This is an excerpt from a show airing tomorrow night (8/31) on the National Geographic channel that examines the conspiracy theories about the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
#2, R&R,
Furthermore, to reach the maximum temperature, one must have a concentrated source of oxygen.
Nope. You need a supply of oxygen. A small yet crucial difference. Have you ever wondered by a bunsen burner can create a flame several hundred degrees hotter than what natural gas can attain otherwise? How about a blacksmith’s forge? Using just coals, he can heat the metal sufficiently to forge it.
The Popular Mechanics hypothesis is flawed in many ways. Diesel fuel also burns at about the same temperature as jet fuel, and you don’t see the internal structure of iron engine blocks, whose melting point is considerably lower than that of structural steel melting.
Two problems with that logic.
First, you have no idea of the difference in melting temperatures between an engine block and “structural” steel. If you did you wouldn’t make that comment.
Second you have no concept of thermodynamics and heat transfer. From the sounds of it you are quoting someone else who doesn’t know what they are talking about either.
It wouldn’t matter what another investigation comes up with. You won’t believe them either.
From: Obamaforever
To: All
Per #54
No one has answered my question. I can think of
only two reasons why no one answered my question.:
1. You agreed with me that the people who did the modeling had accurate information on ALL the
parameters.
2. You did not have a clue so you did not respond.
I believe that most would say that Reason #2 was the reason you did not answered my question.
I better sure that I am the only one here that has had any modeling experience, but a number of you have said that the modeling was wrong. People, please do not expound on a subject that you know nothing about. At best it makes you look foolish.
Shakespeare said it best-What fools these mortals be!
In other news… an unbalanced lone gunman killed Kennedy.
I don’t think Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al., planned or even knew about 9/11 in advance. I agree they were too incompetent to pull it off. That does not mean there was not a conspiracy. There was one and, at the very least, Al Qaeda was in on it. Who else was?
Think about how a hijacked plane could fly into the Pentagon 40 minutes after the second tower was hit. EXCUSE ME? The fucking PENTAGON?
Then look at the PilotsForTruth site and see if you think an untrained pilot could do what the pilot of Flight 77 supposedly did.
Then re-look at WTC 7 anew.
#64–O==I did not answer because I found your question phrased awkwardly enough to skip it. Have to read it a few times to make sense of what your are asking.
“All” parameters are never covered. Now, I do assume “most” of the relevant factors were modeled==and certainly enough variables to make the collapse consistent with what can be documented.
I don’t have real questions or challenges against the model because I am no model expert===beyond knowing they never prove anything until tested AFTER THE FACT. Do you agree with that?
But I am curious:
1. How do you calculate the sheer force of vertical and horizontal structural steel members being hit by an airplane after going thru 3-4 other vertical and horizontal steel members?
2. Is it even valid to model just one given set of assumptions? As stated above, seems to me with a model that you just have to enter some data points on==why not explain how much gas was needed to collapse the building? Do you think the model can do this or can it run only one simulation?
3. How accurate do you think the model could be as in given the fuel and speed and type of A/C–how long would the building remain standing. How many minutes off could it be before the model wasn’t really accurate?
But YOU are the expert. You should know then what imperfections most models have. Share your expertise with us as to what the biggest challenge would be to create a model that would be “predictive” say of an empty airplane hitting the sears tower?
WTC7 sticks out like a sore thumb, nobody from the government has bothered to explain why it fell and why the support beams were sliced with cutter charges. Perhaps thats why WTC steel was hurriedly gathered up and shipped to china to be melted down.
I also find it interesting that the Bush Administration had the remains of the USS Maine destroyed as well. It had been kept for decades, but I guess they didn’t want the potential bad PR coming from an investigation that would expose it as a boiler explosion rather than sabotage by Spain.
That would have made yet another war by the USA nothing but a fraud. (The USA invading cuba in 1898)
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center “up to the day the buildings fell down.”
The company lists as government clients “the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice,” in projects that “often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites.”
Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a “single-source” provider of “end-to-end” security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as “absolutely a sensitive airport,” according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.
Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: “Somebody knew somebody,” he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a ‘power down’ condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up… “Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many ‘engineers’ coming in and out of the tower.”
Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11
From: Obamaforever
To: jealousmonk
Per #65
Here is some stuff that is unreal but they did happen:
Oswald killed Kennedy by himself.
Ted Kennedy was not driving and was not in the car when Mary Jo drove the car off the bridge. This should make people on this blog start to foam at the mouth.
50,000,000 ignorant people voted for Bush in 2000.
62,000,000 stupid people voted for Bush in ’04.
What happen to the two towers also happen to
Building 7 minus the plane strikes. Building 7 got fire. The fire weaken the structural steel which caused the building to fall down.
The only way to satisfy these conspiracy idiots, is to put them at the scene, in the building on the same floor when the plane hit.
I’m with the character Alexandrov from Fred Hoyle’s 1958 book “The Black Cloud”. Correlation is “bloody bad science”. A model is only as good as its predictive value.
Can’t watch this excerpt form the show due to “copyright restrictions.” No problem: The whole damned thing will be on Pirate Bay tomorrow…
I have proof it WAS a conspiracy. 20 nutcase
religious fundamentalists conspired to kamikaze 4 planes into prominent landmarks.
Case closed.
#65
http://popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6
#67
http://popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=5
#70
RE: Ted Kennedy
Kennedy was driving. He admitted as much when he was questioned by police.
And over 69 million voted for Obama. Your point?
Regardless of whether the model is accurate is moot with respect to the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Those theories will remain the stuff of tin foil hats until solid evidence is provided the implicates specific people conspiring or in the act of specific acts that directly led to the towers. Until that happens, the simplest explanation is the one already given: terrorists flew the planes into the buildings.
Fact: 9/11 Troofers are batshit crazy. Always have been, always will be.
Fact: Obama Birfers are batshit crazy. Always have been, always will be.
The GOVERNMENT has the video of the strike at the Pentagon. Let us see it.
Lou Minatti was raised on “batshit crazy media” Always has been always will be…a sheep.
The main stream media (msm) isn’t left or right, it merely maintains the status quo. Hence the need for this documentary with a premise based on a flawed assumption to fit the msm’s lie.
From: Obamaforever
To: the great bobbo
per #66
Concerning my “ALL parameters” phrase we can change it to “ALL important parameters”. Make you feel better, twit!!!!
One does not need to know every parameter to have an accurate model. When I modeled a building to determine its energy consumption the names of the companies that made the machines were not important. All I needed to know was each machines’ volts, amps,watts, etc. and its hours of usage to determine its
energy usage.
bobbo, I was pretty good at this. Most of my models were dead accurate. How do I know this? I matched my model’s energy consumption for the building with the billing history of the building. I hope this is good enough for the great bobbo.
As for 1, 2, and 3:
It is a given that before you model something you have created a list of parameters that you need to know before you model something. You also know that you need to have accurate information on each parameter-garbage in garbage out if you will. This list contains ALL the parameters that you need to perform an accurate model. If you do not know an important parameter the model will not work.
Now, how do you know that you have an accurate
model? Here is the kicker, bobbo so stop sucking
on your thumb and listen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What you do is perform an experiment. You input
all the important parameters concerning the
experiment in the model. The model is someone’s
best guess on how to predict the outcome of
an experiment. If the model is not accurate you
change what you think needs to change in the model to fit the outcome of the experiment.
YOU DO NOT CHANGE THE EXPERIMENT TO FIT THE OUTCOME OF THE MODEL!!!!!!!!!!!
This is very bad science.
To be sure you have an accurate model you change something on the experiment. You perform more experiments and you make changes to those
experiments. You do this until you are sure the
model is accurate.
This last model may not look like your initial
model. It could have different calculations,
changed calculations, more parameters, less
parameters, etc. But by performing enough
experiments and changing the model as needed you have created a model that will give you an accurate outcome of a experiment. In this way, in the future, you do not have to perform an experiment to know what would be the outcome if you did A to B.
bobbo, engineers and scientists work with models all the time. They trust models because the models have worked in the past. NASA could not do a thing without models. bobbo, it is hard to perform an experiment concerning placing an object on Mars.
NASA does a model of placing an object on Mars.
Most of the time it works. bobbo, just think, millions of miles away and we can place an object on Mars-amazing!
Did the NASA engineers and scientists have to know every parameter? No. They only had to know ALL the important ones.
For more information on how the towers were modeled I suggest you contact the modelers who worked on the model. They will give you an earful I am sure!!!!!!
bobbo, if you had taken the time to read all of my post #54 you would see that I never called myself an “expert”. I said that I modeled buildings to learn their energy consumption. I also said that my modeling was not as involved (yes, an understatement) as modeling the tower buildings, but the basics were the same.
This does not make me an “expert” in my eyes.
In may make me an “expert” in your eyes. I
suspect that you pulled your definition of “expert” out of your ass so you could call me an expert.
bye, twit
I took them 2 years for that? Computer modals are unless when you star out with your answer and work backwards. This is like all the global warming computer modals out there, Useless.
i fail to see the difference between this and the PBS model of several years ago. same simple, complete void [and abortion] of real physics applied to fool the most dumbed-down American public in ages.
i’d like to see them produce the same results using real physics, instead of their “suspension of real physics” model.
even the professor’s language in the video [at 2:50] is supect:
He’s telling us that their was a question of honesty they fought over. -but wants to believe that in this instance, they didn’t.
-seems honesty over the modeling data still persists 8 years after the fact. barring anything else, why should i believe them now, -when the engineers themselves question it?
“almost exactly”?? -wtf is that?
i’m sorry, but in a study this important “almost” doesn’t cut it.
this guy has said enough in this one statement to indicate that is *still* suspect and the people doing the study had problems with it as well.
people often “leak” information when “bending the facts” (to put it nicely) -you’ll find this sprinkled throughout the arguments on both sides. -learn about it.
anyway, if the official story did not blatantly suspend the laws of physics, maybe their would not be such an outcry. as it stands now, nothing has changed in this aspect.
-except perhaps, that you’d have to be a complete ignoramus to still believe the official story given these simple facts.
the other problem is that current mainstream science is famous for immediately blacklisting anyone who asks intelligent questions.
-sadly, this attitude has spilled over to those in the general populous that still have no clue how to think for themselves, but think they do. [this is especially true of the “intellectual” crowd]
look at it another way:
modern science really only consists of only two categories: -those who agree with every word of the standard model(s), and cranks.
sound familiar?
Hah, hah. #78–Obama F==thanks for the laugh. Good way to start the day. You gave me some good info despite yourself and thats why we all herd here.
My goodness, what a jag-off ((Sorry Jag)) you display regarding “All Parameters.” At Post #66, if you read or could remember the VERY NEXT SENTENCE you could have saved everyone from having to read half your post.
Now, regardless of subject or author, if I posted an issue I seriously cared about AND NO ONE RESPONDED, making me BEG FOR A RESPONSE, and someone took pity on me and responded half way reasonably, I would thank them. THAT way, no one would have A GOOD REASON to think I was an A-Hole. They could only form that opinion after reading 3-4-5 of my posts. You appear to be an expert at alienating people–by initial confusing post and by hostile and irrelevant response.
OH! Second jag-off ((Sorry Jag)) on use of term “expert.” So touchy. You want to brag about doing a lot of modeling and then argue about being called an expert??? Kinda schizophrenic don’t you think?
Expert: someone who has more knowledge on a subject than the average person. Maybe you require higher credentials? If so, why are you posting?
Indeed, most people posting here are experts on those subjects they choose to comment on. Are there more qualified experts out there? Thankfully, yes. Are you one of them? A self proclaimed, no.
The process you describe on how to make a working model DEFINITELY demonstrates what I and others have pointed out to Uncle Dave==it doesn’t prove anything. What did you explicate except that you can build a model to act just like some observed event??? – – – – – – Nothing.
Well done. I look forward to your next 3-4-5 and establishment of your expert status.
For all you 911 Conspiracists out there:
Why is Post #55–Cap’nKangaroo’s report of bridges burning down not completely dispositive of fire causing steel structures to collapse? Not a mathematical egg head study==real life.
Why is real life not informing to you good folks?
(Dedicated to the victims families, most of which still agree with those who seek a new investigation)
http://twaud.io/9J
“WTC 7 won’t go away,
I don’t know how to tell my baby,
I saw it happen later,
Almost half past five,
Down like an elevator,
Could not believe my eyes,
I tried to listen for it,
But all I heard were lies,
I started digging deeper,
You gotta look inside, (oh!)
I started digging deeper,
Nothing was making sense,
It was a prison planet,
It’s got me on defense,
There was still molten metal,
Found weeks after those events,
It’s getting hot in here,
I think I need to vent,
WTC 7 won’t go away,
I don’t know how to tell my baby,
WTC 7 won’t go away,
It never happened before,
To fall with just a flame,
Three times it happened that day,
Despite the strength of steel,
There were no bodies left,
No concrete & no fax machines,
I’m searching for an answer,
Even if it seems insane,
WTC 7 won’t go away,
I don’t know how to tell my baby,
WTC 7 won’t go away,
You can’t stop us now,
Because we are coming for you,
You can’t stop us now,
Cuz truth is coming for you,
WTC 7 won’t go away….
WTC, how and how – why?”
you can tell a baby anything and they will believe it—95% of them right on into adulthood with 90% of them right on until they die.
Yes, what you tell babies is very important.
The video or program doesn’t prove anything.
Some peoples happiness & sometimes indeed even their livelihoods DEPEND on them not seeing facts clearly.
Hey Bobo the poopy guy that has way too much time on his hands,.. , how about telling “the babies” (or significant others which is who it was directed to) the truth instead of telling them “anything” they will believe?
How about trying to live in truth? If that actually means anything to you.
Forgive me for being so bold as to dare to ask for truth in my life & the lives of those (The Jersey Girls?) who feel they have been lied to.
How about answering the charge by a panel of international scientists that a military grade, nano-thermite was found in the dust? How about reading that paper instead of being a person who thrives on obsfucation?
How about making your own peer reviewed paper to refute it if you don’t believe it?
Or how about you get a real job/life that keeps you away from this blog for more than 2 hours?
“Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information
8/30/2009”
http://www.news-n-views.com/asp/articlenews.asp?place=0659587&issue_date=8/30/2009&edent=2167894&art_id=2560
# 8 pedro:
“…No amount of facts will deter a conspiracy true believer anyway.”
When you are right, you are right, as evidenced right here in these comments.
# 20 VisiblePerson
# 24 Rabble Rouser
# 31 Faxon
# 33 Rabble Rouser
“There are kerosene heaters that burn kerosene, and are made of metals that are weaker than structural steel, and they never become weak or break! I have owned one such heater for more than 10 years!”
Those heaters are vented and are not supporting fifteen or twenty floors of large office building. I bet if you stuffed something combustible in the end of that heater it would go up in flames and if you piled a few concrete blocks on top of it as well, it would soon collapse.
“Furthermore, to reach the maximum temperature, one must have a concentrated source of oxygen.”
Let’s see… There’s oxygen in air. How could lots of air have come from to feed the flames? How about those huge gaping holes in the side of the building where the airplane just went through?
“…engine blocks…”
Engine blocks have highly engineered cooling systems. Have you ever run an engine with a cooling failure, either lost coolant or a dead water pump? Go ahead, drain your radiator one day and see how far you get on the freeway.
“We need a new, truly independent review of the incident…”
If you don’t believe either the National Institutes of Standards and Technology or the Civil Engineering Department of Purdue University is sufficiently independent, I have no idea just who would be, short of God Himself! I suspect even His word would not be sufficient for you!
# 44 juju:
“…How could they possibly know exactly how and where the plane made impact?…”
Uh, maybe because there were pictures of it broadcast to the entire world all day! One news camera caught the first impact; the second was covered by thousands of cameras all over the city, and the footage of both, as well as close-up shots of the gaping, smoking holes was broadcast by every network and news channel all day long. Where were you?
# 46 Gawdmachine [What the *#$&$%* is this magical material “nano thermite” and where can I get some?
# 49 Carcarius
# 50 Troublemaker
# 56 eaze
# 61 zorkor
# 65 jealousmonk
# 67 Rick Cain
# 77 Stars & Bars
# 79 Winston Smith
# 80 soundwash
bobbo — I won’t argue over whether this is PROOF of anything, but it _is_ EVIDENCE, don’t you think? Even criminal prosecutors only need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond all possible doubt!
I also have an argument about the magic phrase that seems to snow so many, “falling at the rate of gravity” and the like, but it takes too much space and this is too long already.
Y’all have a nice day, and stay out of burning buildings, y’hear?
#88–Uncle Patso==yes, it is “evidence” but only to the degree that everything is evidence. The more precise question would be is it evidence of what it purports to prove? or in a legal sense: is it admissible? I don’t think it would be admissible for the reasons I have given above–but in review==models have to be built and then tested in the real world, not the other way around. It really is just that simple, the naysaying of local experts notwithstanding.
From: Obamaforever
To: The Great I Have My Head Up My Ass bobbo
per # 81
also look at #54, #66, #78,
I think I hit a nerve when I said that you pulled the definition of “expert” out of your ass.
You threw me a bomb when you called me an
“expert”. I threw a bomb right back at you.
If you do not like my tone then do not throw bombs,you twit.
bobbo, you called me a “expert”. If you think
that I am an “expert” why do you disagree with me? You have never modeled a goddamn thing in
your whole miserable life , but you tell me I do not know what I am talking about. This tells me you do not know how to think.
I have told you if you wanted more information on how the towers were modeled you should call
the people who modeled the towers. Have you
done this? I am guessing that the reason you will not call is because you do not want to learn how models are created. This makes you an idiot, bobbo- pure and simple. The purest definition of “idiot” is one that you cannot talk to. They have a closed mind. bobbo, you have a closed mind on the subject of modeling. This makes you an idiot on the subject of modeling.
I cannot speak for Uncle Dave or Uncle Patso (see #88, good post Uncle Patso), but I do not think I would be too far off the mark if I say that all three of us think you are a complete utter ass when it comes to the subject of modeling. Uncle Dave and Uncle Patso, please tell me if this is not how you think about
bobbo on the subject of modeling.
Call the towers’ modelers and learn something, you stupid twit.
bye, idiot.
#90–ObamaF==silly man. Taking offense when none was given.
OK, ok, ok==YOU are not expert. Why should I call anyone when I posted I didn’t have any “real” questions?
Hah, hah. You have participated in this blog and yet evidence no understanding of how it functions. You must have a faulty model in mind.
Heh, heh. Silly person. You smell like a person from France.
From: Obamaforever
To: bobbo the idiot
per # 91
I would rather smell like someone from
France then smell like an idiot, you idiot.
If you do not like my questions and/or posts
please do not respond to them-O.K., you
frigging thumb-sucking idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA!
P.S. Calling me an “expert” was a slur. If
you do not know what “slur” means you
can look it up in your goddamn dictionary.
bye, you self-serving twit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!