Martin Sheen: 9/11 Questions 'Unanswered,' Building 7 'Very Suspicious'

[tomk52]

56. Just ... wow ...

OC,
I read your post. I am simply stunned...
You sound intelligent. You string together words into complete, sensible sentences.

And yet...
"wow".

My first post. I'll strain to be polite. But it's hard for me.
I am a 60 year-old mechanical engineer. Been at it my whole career, some significant success. But, in this profession, they beat the "concern for others' self-esteem" out of you. There are only 2 answers to engineering questions: right, & every other answer. (Which come in a couple of flavors that range from "wrong", to "stupid", to "f**ken stupid". To engineers, the "f-word" adjective just means "very". "Stupid" is automatically applied every single time someone repeats an "already-shown-to-be wrong" reply. As of 2008 or so, every truther argument is FIRMLY in the "f'ken stupid" set.)

It is pretty darn clear that you have no idea who either Zdenek Bazant or Anders Bjorkman are.

Bazant vs. Bjorkman is Godzilla vs. Bambi. It's Dwight Howard vs. Paris Hilton, 1-on-1 in the paint. It's a grudge match between The Rock & PeeWee Hermann. But ONLY if Bambi, Paris & PeeWee have gone off of their meds.

Look up Dr. Bazant here: http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/ and a list of his approximately 800 peer-reviewed articles, textbooks (full & chapters), etc., in structural engineering & the stability of large structures here: http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/publicat.pdf. I would strongly suggest that you scan the titles.

It was no accident that Dr. Bazant produced the first competent engineering assessment of the cause of the collapse of the towers in the week after the event: He is one of the WORLD's leading authority on the collapse of large structures. Unlike others, he didn't have to learn the principles. He has taught the principles, hell, he has discovered the principles, over a 50 year career.

AND IN THE OTHER CORNER...!!!

Anders Bjorkman, marine insurance assessor, aka "marine architect".
Structural engineering experience: Zero.
Experience with tall buildings: Zero.
Peer reviewed engineering publications: Zero.

Sadly, Mr. Bjorkman is clueless. His asserted claim is that "if the top structure of the towers fell from 2 miles, it would still not collapse the towers."

I will not go further into his abject failings in the field of Mechanical Engineering.

With great fanfare, the article "Anders Björkman named New Petitioner of the Month" was posted at Richard Gage's AE911Truth.org website when he joined in early 2009. In fact, if you post that phrase, with quotes, into any google search, you'll find this article cited numerous times by Truther websites. One thing that you will notice only with careful observation is that it has been pulled from AE911Truth website.

And it appears that Mr. Bjorkman has been drummed out of that group. I say "appears" because I have zero personal knowledge of the details of this event. But it is very clear that he is no longer listed as a member, and that his name has been removed as a signatory to petition(s).

How does one fall from "Petitioner of the Month" to "don't let the door smack you in the butt..."?

Perhaps this is part of the reason: Mr. Bjorkman's own words.

"Any person stating that she or he has actually seen or filmed a plane crashing into WTC1/2 or seen or filmed a big fire ball around WTC 1/2 or seen or filmed WTC1/2 collapse from top causing a fountain of debris is simply lying (and should be detained [Bjorkman means "arrested"]). Reason being that the latter is physically impossible." (http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm)

He asserts, strenuously, in no uncertain terms, that every photo & every video that shows a plane hitting, entering, blowing a fireball out of the towers is "a fraud". Because he has calculated, somehow, that this event was impossible.

On his website, you will find his similar "reasoning" that proves to him, with equivalent certainty, that Atomic bombs are impossible (http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm), that there are no NASA landers on Mars, that Space Shuttle trips to low earth orbit are hoaxes and that Apollo missions could not possibly have reached the moon (http://heiwaco.tripod.com/moontravel.htm).

Mr. Bjorkmans issues go far deeper than 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.

Please trust me, OC, when I say that I point out the above NOT in an attempt to disparage Mr. Bjorkman. Mr. Bjorkman is of no consequence in the discussion of 9/11 events.

I am sorry to say, OC, that I point out the above in disparaging YOU. More specifically, your woeful epistemology.

Please try to explain to me why Truthers are so woefully inept in their (in)ability to distinguish between the absolute pinnacle of expertise (operating within his field) from abject incompetence, (operating in a universe all his own).

OC, this isn't a subtle difference between close rivals.
This was not ''I chose Ravens & you chose Niners."
This was "I chose Shaq & you chose Honey Boo Boo."

And you went with "The Boo"...?

Can you explain?


Tom

PS. Mr. Gourley's competence is no better than Mr. Bjorkman's. He's a patent attorney. You don't seem to understand the meaning of the verb "refute".

PPS. Your comment that "Bažant's work was already called by one of his peers 'the most shameful Closure in structural damage analysis history'," is 100% incorrect. The comment was made by - you guessed it - Mr. Bjorkman himself. Here: http://heiwaco.tripod.com/blgbclose.htm.

Another word whose meaning you may wish to review: "peer".