I gave that New York Times article that said it was 11:30 AM.

Since you seem to be on the mantra of no steel building has failed due to fire.
Please provide links to CD that the building burned for several hours before executing the CD? Seems WTC7 would be a world first.:mrgreen:, oh wait, if it never has happened before then it can't be true.:lamo

I'm sure it's actually not a very foreign concept to investigators that an arsonist could destroy a building with explosives, but set it on fire it make it look like the fire destroyed the building.

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Yes you did, and I invoked the necessary amount of laughter reading it.

Man flees collapsing burning building, gets thrown across the street by the force of hot air and flames compressed by the building collapse, suffering a broken back, burns and other injuries.

Aaand you're dredging up your old arguments. I addressed them before, doesn't look very plausible that it could come from a compressing building.

Only you could come up with the bizarre fantasy that it was (as usual, silent) explosives on the ground floor which naturally only went off after the building was already fully involved in a collapse that began 80+ floors up.

"...As he approached the Church Street exit, DiFrancesco heard an "ungodly roar". He saw a fireball as the building compressed. He doesn't know what happened next, and was unconscious for some time after his narrow escape, waking up much later at St. Vincent's hospital in Manhattan." -The Third Man Factor: Surviving the Impossible

Brian Clark: "When he was exiting the building, he heard an explosion, he spun around and a fireball was coming down the hallway at him. He put his arms up, blew him across Church Street. He woke up in the hospital two days later." -Beyond 9/11: Portraits of Resilience

If you think the collapse of the Twin Towers was silent, you aren't very familiar with the video evidence.

Funny that Ron DiFrancesco doesn't seem to think he was injured by lobby bombs.

I don't care to try contacting him to see if he has ever considered it. His opinion is not evidence, his experience is. If he did think he was injured by explosives, you would he saying "oooh he's not an expert".

 

[mike2810]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

I'm not exactly sure when the earliest warnings were given, but for what it's worth I gave that New York Times article that said it was 11:30 AM.



I'm sure it's actually not a very foreign concept to investigators that an arsonist could destroy a building with explosives, but set it on fire it make it look like the fire destroyed the building.

So you cannot provide any other examples of a controlled demolition where the building burned for several hours before the charges were set off. Got it.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Aaand you're dredging up your old arguments. I addressed them before, doesn't look very plausible that it could come from a compressing building.



"...As he approached the Church Street exit, DiFrancesco heard an "ungodly roar". He saw a fireball as the building compressed. He doesn't know what happened next, and was unconscious for some time after his narrow escape, waking up much later at St. Vincent's hospital in Manhattan." -The Third Man Factor: Surviving the Impossible

Brian Clark: "When he was exiting the building, he heard an explosion, he spun around and a fireball was coming down the hallway at him. He put his arms up, blew him across Church Street. He woke up in the hospital two days later." -Beyond 9/11: Portraits of Resilience

If you think the collapse of the Twin Towers was silent, you aren't very familiar with the video evidence.

I don't care to try contacting him to see if he has ever considered it. His opinion is not evidence, his experience is. If he did think he was injured by explosives, you would he saying "oooh he's not an expert".

Man is in lobby making his way to exit.
80 floors above building is burning furiously
Building is 95% air by volume
Collapse begins 80-odd floors above lobby. There are no hundreds, or even just scores of 185db booms to warn it is coming.
Mass of falling debris compresses the 95% air by volume that makes up the building, which is also polluted with burning materials
Hot and and burning materials are forced downward through the building by the mass of falling debris above
Wave of compressed hot air and burning materials is pressed down to the lobby level where it blows man out the door and across the street where he is knocked out cold

Everything in this man's experience is entirely consistent with a narrow escape from a collapsing burning building - and he's the best evidence you've got. Think about what that means.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

"...As he approached the Church Street exit, DiFrancesco heard an "ungodly roar". He saw a fireball as the building compressed. He doesn't know what happened next, and was unconscious for some time after his narrow escape, waking up much later at St. Vincent's hospital in Manhattan." -The Third Man Factor: Surviving the Impossible

A roar? A lion did it.

 

[ozeco41]

Meanwhile - back on the actual TOPIC of this thread:

Tony made a couple of interesting points which we shouldn't lose sight of as we chase the straw men and derails:

For those who have always been amazed at the expediency with which civil engineering professor Zdenek Bazant was able ....

Well that is a narrow target audience Tony. I doubt than many persons who comprehend the 9/13 paper and its evolution into B&Z 2002 would be "amazed" at the expediency.

Bazant is an academic - publish or perish a dominating theme of the academic ethos. AND he had a willing PhD student. AND it was a simple paper. In summary he said:
"The collapse mechanism is too complicated to explain without extensive FEA BUT here is a simple limit case". He then did a back of envelope calculation (or Zhou did it for him) and showed that even under worst case the building was doomed. Simple stuff. Easy to win the race for "First to Publish". He won the race.

So - to those like me who understand the academic ethos - nothing to "have always been amazed at". Such persons are almost certainly to be found among the members of the truth movement - but why do you limit your OP to the already converted?

....civil engineering professor Zdenek Bazant was able to explain the collapses of the WTC Twin Towers just two days after 911..]

Well he didn't "explain" it did he? He said "it is too hard to explain (at this time) BUT ...even without explaining here is proof that the building was going to collapse".

HOWEVER we do know that quite a few people misinterpreted it as explaining. As you are well aware Tony - you misinterpreted the paper with your nonsense "Missing Jolt" - and - if we believe you - you still do not understand what Bazant actually said in B&Z - any version.

The real question relevant to B&Z should be "Are there any legitimate errors in B&Z?" and AFAIK there are two possibilities which have not been given the attention they deserve:

1) The first is in a paper published by Szuladzinsky, Szamboti and Johns. I think you are familiar with the paper. It makes a few assertions - several of them valid - others not so. BUT it says "Bazant got his sums wrong -- he overestimated the weight of the Top Block". A serious assertion which I respect and which AFAIK has never been rebutted. Never even seriously addressed to my knowledge. Have you ever followed it up? So there is one issue worthy of consideration by those running this website initiative.

2) The second is my own identification that one of Bazant's assumptions was "wrong way round" for a limit case argument. I have never pursued that matter because the whole B&Z claim is past its "use by date" - superseded by better understanding. I'll provide the details if anyone is interested.

.... a website dedicated to exposing his proficiency and theories on what happened on 911.

The site already identifies "Crush Down/Crush Up" as a weak point when applied to WTC Twin Towers collapse. I've been disagreeing for years with the Bazantophiles over this one.

Simply put "Crush Down/Crush Up" does not apply to WTC "Twins". It has THREE FATAL ERRORS in the WTC setting.

So you could bring those errors to the attention of the WebSite team.

The minor problem is that the three fatal errors are the same ones you copied with Missing Jolt. But I'm sure you can finesse around that aspect. "Truther Logic" does not require consistency.

 

[ozeco41]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

A roar? A lion did it.

An "ungodly roar" - it was an atheist lion????

 

[MicahJava]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Man is in lobby making his way to exit.
80 floors above building is burning furiously
Building is 95% air by volume
Collapse begins 80-odd floors above lobby. There are no hundreds, or even just scores of 185db booms to warn it is coming.
Mass of falling debris compresses the 95% air by volume that makes up the building, which is also polluted with burning materials
Hot and and burning materials are forced downward through the building by the mass of falling debris above
Wave of compressed hot air and burning materials is pressed down to the lobby level where it blows man out the door and across the street where he is knocked out cold

Everything in this man's experience is entirely consistent with a narrow escape from a collapsing burning building - and he's the best evidence you've got. Think about what that means.

Questions:

1. How could the collapsing South Tower behave anything comparable to a piston when the core structure was completely detached in such an asymmetrical fashion?

2. Of all the floors that the fireball could have a wide opening to explode out of, why the base of the building?

3. Why did the fireball explode with enough energy to physically lift a human being despite him being more than a ~30 feet away, and forcefully move than several feet more?

4. Why did this fireball apparently come out as a jet from a point-like source?

5. How does this explain the head injury and witness statements of DiFrancesco, which seemed to indicate a very fast moving solid projectile exploding out of the base of the building along with the fireball?

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

It didn't.

Intentional ignorance of the signs of structural instability.

Why did the building show instability hours before the imaginary CD?

It didn't. The building rocked 90 seconds and 6 seconds before the East Penthouse. Audible percussive noises occurred at least 3 seconds before the East Penthouse fell.

Intentional ignorance of when the Penthouse fell.

Maybe the psychic engineer had something to do with it. Otherwise, that question can be answered by a serious investigation.

Ignorant answer to serious question.

Who did the pre-CD preparation of the columns for your imaginary CD? (CLUE: NO PREP = MASSIVE INCREASE IN EXPLOSIVES NEEDED)

ibid

Not an answer.

Who planted the explosives for your imaginary CD?

The OEM renovations in 1998-1999 is a logical place to look first.

Now this REALLY shows the ignorance in explosives and buildings.

Renovations long before 9/11 are when the explosives were planted. Completely ignoring the fact there is maintenance and renovations going on constantly. Building inspections, etc. Plus the threat of fire or other disaster. Plumbing issues, refurbishing work spaces, etc.

That is stupid on a whole new level.

How many people within maintenance actually see the naked steel columns? They don't. Also, it's called an "inside job" for a reason.

How many people see the columns? Potential for plenty. Ah, now the maintenance staff are "in on it"

Why didn't any of the maintenance or facilities personnel find these imaginary explosives?

That was answered for you here and I'm sure many times before.

Post number?

How did the imaginary explosives survive the fires?

Demolitions don't always produce seismic spikes like that.

"But with the charges positioned above ground instead of within the crust -- where the release of strain results in powerful earthquakes -- the Aladdin implosion didn't even register on the nearby seismograph at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, according to geology professor Dave Weide."

LAS VEGAS RJ:NEWS: If The Big One Hits Here, Will We Be Ready?

Yet you require far more explosives to do the job. Remember the explosives were planted years ago without prepping the building.

Why no telltale seismic or audible signatures when the imaginary explosives went off?

Audio evidence for explosions in WTC 7 has already been pointed out to you.

And laughed at.

Explosions not consistent with CD are not evidence of explosives...

Remember, your unprepared building will require far more explosives than a normal CD.

That was answered for you here and I'm sure many times before.

Post number?

When no shattering of windows around the WTC7?

ibid

Not an answer.

Why are the windows in WTC7 intact after the imaginary explosives went off?

Elaborate?

You don't understand the term?

Proof of ignorance when dealing with explosives.

1. Det cord is not needed, wireless methods have been available for years

2. Det cord comes in a variety of colors and could be indistinguishable from ordinary cords found in buildings.

Wireless is fine over open air... Remember your explosives are hid deep in a building. Not ideal by ANY stretch of the imagination... Not only that... Radio fired explosives were planted years ago? And left armed?

And now det cord looks like other cords. According you...

Not in the real world.

1. They could've all exploded successfully

Not with your fantasy wireless detonators....

Why no unexpended explosives found?

2. Who says there wasn't? Large volumes of WTC rubble was almost quite literally stolen from the fresh kills landfill, including a lot from Building 7. https://oig.justice.gov/special/0403a/index.htm

So folks went in and stole the fantasy explosives.... Is that your story now?

Too big of a can of worms. Either way, I gave you evidence that enough suspicious residues were found to warrant an investigation into insider foul play in the WTC destruction.

What "suspicious residues"? Post number?

And there were investigations. And they actually know who was involved in the foul play....




You just refuse to accept it.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

An "ungodly roar" - it was an atheist lion????

Ooooooooooooh, I like that.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Do you think the percussive noises from WTC 7 i pointed out were from exploding transformers or from small parts of the building falling down? The first is extremely unlikely and the you didn't answer any of my points against the second.

Percussion? Drums?

 

[MicahJava]

Meanwhile - back on the actual TOPIC of this thread:

I second that motion, at least. I think Fledermaus just seriously suggested that a particularly loud marching band was the source of the explosive noise heard in the CBS WTC 7 footage, so it's getting way too nuts in here.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Bazant Misconduct website is launched

Some idea of what happened at ground level

 

[Fledermaus]

I second that motion, at least. I think Fledermaus just seriously suggested that a particularly loud marching band was the source of the explosive noise heard in the CBS WTC 7 footage, so it's getting way too nuts in here.

There are plenty of threads where we can discuss your level of ignorance in explosives....

 

[MicahJava]

There are plenty of threads where we can discuss your level of ignorance in explosives....

You are a troll. If you ask any legitimate questions, I'll answer to the best of my ability, but only for the sake of lurkers. For some people, all the evidence in the world isn't enough.