Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
You're right, he's just an editor. But he's an editor for POPULAR MECHANICS, discussing their 9/11 articles, for which they:
|
I've already addressed the entire PopMech book elsewhere. I'm not doing it again and please present your own work.
The correct point that the man in the video is an editor and has no expertise on the subject still stands.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
I doubt that you've personally consulted "more than 70 professionals" about concepts of Engineering, nor have you acted as an editor for a technical magazine. While you might call his credibility into account, I think that (at the very least) he has more contacts and more relevant engineering knowledge than you or Alex Jones.
|
You're right, I've contacted
a lot more than 70 people who work in fields that are relevant to the discussion, but that means exactly nothing. "I've contacted 70 engineers" is not a fact and is not evidence. This is both your first and last warning. Facts and evidence only. Assertions and fallacies can go in Paranoia, but have no place in this thread.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
Do you know who the man speaking was? His name is Brent Blanchard. He's the author of "A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 and 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT", available
here He's not a stranger to scientific publication, and has a handful available, including: A History of Explosive Demolition in America". Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique: 27–44, International Society of Explosives Engineers. ISSN 0732-619X. He is also the DIRECTOR of Field Operations for Protec, who describe themselves as: |
This doesn't disprove the fact that the wreckage was immediately shipped out and that they had days, not years, to locate blasting caps. A degree, being a director, and being an author on a subject does not allow one to control the passage of time.
This will be the last time a title will be used in lieu of evidence in this thread. "Dr." isn't the same as "is always correct". Evidence cannot lie.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
Which link? You've presented quite a few, and I missed the one that "proved" that trusses were "of course"not heated and did not cause the collapse.
|
http://web.archive.org/web/200308181...fire/fr006.htm