Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad
  • Blog
    Orhan Cam/Shutterstock

    The State of the Deep State

    The monster in America’s closet
    by JHK

    Wednesday, April 30, 2014, 1:43 PM

We’ve been hearing a lot about the so-called Deep State lately. What to make of this shadowy monster? Some observers link it to the paranoid fantasy called the New World Order, a staple of political talk radio (and a hobgoblin I don’t believe in). In popular movies such as the Jason Bourne epics and Mission Impossible, the Deep State launches hyper-complex schemes that work flawlessly and never fail. That is exactly why they have such high entertainment appeal. Viewers are thrilled by the precision, by the conceit of seeming infallibility. The Deep State definitely exists; it just doesn’t work the way it is depicted in the movies. 

I like to say that I’m allergic to conspiracy theories because human beings are generally too inept to carry out schemes at the grand scale, as well as being poor secret-keepers. Insider knowledge is almost always swapped around, even in secretive organizations, often recklessly so, because doling it out confers status, tactical advantage, and sometimes money for the doler-outer. But the Deep State isn’t a secret. It operates in plain sight.

Military

First, of course, is the Pentagon leviathan plus all of its suppliers, enablers, and lackeys — the beast that President Eisenhower warned his fellow citizens to beware of in his farewell address, calling it “the military-industrial complex.” It’s worse than ever, especially having engaged in two major fiascos on Asian soil the past decade, pointless escapades that cost the lives of 8,000 soldiers in action, many more maimed for life, and in suicides of servicemen returning home in despair to a spavined economy and the manifold indignities of a cruel and incompetent veterans’ bureaucracy completely unable to care for their needs. Iraq and Afghanistan proved the futility of America’s neurotic mission to try to control everything and every place in the world. In fact, the US military could not control the only two things that mattered in those faraway lands: the terrain and the behavior of the population. What else is there in a military campaign?

This did not stop President Obama from almost repeating the fiasco in Syria in 2013. Only some reality-testing by Vladimir Putin put the schnitz on that operation. For the moment, Putin has also juked Obama and his Secretary of State Kerry from further shenanigans in Ukraine, but the US looks like a sloppy drunk in a barroom at last call spoiling for a fight. We’d better hope we don’t find it. It’s one thing to fight a band of ragged Taliban in the Helmand highlands; it’s another thing to poke a country (Russia) with a thousand nukes targeting everything from Bangor to Bellingham.

Finance

Then there are the multiple vampire squids of Wall Street (shorthand for all of finance) engaged in funneling as much wealth out of the disintegrating middle class as possible, creaming off gargantuan transaction fees, premiums, and spreads from every transaction in the entire universe (especially in their carry-trade with the Federal Reserve), and buying off elected officials wholesale, by the hundredweight, to ensure that their swindling operations go unimpeded. Wall Street’s hired servelings now write the latest laws for financial regulation. It is nothing but racketeering on the grandest scale, plain and simple, and it is sponsored wholeheartedly by the Deep State. The Supreme Court has lent a hand in this by defining corporations as persons entitled to express political fellowship via unlimited cash contributions to election campaigns. Wall Street is assisted in turn by the thoroughly corrupt two major political parties. The fabled “revolving door” that shuffles Wall Street executives in and out of government now spins so fast that it is more like a turbine than a door. The degeneracy of Wall Street is covered sufficiently elsewhere in my writings to leave it at that for the purposes of this essay.

Security

Present worries over the Deep State are focused on its massive security apparatus, made up of a combination of venerable old institutions such as the CIA and the Defense Intelligence services with some newer ones such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Safety Agency (TSA), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the good ol' IRS, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and God knows how many out-of-sight “security” offices in the dark precincts of seemingly benign agencies like the National Parks Service and the Bureau of Weights and Measures. On top of all that, add the newly militarized local police all across this land with their camo-clad SWAT teams, bomb-proof Hummers, grenade-launchers, surveillance drones, 20-ton Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles (MRAPs), military-grade helicopters, and in the case of one Arizona sheriff’s department, a pre-owned US Army tank.

The sheer multiplication of “security” officialdom ought to give a sentient citizen a case of the vapors. The work of these outfits is supposedly coordinated by the new umbrella entity, the National Security Agency (NSA), but that’s probably too slippery a description for the organized chaos it represents. The NSA can only pretend to manage all these posses of tech-drunk cowboys. The NSA is a pretense wrapped in a wish shrouded in techno-narcissism.

Grafted onto this armature of old and new bureaucracies is a matrix of private contractors who do much of the actual dirty work and heavy lifting for the official agencies. These private contractors are hugely overpaid (by taxpayers) and are subject to little oversight outside the agencies who hire them — who, in turn, have a keen interest in concealing any misbehavior perpetrated by their private contractors. Outside of that ring of techies, hit men, and errand boys is an asteroid belt of domestic spying infrastructure based in the internet, featuring companies that, willingly or not, funnel information about the myriad activities of individual citizens to the government. These include online retailers, Google and other search engines, banks, credit card companies, health care orgs, phone companies, universities, etc. Then, of course, there is the gigantic corps of lobbyists, public relations spinners, media pimps, corporate consultants, legislative staffers, and other enablers and fixers of Deep State operations. These highly-paid parasites are the ones largely responsible for Washington becoming the third-richest ranked metro area in the nation.

This ever-growing network has been constructed right out in the open with a long lead-up after World War Two, and then an exponential ramp-up following the attacks of 9/11/01 and the paranoia entailed by it. It is surely a remarkable thing that there have been no terror acts on the grand scale in America since 9/11. The 2013 Boston marathon “pressure cooker” bombs that killed 3 people and maimed over 250 others was a way smaller op than 9/11 and relatively amateurish, and the Deep State did not prevent the Chechen Tsarnaev brothers from pulling it off despite the fact that the elder brother, Tamerlan, had been on an FBI watch list for two years prior to the bombing. The Fort Hood massacre of 2009 (13 fatalities) was perpetrated by, of all things, an army psychiatrist Major Nidal Malik Hasan. You’d think the army would have been onto this fellow… he being right under its nose… but what better illustration of basic institutional failure?

There has been surprisingly little else. Perhaps that is due to the diligent work of these bureaucracies. But I find it hard to believe that they had much to do with the absence of terror acts against the countless “soft targets” across the nation. For instance, a small squad of half a dozen jihadists might have entered any one of a thousand big regional shopping malls across America with enough ordnance in a duffle bag to kill a few hundred people. It hasn’t happened, but can anyone say it’s because the National Security apparatus prevented it? I’ve been in many malls the past thirteen years and none of them had any security screening at their doors whatsoever. Anyone could stroll in with an Uzi tucked under his London Fog and blast away. Yet, the known attempted dastardly deeds that were prevented by the Deep State — the 2010 Times Square car bomber, the airplane underwear bomber — you can count on the fingers of one hand.  Of course, the airplane shoe bomber wasn’t stopped until the very moment he tried (and failed) to light his Nikes. Lucky he was a klutz.

In any case, the monumental new combined security apparatus has been given carte blanche to elaborate itself, to grow ever more branches and buds so that it is now a kind of creeping, suffocating, parasitical vine entombing the edifice of the Republic behind a scrim of toxic administrative overgrowth. The remarkable thing all along has been the lack of protest from just about any quarter of the American polity, either the citizens themselves or their elected representatives. Now and again an elderly airline passenger will complain about being groped by an ardent TSA officer, but on the whole the broad public does not seem to care about having its privacy stripped away, even after Edward Snowden burst on the scene with his revelations of what should have been perfectly obvious to anyone who thought about it for half a minute — namely, that government agents could not possibly resist the temptation to harvest those bounteous crops of data accumulating in all the humming server farms all over the country.

It was really only a few weeks ago when one politician did offer a few yelps of objection. That would be Senator Diane Feinstein who, as chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, was investigating torture carried out by the CIA following 9/11 and in the wars engendered by it. The CIA response to the committee’s requests for information was a 6.2 million-page data-dump of un-collated, un-indexed memos and cables — obviously designed to confound, impede, and delay any discovery of misconduct. On a number of occasions both the CIA and White House staff lied to the committee about the handling of documents, which, of course, distracted attention from the substance of what was in the documents: evidence of programmatic torture. It would be fair to say that CIA personnel jerked the committee around in every way possible to avoid providing coherent answers to straightforward questions and requests. CIA Director John Brennan repeatedly stonewalled Senator Feinstein’s letters, simply refusing to reply. As the tussle heated up, the CIA hacked the Senate committee staff’s computers. Then they went a step further and referred senate committee staffers to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution in mishandling secret documents. The CIA’s general counsel who made the referral was, in fact, a lawyer in the CIA’s counter-terrorism unit when the alleged tortures took place  — meaning, he had approved them — and his name appeared 1,600 times in the Senate committee’s report.

Senator Feinstein, formerly a dogged supporter of the CIA and its redundant cousin agencies, finally lost it. She held a press conference and pretty much denounced the whole wicked business as an attempt to intimidate the committee and obstruct constitutional oversight of the CIA’s activities.

Who Is Watching The Watchmen?

The affair raises very troubling questions, chiefly: has this vast “security” apparatus become by stealth a fourth branch of the United States Government?  Does it think itself to be more equal than the other branches? Does its existence undermine the rule of law in this nation? And what do we ordinary citizens of this republic do about it? (Assuming we are still a republic.) We’ll touch on these matters in Part 2: How To Oppose The Deep State

Click here to access Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access).

Related content
» More

82 Comments

  • Wed, Apr 30, 2014 - 2:49pm

    #1

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    For fear of

    sounding very tedious on the issue of 9/11. In addition to Mish Shedlock,do we now have Mr Kunstler denying the hard evidence pointing to direct Federal involvement in the terror attacks on 911. Come on James get your investigational head on and do a little due diligence.

     

    http://www.killingauntiefilms.co.uk/

     

    As for the Boston bombing…well its not all that it seems!

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 1:10am

    Reply to #1

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    A lot of bad information in

    A lot of bad information in that video. The team with the backpacks in the photos were members of the national guards civil support team.
    Craft International is a consulting and training service group. They are not private contractors.The reason the national guard member was wearing the Craft hat is likely because Craft Int. trains government personal and he probably attended a workshop.
    The "unidentified device" in the photo is a radiation detector. Obviously the national guard member was testing for radiation after the explosion went off.
    The rest of the video contained no logical or identifiable evidence despite claiming that it is showing it to you throughout the video… No thanks

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 10:31am

    #2

    SudburyHardRockMiner

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 01 2014

    Posts: 10

    "I like to say that I’m

    "I like to say that I’m allergic to conspiracy theories because human beings are generally too inept to carry out schemes at the grand scale, as well as being poor secret-keepers. Insider knowledge is almost always swapped around, even in secretive organizations, often recklessly"

    I disagree.  

    How long has the NSA been spying on everyone's communications – decades?   How many hundreds of thousands of people have worked at the NSA while this was happening — and would most definitely had know what was going on?

    How many of these hundreds of thousands blew the whistle?   Uh…. one — Edward Snowden.

    It is very easy to understand how a sinister secret would remain secret – a few reasons:

    – the government destroys whistle blowers

    – the government pays people 'in the know' good salaries — why rock the boat?

    – if you rock the boat what is the upside?  ZERO.   Downside?  Career totally destroyed – life totally destroyed – reputation totally destroyed by the MSM

    I would argue the exact opposite of what you say a secret is difficult to keep – it is VERY easy to keep.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 12:44pm

    Reply to #1

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    I cannot argue

    against your comments, but I still cannot believe that the security apparatus had no hand in the proceedings after all IMHO that is one of reasons why America is in the condition that it is in. The number of false flag ops conducted by your so called own protectors is quite staggering.These two guys it would appear were quite inept at what they did on that day in Boston, by placing bombs in an area swarming with security at a high profile event being filmed and broadcast to a sizeable audience. Would it not have been easier and more deadly to have bombed a packed out Macdonalds or shopping mall complex somewhere that is very busy but lacking in security cover, allowing an easier escape?
    Just another set up in my opinion to enforce more of the fascist police state upon the masses.
    Just my tuppence worth.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 1:47pm

    #3

    Arthur Robey

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 03 2010

    Posts: 1814

    An old Trooper.

    A very long time ago in a land far, far away I was professional in an elite unit. Agent Provocateur is one job description, Terrorist is another.

    Just like a pilot is a professional who gets training specific to his career so APs and Ts get theirs. Their training can be thorough. For instance the professional terrorist is taught to make use of the enemies media. His aims are not to bring a country to it's knees by destroying infrastructure but to destroy a country by destroying civil liberties by instilling fear. The more news-worthy their acts the better the effect.

    But I digress. Every military operation is by necessity a conspiracy, planned in exquisite detail.

    Agent Provocateur. So someone was shooting indiscriminately in the Ukraine? And the culprit was never found? And everyone is now willing to go to war with everyone else?

    Bingo.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 3:25pm

    Reply to #2

    davefairtex

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 3084

    snowden was #4

    How many of these hundreds of thousands blew the whistle?   Uh…. one — Edward Snowden.

    Not exactly.  There have been three other whistleblowers, but Snowden was the only one to collect a mountain of evidence and release it to reporters.
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/

    Thomas Drake, William Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe belong to a select fraternity: the NSA officials who paved the way.
    For years, the three whistle-blowers had told anyone who would listen that the NSA collects huge swaths of communications data from U.S. citizens. They had spent decades in the top ranks of the agency, designing and managing the very data-collection systems they say have been turned against Americans. When they became convinced that fundamental constitutional rights were being violated, they complained first to their superiors, then to federal investigators, congressional oversight committees and, finally, to the news media.

    The NSA is a perfect example of a conspiracy that wasn't kept.  Its just that Snowden scampered off with about 50 smoking guns and they didn't.  But their lives were still ruined by what they did.  I recall reading about Binney perhaps 10 years ago.  I believed him, to me he was quite credible, and from that point on I assumed everything I said was being recorded by NSA.
    I just think few others paid attention.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 4:04pm

    #4

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    2013: A Silver Market in Review

    For folks concerned about silver prices today, I finally finished my analysis this morning and I hope some of you may find this helpful…

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 4:44pm

    Reply to #4
    Farmer Brown

    Farmer Brown

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 23 2008

    Posts: 158

    Silver

    Awesome video, charts and analysis – thanks! My only question is why did this go under the Deep State article? Should be its own forum topic IMO!

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 4:52pm

    Reply to #4

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    I wanted people to see it I guess

    I need to make back my $25 microphone investment! Maybe that's rude. I'll let the moderators decide if they want to delete this posting or not. Thanks for watching.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 5:15pm

    Reply to #4
    Keith Manssen

    Keith Manssen

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 10 2012

    Posts: 39

    How about Au?

    Thanks for the analysis, WT! Now, how about a similar analysis on gold?
    Best,
    Keith

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 5:29pm

    #5

    AKGrannyWGrit

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 06 2011

    Posts: 427

    Video

    I personally enjoyed watching your video Wildlife Tracker and as someone who doesn't obsess about gold and silver I never would have seen the video were it tucked away where ever gold and silver info goes. The video was short and informative, just the way they should be IMO.

    AK Granny

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 7:21pm

    Reply to #4

    RNcarl

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 13 2008

    Posts: 179

    Good Spot

    [quote=Farmer Brown]Awesome video, charts and analysis – thanks! My only question is why did this go under the Deep State article? Should be its own forum topic IMO!
    [/quote]
     
    I think it's a good spot for the chart under the context of how the "deep state" manipulates… everything.
    I agree, it is provocative enough to earn its own topic!
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 7:30pm

    #6

    RNcarl

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 13 2008

    Posts: 179

    Where is my tin hat?

    Well,

    I have mentioned before that I am not a fan of JHK. But this time, his cutting snarky comments ring true with me. I see all of the issues he has brought to light. I live among members of the "military industrial complex." I see first hand the "chest thumping" and flag waving. How many bombs and guns do we need? For a small percentage of the deep state budget, we could really, really end hunger in this country. And, for a few pennies more, provide college education for all who want it.

     

    I have labeled JHK a "grumpy old man" in the past, So, this time, I guess that makes me one too!

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 7:37pm

    #7

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Moved the discussion to the Silver and Gold group!

    Keith: Gold is something I probably will work on, but gold is less dependent on its industrial role (although still reflects production costs), so therefore this analysis would probably be less meaningful focused on gold. Gold is not as dependent on constant production because it's demand is almost entirely for hoarding and storing whereas silver is consumed and constant production is vital. Analysis on gold's monetary role is far more important and relevant. I still plan to take a look at it though.

    Granny: Thank you. I am happy you found the information useful! Believe it or not, my past videos have been much shorter!

     

     

     

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 7:55pm

    Reply to #2
    jcat3022

    jcat3022

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 09 2012

    Posts: 58

    On Point

    if you want a glimpse at how well the folks in the NSA are doing (financially), look at the real estate in Howard County, MD.  It's minutes from NSA headquarters & boasts some of the highest per capita incomes in the US.  They are paid very handsomely for what they do & live like royalty in the old USSA.Our good friends are both Federal Gov't employees.  They are taking home a combined income of probably $250-300k.  He can retire in 9 years at the age of 43 w/ a pension and lifetime benefits.  I have never had the heart to tell him that they are gouging the rest of us.  Even if I did, I highly doubt they would even understand.  They are very much entrenched in the deep state. 
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 9:10pm

    Reply to #2

    SingleSpeak

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 30 2008

    Posts: 162

    If You Do

    mention it to them, please have a hidden camera running. The response would be enlightening I'm sure.SS

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Thu, May 01, 2014 - 11:11pm

    Reply to #4

    Arthur Robey

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 03 2010

    Posts: 1814

    Excellent analysis Wildlife Tracker.

    Give my regards to your teachers. They did a good job.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 2:11am

    #8

    apismellifera

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 08 2010

    Posts: 33

    Struck me as kind of shabby

    The topic of the Deep State is of great interest to me, but this JHK piece seems rather dashed off and sloppy. One major gaffe:

    The work of these outfits is supposedly coordinated by the new umbrella entity, the National Security Agency (NSA)

    The NSA is anything but a "new umbrella entity."  It's been around for decades, gathering and decrypting data, (and suffering from a serious case of mission creep in the 21st century.)

    I'd at least expect a factually correct taxonomy of the various entities, so this did not inspire confidence in the author's grasp of the topic, (as appropriate as the tone may be!)

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 6:05am

    #9

    jrf29

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 18 2008

    Posts: 166

    RE: Struck me as kind of shabby

    One could also point out that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (which Kunstler mentions) ceased to exist by that name over a decade ago.

    But Jim Kunstler is very intelligent, and I still value his analysis.  Also, Kunstler himself has said that he does not really view himself as a researcher or number-crunching analyst.  What he mostly tries to contribute are his skills as a writer — a word-smith.  He takes dry facts about things like oil depletion and government bureaucracies and tries to weave them into powerful prose with emotional impact. 

    In other words, his specialty is taking complex issues that the population is inclined to ignore (like the deep state), and framing them in a way that is powerful.  And he does an admirable job.  His quotes are memorable:

    [quote] [Paraphrasing] "The truth is that no combination of solar, wind, ethanol, biodiesel, tar sands and used French-fry grease will allow us to power Wal-Mart, Disney World and the interstate highway system — or even a fraction of these things — in the future.  We're going to have to do things very differently.   We cannot continue to run what we're running the way we're running it.  The age of the 3,000 mile Ceasar salad is coming to an end." [/quote]

    When I read or listen to Kunstler, I don't only listen to his analysis, I also pay attention to how he phrases things, because he demonstrates how to say things with impact.

    And I consider this vitally important.  As Chris has said, most people run on emotion and beliefs, not facts.  If you want to learn how to move people, you don't only need to grasp the facts, you need to grasp how to speak and write with emotional impact.  And in my opinion Jim Kunstler teaches this art very well.
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 11:27am

    Reply to #1

    LesPhelps

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 30 2009

    Posts: 461

    Bankers Slave wrote:In

    [quote=Bankers Slave]In addition to Mish Shedlock,do we now have Mr Kunstler denying the hard evidence pointing to direct Federal involvement in the terror attacks on 911.
    [/quote]
    This topic goes well beyond believing that the global economy is sustainable.
    A lot of otherwise rational people are deeply offended if you bring up the possibility that our government would engage in a terrorist act of this magnitude.
    I don't think you can break through that barrier.  I stopped trying.  The argument frequently gets too personal and emotional for my taste.
    I can't think of this topic without visualizing Dorothy finding the Wizard of OZ behind the curtain.  He is clearly visible for all to see.  People simply refuse to look because even the mention of the idea is offensive. 
    I mentioned it to one of my daughters once.  Her earnest reply was that there are some things you just don't want to know.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 12:02pm

    Reply to #1

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    I am beginning to

    now understand the magnitude of denial in many issues of a conspiratorial flavour.Just the other day when I was handing out fliers regarding the AE911truth.org organization, I was approached by a husband and wife who were both 911 truthers. My eyes were starting to well up, having never met in person anyone that is willing to stride into the no mans land that is the faked war on terror. It is days like this that give me hope….or am I the one living in denial?
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 2:58pm

    Reply to #1

    RNcarl

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 13 2008

    Posts: 179

    LesPhelps wrote:Bankers

    [quote=LesPhelps]
    [quote=Bankers Slave]
    In addition to Mish Shedlock,do we now have Mr Kunstler denying the hard evidence pointing to direct Federal involvement in the terror attacks on 911.
    [/quote]
    This topic goes well beyond believing that the global economy is sustainable.
    A lot of otherwise rational people are deeply offended if you bring up the possibility that our government would engage in a terrorist act of this magnitude.
    I don't think you can break through that barrier.  I stopped trying.  The argument frequently gets too personal and emotional for my taste.
    I can't think of this topic without visualizing Dorothy finding the Wizard of OZ behind the curtain.  He is clearly visible for all to see.  People simply refuse to look because even the mention of the idea is offensive. 
    I mentioned it to one of my daughters once.  Her earnest reply was that there are some things you just don't want to know.
    [/quote]
    I agree, I too believe there is something rotten in D.C. Notice that no one mentions Bldg. 7 very much? That looks like a truly planned "take down."
    I still, to this moment, find it hard to stomach that the tin hat crowd may just be right on this one. Which leads me to agree with your daughter's sentiment. On this topic,  I don't want to know, what I want to know.
    How does that movie line go? "You want to know the truth? You can't handle the truth!"

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 3:14pm

    #10

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    It's all about the belief systems

    To confront something like bldg 7 is to confront a multitude of very deeply entrenched belief systems.  

    The information, the science itself, is incontrovertible; the building came down at free fall speed for nearly 3 full seconds of its descent.  Therefore there was zero resistance during that time.  Therefore there could not have been any intact steel framing on any one of the four corners or at any place on any of the floors that occupy a vertical distance covered by 3 seconds of free fall.

    Ergo it's not possible that the 'fire took it down' narrative put forth by the NIST to be even remotely among a set of plausible explanations.  The current 'explanation' violates science and physical laws.  The conservation of momentum, being one.

    Once one has gone through this very simple intellectual exercise, however, what comes next is not so simple.  A whole constellation of belief systems get twanged.  Perhaps faith in authority, or the goodness of people.  Believing one narrative but then being confronted with the truth of another is always a jarring experience, as anybody who has had their trust violated by someone they thought they knew well understands.

    We have a lot of very uncomfortable truths to confront on a whole wide range of issues and I actually have a lot of compassion for everybody who is not able to face them on their own terms.  Eventually they will have to face them on some other terms, and that's ;likely to be a rough time for them.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 6:19pm

    #11
    Doug

    Doug

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 01 2008

    Posts: 1353

    Quote:Ergo it's not possible

    [quote]Ergo it's not possible that the 'fire took it down' narrative put forth by the NIST to be even remotely among a set of plausible explanations.  The current 'explanation' violates science and physical laws.  The conservation of momentum, being one.[/quote]

    Given your orientation to data backed evidence, do you have an explanation that is supported by the evidence?  Or is that in the realm left to conspiracy theorists?

    Doug

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 8:24pm

    Reply to #11

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    Go to ae911truth.org

    "You can successfully contradict NIST.But you will have a hard time doing that to Sir Isaac Newton"

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 8:25pm

    Reply to #11

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    Scientifically we can say....

    [quote=Doug][quote]Ergo it's not possible that the 'fire took it down' narrative put forth by the NIST to be even remotely among a set of plausible explanations.  The current 'explanation' violates science and physical laws.  The conservation of momentum, being one.[/quote]
    Given your orientation to data backed evidence, do you have an explanation that is supported by the evidence?  Or is that in the realm left to conspiracy theorists?
    Doug
    [/quote]
    Scientifically we can say, without any doubt and in conformance with the law of conservation of momentum, that there was no structural resistance during the free fall phase.
    The only explanation that conforms to that is that the steel framing members were somehow removed or cut.
    That much is certain.  
    There aren't that many ways to remove structural steel effectively all at once, but there we have to begin to speculate, so I'll leave it at that.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 9:07pm

    Reply to #11

    Arthur Robey

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 03 2010

    Posts: 1814

    Wisdom

    so I'll leave it at that.

    A good idea. I like this site too much for it to suddenly go off-line.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Fri, May 02, 2014 - 9:09pm

    #12

    darbikrash

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 25 2009

    Posts: 297

    Thanks to JHK for a great

    Thanks to JHK for a great article. I agree with previous commentary that highlights not just his message, but the way the message is delivered. We need more of this hard hitting clarity to bring the attention to things that are meaningful- not just controversial.

     

    I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.

     

    To head down this rabbit hole may well be interesting to some, but this dilutes the larger point the Kunstler is making, and deflects us away from important and actionable conclusions- which is precisely what he is warning against.

    The recent popularity of the term ‘Deep State’ springs forth from a series of essays and interviews promoted by Mike Lofgren, ex-Republican congressional staffer who has widely denounced the Republican Party. His recent interview on Bill Moyers' PBS program focused nearly exclusively on discussion of the so-called ‘Deep State’.

    Largely because of Lofgren’s status as a “fallen angel”, his testimony has reached whistleblower status, and appears congruent with another emerging theme, which like a wave sweeping the public discourse, is gathering momentum. This emergent theme in the public consciousness is the slow realization that corporations are colluding with government to act in ways that undermine not only individual freedoms, but threaten the very foundation and basis of democracy.

    While to some this might seem obvious, this is profoundly disturbing to much of the conservative narrative that clogs the mainstream media. The pre-packaged for consumption explanation for matters that concern declining liberties, government overreach, and free market debauchery is laid at the feet of what has been generally termed the “Crony Capitalist”. The Cronies are described as statistical outliers, a deviant form that is equal part sociopath and no-good villain, but nevertheless, an anomaly, a circus attraction or side show to the pursuit of all that is Good and Just in the free market.

    But this narrative is sounding more and more shrill as the evidence is mounting that such matters are not the handiwork of statistical outliers, rather, they are intrinsic contradictions that are systemic and widespread through our political economy, and in fact are endemic to Capitalism.

    The concept of the Deep State represents an evolution of this cronyist thinking, and implies that there is deep and incontrovertible linkage between Capital and the levers of governance. In short, government is at the very least influenced- and some would more correctly claim completely captured- by Capital.

    If you’re a free market evangelist this is really bad news, and does not sit well. In response we see pages of conspiracy theories, with every single investment newsletter screaming ‘manipulation’ when the observable does not match the narrative. Like the much maligned comparisons to heliocentric theory, ever more complex schemes and explanations are required to try and explain something that is fundamentally based on conceptual error- with the schemes becoming more vivid and complex as new data continues to pile on refuting even basic assumptions. Easier to dream anew than scrap the narrative.

    Kunstler does a great job taking this dry edifice of a proclamation and giving tangible and visible examples of how this manifests in our world to the casual observer. He cites the horrific architecture of strip malls, the bleak urbanscape of many of our neighborhoods, begging the unspoken question- is this the best we can do?  Is this evidence of an efficient market system? He references the collection of virtually all personal data- not just by government, but more to the point- by Capital. These are linked. If Google has your data- so does the NSA- and vise-versa.

     

    Kunstler is framing the problem correctly, he has visualized the symptoms in a fashion the illustrates exactly what is going on. We may quibble that using new terms like ‘Deep State’ to define very old concepts is facile, but it tells the story, and it may help to move a decaying narrative towards something much more useful.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 5:11pm

    Reply to #2
    Thomas Finnell

    Thomas Finnell

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 16 2008

    Posts: 2

    Conspiracies - not theories

    “human beings are generally too inept to carry out schemes at the grand scale, as well as being poor secret-keepers.”The successful Manhattan Project puts the lie to that quote!

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 6:12pm

    Reply to #12

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    Not 'theories', science.

    [quote=darbikrash]I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
    [/quote]
    I understand your troubled experience because the implications are immense and therefore hard to emotionally digest.
    However, the term you use, 'conspiracy theories', is regularly used to shut down conversations and is dismissive, and therefore I'd like to request we keep the conversation focused on data, science, and facts as much as possible.
    In my case my focus was solely on matters of science.  Gravity, conservation of momentum and the like.  I do not consider these to be either theories or a matter of conspiracy.  If we cannot agree on basic science as a legitimate avenue for discussion and inquiry then I don't know quite what to do with this site.  If you have alternative scientific explanations for the observed event(s) then I am completely open-minded an curious.
    To couple the science of the bldg 7 collapse to the idea of a deep state, I find them intimately linked.  After all, how much 'deep state' do you think is required to get a scientifically oriented institution like NIST to cobble together and publish a report that fails to conform to basic, high school level physics?
    I'm  thinking 'quite a lot' is the answer.
    Again, I know the topic is emotionally difficult, and probably dangerous to discuss in today's environment, and yet the science stands in the way of letting it go.  
    There are numerous topics across all three E's to which that prior sentence applies.  How shall we approach such things around here?  Head on, sideways, or not at all?  So far we've been pretty delicate but perhaps the circumstances of the world call for a more direct set of declarations along the lines of the emperor has no clothes!

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 6:38pm

    Reply to #12

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Bad Information

    I think the hardest part of sifting through conspiracy ideas is that there is a lot of misinformation out there on top of a lot of complete nonsense. It's hard to find the real science and weed out the crap. Drawing the line is often very difficult. 
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 8:07pm

    Reply to #11

    jpitre

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 04 2009

    Posts: 42

    World Trade Center

    Chris – most of the time you analysis is at least close, however your comments on the trade center collapse are so far off as to be nonsensical and almost impossible to argue without starting from scratch and many others have done that quite well.Sorry to be so disagreeable, but in my opinion, your conclusions are way off the mark
    Jim
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 8:27pm

    #13

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    Classic!

    Jim,

    excellent display of avoidance there.

    If you want to take the time to type out your alternative scientific explanation, feel free, I'm all ears, but please don't bother to simply say I'm off the mark and you don't have the time to set me/us straight.

    The engineering and science behind my statements  is quite deep and I am 99% confident will stand any test.

    However, in the interest of the 1% chance I've missed something I'm curious.  What's your explanation for achieving freefall with resistance or, alternatively, for how structural steel can suddenly become resistanceless across all four corners of a 47 story building that occupied a full city block.  

    Use science and engineering principles please,  bearing in mind that I have the data for bldg 7 in terms of its construction, types of girders, and total mass in tonnage (framing elements only, I don't have any data on the furnishings and such, but assume those to be negligible for our purposes).

    So that's the challenge.  Explain, freefall despite resistance.  Or how all four corners all lost 100% of their resistance at the same time.  Or how it's possible for structural steel to effectively offer zero resistance.  One of those three things

    Remember, you have to account for the full 2.5 seconds of freefall which, starting from rest, means the building travelled in perfect free fall for a bit over 30 meters or 98 feet, which means you have to account for not one, but more than eight full stories of structural framing losing 100% of its resistance.  

    Feel free to show your math.

    🙂

    Seriously, this is just science, and I love science.  It works.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 8:41pm

    Reply to #11

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    There is

    a large amount of evidence/proof and dozens of eyewitness accounts of what happened that day, with special regards to the emergency services, and most of it is of audio visual recording evidence. Its all on the internet.I have my doubts that you have looked very far for this information.
      

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 8:48pm

    Reply to #12

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    Drawing the line...

    Wildlife …. you hit on a very, very important point.  In some ways, the central point I think.  That is this;  It is essential that our society gets back to critical thinking… to the exercise of critical thinking skills.  This means that we all need, as much as possible, to become self-sufficient thinkers, across a broad range of topics.  One could make the case that many of our brethren have been lulled into a sort of intellectual malaise… a laziness.  A blind trust if you will.  Is there a vast conspiracy by the one world government, agenda 21 team to dumb down our education systematically in order to breed this laziness?  I am not sure… that is near where I draw my line.. sitting just to the far side of it for now. When we open our minds and put our beliefs aside, hard as that is to do, myself included…and get to the business of research and critical thinking, we still need to draw a line somewhere.  What I mean is this;  If you just say to yourself, "now I am a critical thinker", and you start reading every liberty/conspiracy site on the internet and assuming that it is true… you are not really being a critical thinker at all.  You have to draw a line somewhere… and it's HARD to do.  But it is your line, and it is important to draw it, because doing so means that you are doing the hard work of critical thinking.  Your line can change…and you should let it.. that does not make you dumb or wrong.. it only makes you a more evolved, more experienced critical thinker.  In a world of propaganda and misdirection… critical thinking is our only hope.     
    It's fair to ask.. where do I draw my lines?  
    1)  The mass media is captured by the fascist deep state machine and no longer is a source of effective investigative journalism, but is rather a megaphone for said deep state. 
    OMG YES.  
    2)  When you look up in the sky and see persistent plane trails criss-crossing the sky.. those are the signs of chemical spraying for some nefarious purpose (maybe HARP, or geo-engineering).  Chemtrails!
    No way.  Are there a few planes around the world that can spray stuff?  I am sure they exist.  Is there mass spraying taking place everyday over the US?  No way.  This is preposterous on so many levels to my mind.
    The latest swing in terms of my own critical thinking relates to the existence or non-existence of the phenomenon known as Cold Fusion, aka Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, aka Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions.  I was of the mind that these were chemical phenomena being mistaken for nuclear.. but after watching Peter Hagelstein of MIT teaching his course earlier this year (all on Youtube) .. I have had a change of mind.  Here's a great place to start if you are interested;

    Thank you Arthur!           
     
       

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 9:03pm

    Reply to #11

    ResilientTom

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 03 2014

    Posts: 1

    jpitre wrote:Chris - most of

    [quote=jpitre]
    Chris – most of the time you analysis is at least close, however your comments on the trade center collapse are so far off as to be nonsensical and almost impossible to argue without starting from scratch and many others have done that quite well.
    Sorry to be so disagreeable, but in my opinion, your conclusions are way off the mark
    Jim
     
    [/quote]
    Hi Jim,
    Might I suggest watching this short segment from the History channel on the momentum issue Chris is mentioning here. http://youtu.be/Zd65gK-mXR0?t=54s
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 9:04pm

    Reply to #12

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    About those contrails

    [quote=Jim H]2)  When you look up in the sky and see persistent plane trails criss-crossing the sky.. those are the signs of chemical spraying for some nefarious purpose (maybe HARP, or geo-engineering).  Chemtrails!
    No way.  Are there a few planes around the world that can spray stuff?  I am sure they exist.  Is there mass spraying taking place everyday over the US?  No way.  This is preposterous on so many levels to my mind.
     
    [/quote]
    I get asked about chemtrails all the time.  I have not come to any firm conclusions yet.  It would not surprise me in the least to discover that experiments with geoengineering were being conducted, but I seriously doubt they are happening everyday everywhere.
    What bothers me is the proof would be trivial for someone who really wanted to know and yet nobody has bothered to gather it.
    The idea is that various reflective substances are being sprayed in the upper atmosphere, presumably to increase albedo and reflect sunlight.  Things like barium and aluminum oxides have been fingered as the probable agents.
    Okay.  
    Regardless of what the actual substances are, the test is simple.
    Take absorption spectra readings.  Sunlight has a perfectly well known light absorption 'fingerprint' and anything else that shouldn't be there will leave its fingerprints all over the reading.

    If the worry is the concentration is not enough to give a good reading, just wait for a suspected chemtrail to cross the sun and take your reading.
    This should be easy as pie and nobody has done it yet so I have my doubts about why not.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 10:02pm

    Reply to #12

    RNcarl

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 13 2008

    Posts: 179

    cmartenson wrote:darbikrash

    [quote=cmartenson]
    [quote=darbikrash]
    I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
    [/quote]
    I understand your troubled experience because the implications are immense and therefore hard to emotionally digest.
    However, the term you use, 'conspiracy theories', is regularly used to shut down conversations and is dismissive, and therefore I'd like to request we keep the conversation focused on data, science, and facts as much as possible.
    In my case my focus was solely on matters of science.  Gravity, conservation of momentum and the like.  I do not consider these to be either theories or a matter of conspiracy.  If we cannot agree on basic science as a legitimate avenue for discussion and inquiry then I don't know quite what to do with this site.  If you have alternative scientific explanations for the observed event(s) then I am completely open-minded an curious.
    To couple the science of the bldg 7 collapse to the idea of a deep state, I find them intimately linked.  After all, how much 'deep state' do you think is required to get a scientifically oriented institution like NIST to cobble together and publish a report that fails to conform to basic, high school level physics?
    I'm  thinking 'quite a lot' is the answer.
    Again, I know the topic is emotionally difficult, and probably dangerous to discuss in today's environment, and yet the science stands in the way of letting it go.  
    There are numerous topics across all three E's to which that prior sentence applies.  How shall we approach such things around here?  Head on, sideways, or not at all?  So far we've been pretty delicate but perhaps the circumstances of the world call for a more direct set of declarations along the lines of the emperor has no clothes!
    [/quote]
    Chris and all,
    For the reasons you stated, (science) is exactly why I mentioned Bldg. 7 as opposed to the other events that occurred that day. When one's beliefs are questioned, and I mean questioned internally, questioned by one's own inner voice when presented with data and science that perhaps validate the feelings that things are not quite right, the grieving process begins. I hope, some day before I die, the truth comes out.
    It is much easier to discuss manipulation of the stock market, oil, gold and other mineral prices because those things – (while they do in fact effect one's personal safety) are more abstract and in a way appear less threatening to one's personal safety than a ruthless direct physical attack.
    The Deep State is both inept and cunning – incredibly inefficient and precise. It is these and other paradoxical behaviors that make the Deep State so dangerous. When it boils right down to it, which do you really, really fear the most – a banker that steals your wealth or a person with intent (and means) to take your life? It is that answer that makes one side (the 3 – E's) easier to talk about than the other (one's own government meaning to do physical harm to those they are sworn to protect).
     
    I can't remember where it was discussed, but it may actually be the Deep State that "saves" us from the banking cabal. It has been said that the golden rule is – the man who owns the gold makes the rules, I say, that only holds true until the man with a gun comes along.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 10:24pm

    Reply to #12

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Chemtrails

    1) When you get into the airplane math. Such as storage capacity, dispersal rate to provide "chemtrails," etc. the idea that these planes are producing chemtrails at any significant scale is crazy. Small scale albido "experiments" would make sense, but I doubt they would perform these experiments beyond a couple areas in the world, but I really have no idea.2) Then consider chemical production. Where are they producing these chemicals and where are they receiving the precious minerals to waste at any significant scale? 
    3) The biggest "forget about it" for me regarding chemtrails is that they link non-point source contaminants with chemtrails as evidence.
    Coal burning is done everyday, THROUGHOUT the world. Coal burning releases aluminum, arsenic, and other heavy metals suggested to be linked with chemtrails as well as mercury. This occurs because fly ash is released through the smoke stacks of poorly filtered power plants as well as the smoke stacks of power plants that completely lack a filter.  Fly ash is then deposited via precipitation.
    38% of power plants had a filter in 2008. Not all of them worked and to varying degrees. Knowing how useless the EPA is on this stuff, I'm sure that has not improved. Now imagine the rest of the world? 
    Coal burning also participates in point-source pollution through coal ash disposal areas (waste that did not go up into the atmosphere) which are conveniently located above our vital aquifers. These may or may not have an adequate liners to prevent seepage. 

    http://content.sierraclub.org/coal/disposal-ash-waste
    What's the EPA for again? Maybe we can some quantitate easing funding for some new liners and filters for these companies that get away with murder?
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 10:52pm

    #14
    VeganDB12

    VeganDB12

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 18 2008

    Posts: 108

    Is it necessary to assign the same causes to 1,2 and 7?

    I have a nagging question but not data. Simply an observation that many assume that the twin towers came down for the same reason that building 7 did. I think this is an error in inductive reasoning. Perhaps they came down for different reasons.  Hypothetically…….

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sat, May 03, 2014 - 11:53pm

    #15

    HughK

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 06 2012

    Posts: 571

    Calling tree experts

    Question:  How was the bark removed from this tree?

    Could a Volvo hitting the tree head on have done this?  This is not a rhetorical question.  While it seems to me that bark is not removed from a tree in this manner by a head on collision, I would like to hear from other people.  In spite of the tree's location, I'm pretty sure it wasn't Dutch elm disease.  Here is the video clip from which this image is taken.

    Cheers,

    Hugh

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 12:53am

    Reply to #14

    Stan Robertson

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 07 2008

    Posts: 516

    Different proximate causes

    [quote=VeganD]I have a nagging question but not data. Simply an observation that many assume that the twin towers came down for the same reason that building 7 did. I think this is an error in inductive reasoning. Perhaps they came down for different reasons.  Hypothetically…….
    [/quote]
    They may have come down for the same ultimate cause; i.e., planes flying into buildings, but they certainly did not come down for the same proximate causes. Bldg 7 came down because internal supports were cleanly and quickly broken without the building being hit by a plane. It is not clearly impossible that they could have broken for the reasons that were given by NIST, but it seems highly improbable that it could have collapsed so precisely like a well executed demolition.
    The implications of the collapse of Bldg 7 being a deliberate demolition are monstrous and nearly unthinkable. Such a demolition would require planning and placement of explosives in advance of the plane attacks. Begin with motives. What would be the motive for such an act? Why would NIST cover it up? Why are no mainstream media interested in the story? Think I will check for monsters under the bed and pull the covers up over my head.
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:08am

    Reply to #12

    darbikrash

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 25 2009

    Posts: 297

    Structural failure

    [quote=cmartenson][quote=darbikrash]
    I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
    [/quote]
    I understand your troubled experience because the implications are immense and therefore hard to emotionally digest.
    However, the term you use, 'conspiracy theories', is regularly used to shut down conversations and is dismissive, and therefore I'd like to request we keep the conversation focused on data, science, and facts as much as possible.
    In my case my focus was solely on matters of science.  Gravity, conservation of momentum and the like.  I do not consider these to be either theories or a matter of conspiracy.  If we cannot agree on basic science as a legitimate avenue for discussion and inquiry then I don't know quite what to do with this site.  If you have alternative scientific explanations for the observed event(s) then I am completely open-minded an curious.
    To couple the science of the bldg 7 collapse to the idea of a deep state, I find them intimately linked.  After all, how much 'deep state' do you think is required to get a scientifically oriented institution like NIST to cobble together and publish a report that fails to conform to basic, high school level physics?
    I'm  thinking 'quite a lot' is the answer.
    Again, I know the topic is emotionally difficult, and probably dangerous to discuss in today's environment, and yet the science stands in the way of letting it go.  
    There are numerous topics across all three E's to which that prior sentence applies.  How shall we approach such things around here?  Head on, sideways, or not at all?  So far we've been pretty delicate but perhaps the circumstances of the world call for a more direct set of declarations along the lines of the emperor has no clothes!
    [/quote]
     
    I have to concede I have little interest in re-litigating the WTC collapse. I see no value to come from this, irrespective of the engineering outcomes.
     
    For me the simple statement  “I do not trust my government” is quite sufficient to allow me to move on.
    Accurate characterization of the principle failure modes of Bldg 7 does not change my position, nor should it change yours. Let us not forget it was your guest poster who brought up the topic of conspiracy theories, and did so in such a manner as to imply a lack of credibility from those who take these positions.
     
    I agree with him.
     
    But you seem quite invested in the idea that there are scientific (or more succinctly engineering) principles that are violated in the assignment of a catastrophic buckling failure to “a central load bearing column or support” as causation for the building collapse. I would be very surprised if there was any engineering justification to your concern.
     

    Use science and engineering principles please,  bearing in mind that I have the data for bldg 7 in terms of its construction, types of girders, and total mass in tonnage (framing elements only, I don't have any data on the furnishings and such, but assume those to be negligible for our purposes).
    So that's the challenge.  Explain, freefall despite resistance.  Or how all four corners all lost 100% of their resistance at the same time.  Or how it's possible for structural steel to effectively offer zero resistance.  One of those three things
    Remember, you have to account for the full 2.5 seconds of freefall which, starting from rest, means the building travelled in perfect free fall for a bit over 30 meters or 98 feet, which means you have to account for not one, but more than eight full stories of structural framing losing 100% of its resistance.  
    Feel free to show your math.

     
    Full disclosure – I operate a firm that does engineering simulations, and a good bit of those are dynamic explicit loadcases that simulate failure mechanisms. I’ll tell you the same thing I tell any of the PhD mechanical engineers that come into my office at the beginning of a tricky non-linear study- start with a free body diagram and demonstrate to me, to a first order approximation- that we understand the problem and the physics that surround it.
     
    To this end we might start with a simple back-of-the-napkin calc that examines the basic physics:
     
     
     

     
    This simple equation governs the free fall of an object and depends on two key variables, the time domain and the drop height or fall distance.
    To get a quick- and accurate validation as to whether or not any key principles of physics are violated, we can plug in the height of the building and the recorded event duration (timescale) and we can determine by solving this simple equation where we are from a first principles standpoint. Please note per Newtonian physics that the mass of the building (with or without furniture makes no difference) is not relevant in calculating free fall. So, we know the height (47 stories) what, exactly, is the event duration you are using? Can you provide this? If so, we can take a first step. I looked at some videos of the collapse, and I count 5, 6 7 seconds from some angles, 8-9 or seconds from others, yet you say it is three seconds? Can you provide a valid timescale event video so we can perform a simple calculation?
     
    Upshot, any solution that shows a non-zero time descrepancy between the predicted free fall time duration and the actual recorded time duration (measured with some accuracy which should be straightforward given the vast amount of video footage) indicates- definitively- some non-zero resistance.  As someone who does this for a living every day I would not want to be taking the position that the time domain will represent perfect free fall, not very likely- but hey, let’s do the math.
     
    Once we find out what the comparative numbers between predicted free fall and actual event duration are, then we set about to examine the realm of resistance that steel beams can provide given exposure to fire. We find that the material properties of structural steel of the type used in fire proofed buildings is decidedly non-linear when exposed to high heat. And not surprisingly, we find that structural steel gets quite soft when exposed to elevated heat ranges, in engineering terms we see a pronounced reduction not only in tensile strength, but more importantly, we see a dramatic drop off in tensile modulus (stiffness) as well. We can consider steel as exhibiting isotropic behavior, so we can safely interchange tensile strength and tensile modulus for compressive strength and compressive modulus. It is expected that the building collapse is primarily a combination of compressive and buckling failure.
     
    Note the graphs below for fireproof structural steel, have a look at the effective modulus of steel at elevated temperatures, it is very close to zero. Look also at the yield strength at elevated temperatures. Not a pretty picture.
     
    Material props:
     

    Source:
    We have another failure mode to address, that of column buckling. The NIST report mentions column buckling as a principal failure mode, so this obviously needs to be examined in some detail. Practitioners understand that buckling failures are inherently sudden and violent in their manifestation.
     
    Compressive buckling is predominantly a geometric function, e.g. it is dependent principally on the dimensional attributes of the vertical column, length of the beam by section modulus, and the mechanical stiffness of the material (elastic modulus). We have seen above that modulus is negatively impacted by heat, so this property we can expect to degrade rapidly.
     
    More on buckling failures, a vertical column in buckling failure undergoes a “snap through” or rapid, violent, lateral excursion wherein the beam deforms rapidly- and catastrophically out of plane. This can allow the load it supports to move downward, accelerating and creating cascading downstream failures as the dynamics of the load accelerating can and does impinge on other structural supports.
     
    The acceleration of an overhead load acting on lower level support beams creates an amplification of carried mass, due to the inertial contribution.
     
    The picture below shows a typical buckling failure of a large storage tank, note the snap through is evident as lateral damage, note also the asymmetric collapse pattern is caused by the feeder pipe acting as a constraining boundary condition.

     
    So for me its back to the free body diagram. I have outlined above, briefly, well documented and established engineering principles that may adequately explain the collapse. A first check would be a concise review of a time stamped video that can give us a sense as to the event duration, from which we can ascertain the degree of mechanical resistance (if any) offered by whatever remains of the supporting structure, using engineering judgment and analytical modeling tools. If you can produce such a video, I would be happy to provide feedback, in strict engineering terms, as to the overlay of these data with possible failure modes.
     
     
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:24am

    #16

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    tree

    Hugh, this is usually my thing. Natural history and natural interpretation is my passion.

    First consider age. The bark of that tree was very freshly removed from that tree. We know this because the tree still has that mild yellow color that means the tree was quite healthy when the bark was removed. That yellow color gives you complete confidence that the event occurred within a year, but because of the rich color still present, I would argue weeks to months. It was a "recent" event.

    Okay so now we have an idea of the age. What about causes?

    So to remove tightly held and healthy bark from a tree is hard work. Mammals will expend their energy to remove healthy bark to extract the cambium layer of the tree which is the food/sugar transportation layer right underneath the bark. Eurasian beaver (if you have them?), voles (not nearly as high up the tree as pictured though), deer (characteristically messy and has a peeled look) will remove tightly held bark to eat the cambium. All of these mammals will leave incisor scrapings in one way or another. These are not present in this photo. Woodpeckers will remove tightly held bark to open trees up to infestation (their form of investing), and to let sap drip from the tree (to attract beetles, flies, etc.). Woodpecker damage does not look like what is pictured though. Small holes to small damage is typical of woodpeckers.

    Disease? Diseases in North America kills trees, THEN tree bark starts to fall off. Like human infrastructure, when the energy to maintain the structural integrity is stopped, things start falling apart. 

    Weather? Weather doesn't just rip bark off healthy trees. Unless weather propelled something into the tree, weather would be unrelated to this event. Lightning will explode bark off trees, but cracking and terrible damage is also present.

    So to sum this post up, the only thing that could have done that damage to that tree is something propelling into that tree. Look at the height of the area where the most damage was incurred. It's the same height as the car. The other two scrapes could have been from any number of metal or plastic pieces misplaced by the damage. While bark is held tightly to the main structure of the tree, its subsequently to easiest part of the tree to "remove." The main structure of the tree was only mildly damaged.

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:43am

    #17
    Doug

    Doug

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 01 2008

    Posts: 1353

    tree damage

    I am not a tree expert, but my daughter is. She is particularly interested in tree pathologies. Her opinion, just looking at the image (we couldn’t get the vid to run) is that she knows of no disease process that would cause that kind of damage. It was apparently caused by some kind of violence, but trying to guess whether it was the result of a car accident, and what kind of impact, would just be guessing. My totally unprofessional opinion is that it looks like a car hit it.
    Doug

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:58am

    #18

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    Building 7

    ….Freefall is an embarrassment to the official story, because freefall is impossible for a naturally collapsing building. In a natural collapse there would be an interaction between the falling and the stationary sections of the building. This interaction would cause crushing of both sections and slowing of the falling section. I have done measurements on several known demolitions, using similar software tools, and found that they typically fall with accelerations considerably less than freefall. Building 7 was not only demolished, it was demolished with tremendous overkill…..

    The fact remains that freefall is not consistent with any natural scenario involving weakening, buckling, or crushing because in any such a scenario there would be large forces of interaction with the underlying structure that would have slowed the fall. Given that even known controlled demolitions do not remove sufficient structure to allow for actual freefall, how could a natural fire-induced process be more destructive? Add to that the synchronicity of the removal of support across the whole width of the building, evidenced by the levelness of the roofline as it came down, and the suddenness of onset of collapse, and the immediate transition from full support to total freefall. Natural collapse resulting in freefall is simply not plausible. It did not happen. It could not happen. Yet freefall did in fact happen. This means it was not a natural collapse. Forces other than the falling upper section of the building suddenly destroyed and removed the supporting columns for at least eight stories across the entire length and width of the building.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/872-freefall-and-building-7-on-911-by-david-chandler.html

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:59am

    Reply to #9
    agitating prop

    agitating prop

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 28 2009

    Posts: 282

    jrf29 wrote:One could also

    Deleted — too snarky!

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:18am

    #19

    Time2help

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2011

    Posts: 2222

    Bad office furnishings fire (my ass!)

    This is an Apple. 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nqbUkThGlCo

    And if you listen closely, you can even hear the "office furnishings" going off between seconds 1 and 2 of the video.

     

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:22am

    Reply to #12

    Stan Robertson

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 07 2008

    Posts: 516

    This may be of interest

    This is not a time stamped video, but supposedly was produced by analysis of one (available here.). I believe that this includes the time period of interest to Chris. 

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 3:03am

    Reply to #12
    agitating prop

    agitating prop

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 28 2009

    Posts: 282

    cmartenson wrote:darbikrash

    [quote=cmartenson][quote=darbikrash]
    I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
    [/quote]
    I understand your troubled experience because the implications are immense and therefore hard to emotionally digest.
    However, the term you use, 'conspiracy theories', is regularly used to shut down conversations and is dismissive, and therefore I'd like to request we keep the conversation focused on data, science, and facts as much as possible.
    In my case my focus was solely on matters of science.  Gravity, conservation of momentum and the like.  I do not consider these to be either theories or a matter of conspiracy.  If we cannot agree on basic science as a legitimate avenue for discussion and inquiry then I don't know quite what to do with this site.  If you have alternative scientific explanations for the observed event(s) then I am completely open-minded an curious.
    To couple the science of the bldg 7 collapse to the idea of a deep state, I find them intimately linked.  After all, how much 'deep state' do you think is required to get a scientifically oriented institution like NIST to cobble together and publish a report that fails to conform to basic, high school level physics?
    I'm  thinking 'quite a lot' is the answer.
    Again, I know the topic is emotionally difficult, and probably dangerous to discuss in today's environment, and yet the science stands in the way of letting it go.  
    There are numerous topics across all three E's to which that prior sentence applies.  How shall we approach such things around here?  Head on, sideways, or not at all?  So far we've been pretty delicate but perhaps the circumstances of the world call for a more direct set of declarations along the lines of the emperor has no clothes!
    [/quote]
     
    The 'pan caking' theory of collapse the overt govt used to explain the collapse of the twin towers was easily dismissed by Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, an organization with approximately 2000 members. Beyond that, building 7, built using a completely different design plan, collapsed in an almost identical manner.  
    The people who are the most resistant to considering the possibility of criminal conspiracy, with regards 911, are often those who are pretty far left, raised on the "systemic failure" model of govt, proposed by Noam Chomsky; champion of the left. Chomsky, basically a Bolsheviik, believes the magic bullet theory of the JFK assassination.
     He thinks the Kennedy sons as 'elitists' could not actually have been agitating for authentic change–that every baby American elitist is born a blank slate upon which his politics are written by class dictate.  The individual is completely and without exception unable to change his world view orientation.  In other words, very little free will. And when you reduce free will agency in favor of class preordination, in analysis of American domestic politics, you will not be able to apply the lessons learned in third world countries.
    Chomsky is on YouTube at some conference stating that "congress would never have allowed an inside job, re 911". Wtf? Congress wouldn't have anything to do with the implementation. Would they try to cover it up after the fact… Obviously. I might if I were a pol and didn't want my control file pulled. He then goes on and states, "and even if they did, it wouldn't matter anyway!"  Again… Wtf?
    Da Comrade, really?  That's nuts. 
    Chomsky has almost single handedly split and weakened the Left, on this issue alone. 
     
    Great discussion. Look forward to seeing more of the same. 
     
     
     
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 3:49am

    #20

    darbikrash

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 25 2009

    Posts: 297

    Both Jim H and Stan Robertson

    Both Jim H and Stan Robertson reference the same web page. The jist of the claims are related to the time domain of the event- physicist Chandler claims the event is ~2.5 seconds, the NIST claims ~ 5.45 seconds.

     

    Pretty big difference.

     

    At 2.5 seconds we have a problem, at 5.45 we do not.

     

    Unfortunately, this is not science, this is he said- she said. However, I did look at several videos on this website that purportedly show the collapse from several angles. I do not count 2.5 seconds, no matter how hard I try. Nowhere close.

     

    And down the rabbit hole we go…..

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 3:53am

    #21

    Time2help

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2011

    Posts: 2222

    Someone please - pass me a jelly donut

    "Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away." 

    – Elvis Presley

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 4:25am

    #22

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    watch the reaction of an unbiased expert....

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 4:39am

    #23

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    But he's not around to talk about it anymore....

    http://www.dailypaul.com/172140/danny-jowenko-is-dead-3-days-after-sabrosky-interview-implicates-cia-mossad-in-911

    Demolition expert Danny Jowenko, one of world's leading building demolition experts, was killed in a one-car accident last week when his car slammed into a tree. Jowenko received international attention as the expert who unequivocally described the collapse of Building 7 at the World Trade Center on 911 as a "demolition."

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 5:01am

    #24

    thc0655

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 27 2010

    Posts: 1426

    Another angle

    I'm way out of my depth with you guys discussing engineering and all that stuff, but I look at this whole WTC7 thing (and other events in which the "official" story is widely disbelieved) from a different angle.  I look at it from the perspectives of psychology, sociology, political science and ethics/morality.

    Temporarily setting aside the issue of what caused the collapse of WTC7, look at the problem we have.  Our government and legacy MSM (and the oligarchs and Deep State behind it) have completely lost the trust of a significant and rapidly growing portion of our society.  There are millions of people who don't believe a word they read, hear or see in public life or on teevee.   In addition, there are many in our society who have no respect for our leaders, but are dependent on the government so they won't make a fuss or pay much attention as long as they get their benefits.  Trust and credibility are the primary resources of any government or any public figures or institutions. And the level of distrust is gathering momentum and becoming more and more open and militant.  Someone might rightly say ALL these conspiracy theories can't be true, but that doesn't really matter.  What matters is that our leaders don't have our trust.  Trust in our leaders, trust in each other, trust in our leading institutions is the glue that holds a society together.  Once that glue is lost past some indeterminate point, the whole house of cards will come crumbling down, vaulting us back into some apocalyptic Dark Age.

    Seeing this, what would a leader with integrity and wisdom do?  Such a leader would address the issue publicly and head on, taking all necessary steps to lead the nation and the people toward an honest appraisal of our terrible condition, communicating a vision of repentance and renewal, and personally taking the first steps toward individual and societal renewal him/herself.  Do we see that kind of leadership from Obama, Hilary, Pelosi, Reid, McConnell, Boehner or any of the others?  Of course, not.  What we see from them are corrupt and cynical attempts to hide the moral rot from the people and maximize their own personal power, wealth and perks everywhere possible for as long as possible.  We need some Fourth Turning prophets, but they seem to be in dramatically short supply.  Ron Paul is the kind of guy we need with integrity which he fought to keep for decades in filthy D.C. There are others, but they remain largely unknown and certainly locked out of the halls of power and influence (Dr. Ben Carson comes to mind).

    The truth is the prophets we need are not really in short supply.  It's just that very few people want to hear anything they have to say. We're not ready (emotionally, psychologically, spiritually) for the honesty and repentance that would be required of us if we were to listen.  So TPTB will continue to marginalize the prophets and the majority of the people will turn away from their message anyway because it is too threatening to our world view, our own personal faults, etc.

    A Chinese proverb states: "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."  The "students" may currently appear determined to self-destruct and not listen to wisdom but the pressures of "The Truth" are bearing down on them.  The pressure that "The Truth" is exerting on the "students" is very much like the building threat of avalanche we often discuss here.  Nothing seems to be happening, but the pressure is building.  Each person has their "aha" moments, and so do societies and institutions.  Unfortunately, we're back to the question of how much pain will we have to endure before our collective denial and self-imposed blindness are breached by the intense sun light of "The Truth."  

    Personally, I'm very suspicious about WTC7 and a bunch of other stuff.  But I am absolutely convinced there is an astounding level of corruption and evil in high places, and that our days are numbered. Surviving and even prospering during the dark times ahead are two of my motives.  But my number one motive is to be judged later to have lived through what's coming to us with courage, honor, love and moral righteousness.

    Tom

    "Happy Hunger Games.  And may the odds be ever in your favor."

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 5:40am

    #25

    sand_puppy

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 13 2011

    Posts: 1821

    NIST Computer Model Doesn't Predict The Observed

    (I just posted a book review on WTC7 in forums.  Part 2 of my report summarizes the NIST study and Part 3 summarizes the criticisms of the study)

    I really agree that the free fall issue is paramount here.  Progressive collapses are not at free fall acceleration.  David Chandler, (as referenced by Jim H and Stan above) a high school physics teacher explains that very clearly.  If the potential energy of the falling building is being utilized to bend, crush, rip apart and pulverize other portions of the building as it falls, it will not accelerate at free fall.    Free fall is the antithesis of a progressive mechanism.  You just can't have both.

    The NIST model also predicts 2 major findings that can be compared against videos of the building collapse.  They do not match well at all!  Compare the NIST animations with Time2Help's slow motion video of the collapse.

    1.  The first prediction is that collapse will progress in a wave from one end of the building to the other.  NIST predicts that the NE edge will begin its fall well before the SW.  But when you watch the video you see that this is not what happens.  Both ends of the building start falling at the same time and continue at the same rate.  The roof line is level from every view point.  (Better pictures available at  NIST NCSTAR 1-9 page 593.)  

      

     

    2.  The second NIST model prediction is that the facade will buckle as the core crumbles.  (Core columns are attached to the facade at every floor.)  Again, when the videos are watched, we see that the facade remains completely flat without any buckling on any surface.  

             NIST NCSTAR 1-9  page 594

    These two discrepancies strongly argue against a progressive or asymmetric collapse such as NIST has suggested.

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 7:07am

    Reply to #16

    HughK

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 06 2012

    Posts: 571

    Bark removal

    Thanks, WT and Doug,Why is the bark removed so close to the base?  Is the rectangular patter consistent with a Volvo's bumper and grill?  You say the only thing that could have removed the bark from the tree is something that was propelled into it, WT, and Doug, you say that it looked like a car hitting it.  But couldn't a chainsaw, handsaw or some other type of cutting tool also have removed the bark?  
    I am not saying I'm certain of the latter by any means, but I am still struggling with the idea of a Volvo bumper and grill doing that, all the way down to the ground.  Probably difficult to know, unless one were to find the same kind of tree and run a Volvo into it.  And it's only a very tiny piece is a massively complex puzzle.
    Cheers,
    Hugh

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 8:22am

    Reply to #14

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    All three towers

    were brought down in the same manner, the only difference being, they forgot about or lost the third plane.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 12:11pm

    Reply to #12

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    Yep, that's the data

    [quote=Stan Robertson]This is not a time stamped video, but supposedly was produced by analysis of one (available here.). I believe that this includes the time period of interest to Chris.
     

    [/quote]
    Yes, that's the data and analysis I have based much of my conclusions upon.  The frame by frame analysis used multiple video sources from multiple angles and all were in agreement with the produced graph.
    Perfect, linear, freefall for ~2.5 seconds.  That's part one.
    Part two is that this happened across the whole building structure…all four corners, perfectly evenly, all at once.  If we are to go with the fire weakened concept, then how do we account for zero observations of smoke and or fire from any of the three corners that were visible to the cameras?  Wouldn't we have to assume that an out-of-control fire capable of reducing the tensile strength of structural steel to near zero would be visible?  You know, flames out the side and all that?
    But there's none of that.   

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 12:22pm

    Reply to #20

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    So let's use NIST data then...

    [quote=darbikrash]Both Jim H and Stan Robertson reference the same web page. The jist of the claims are related to the time domain of the event- physicist Chandler claims the event is ~2.5 seconds, the NIST claims ~ 5.45 seconds.
    Pretty big difference.
    At 2.5 seconds we have a problem, at 5.45 we do not.
    Unfortunately, this is not science, this is he said- she said. However, I did look at several videos on this website that purportedly show the collapse from several angles. I do not count 2.5 seconds, no matter how hard I try. Nowhere close.
    And down the rabbit hole we go…..
    [/quote]
    There's no rabbit hole here, only facts.  As you can understand better than most, if you measure 5.4 seconds of collapse but only the middle 2.5 seconds are freefall, you won't get freefall rates for the whole 5.4 second period.
    That's just simple science and for NIST to have counted some seemingly random 5.4 second interval to measure as a means of dispelling instantaneous freefall at any moment would get their paper tossed during even the shoddiest peer review process performed by graduate student lab assistants.
    However, I say there's no rabbit hole because when finally cornered with the video evidence  NIST had to backtrack and has now admitted freefall.  From the NIST website (emphasis mine):

    The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

    Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
    Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
    Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

    (Source – NIST.gov website

    So this is not "he said, she said" this is straightforward and easily verified video frame analysis of a well documented event and even the NIST has now admitted a sustained period of freefall.
    The only debate right now is whether that was 2.5 or 2.25 seconds.
    But, as you said, for any period like that, we have a problem.  However one of the problems we do not have is any uncertainty over the fact that free fall happened.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:01pm

    Reply to #16

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Bark and oranges

    When bark is peeled off a tree, it's removed as varying sized chunks or plates.  This is likely why the bark was likely peeled all the way to the base. It's like the outer skin of an orange. 
    This tree happened to be dead, so the bark peels into larger chunks, but the idea is the same.
    Chainsaws or handsaws would do more direct damage to the heartwood of the tree in my opinion whereas the car disperses the damage more. I think an axe or a hatchet would be a more appropriate tool to do that damage, but the heartwood would me a mess. Anyways it's challenging to interpret exactly how ever bit of damage was done as we are not physically at the tree and are only looking at a low-resolution photo. 
    I've seen car damage on trees and it looks just like what we see in the photo. I'm very confident that a car had damaged the tree and not something else based on my experiences.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 1:41pm

    Reply to #16
    Doug

    Doug

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 01 2008

    Posts: 1353

    tree damage

    Ok, I got the video to work.  First, "head on collision" appears to be not quite accurate.  The damage to the car was largely on the left front and the car was displaced quite a way away from the tree.  The way I think of "head on" the car would have stopped with the front end wrapped around the tree.  So, a glancing blow would be more likely to result in the damage to the tree.Further, damage I have seen on trees caused by car collisions frequently have scars that are not intuitively identified as being caused by the collision.  There are all kinds of movements caused by a collapsing car hitting the tree unlike those test collisions we have all seen videos of where a car is on a track and hits an immovable object. 
    Second, I have a lot of experience with chainsaws and would have a difficult time trying to duplicate the damage to the tree.  Perhaps those people who create chainsaw sculptures could do better.  I agree with WT that the tree was alive and (probably still) healthy.  True, bark will come off in plates from dead trees, but not from healthy trees.  Further, I'm pretty sure that tree is not an American Elm, the species most commonly associated with Dutch Elm disease.  I have seen a lot of that disease since I have a lot of American Elms on my property that suffer periodic waves of the disease and die.  Those trees never reach the size and age of the pictured tree.  They rarely get to 20 years and/or a foot in diameter.
    So, I'll stick with a car hit the tree theory.
    Doug

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:00pm

    Reply to #14

    Time2help

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2011

    Posts: 2222

    Back to theory for the moment...

    [quote=Bankers Slave]All three towers were brought down in the same manner, the only difference being, they forgot about or lost the third plane.
    [/quote]
    Or maybe building 7 did have a plane assigned but the passengers had other plans.  Seems like there were a lot of loose ends along those lines.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/World_Trade_Center%2C_New_York_City_-_aerial_view_%28March_2001%29.jpg
    WTC7 is reddish brown, behind WTC1 and 2 in this March 2001 photo.
     
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:10pm

    #26
    sivarik

    sivarik

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 04 2014

    Posts: 3

    The State of the Deep State

    Chris begins this article with this comment: "I like to say that I’m allergic to conspiracy theories because . . ."

    Consider that over several hundred years the Roman Catholic Empire sadistically murdered millions of woman, keepers and providers of the knowledge of how to live sustainably, and then employed generations of workers to build monumental edifices to itself, then it is clear that organizations can and do execute domination plans that span not just years or decades, but centuries.  There is little to deny and much to support the postulate that the same kind of domination plans are in play today.  That is not 'conspiracy theory', that is reality.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:21pm

    Reply to #26

    cmartenson

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 07 2007

    Posts: 4479

    Proper credit

    [quote=sivarik]Chris begins this article with this comment: "I like to say that I’m allergic to conspiracy theories because . . ."
    [/quote]
    Just for clarity's sake, the author of the article is Jim Kunstler not myself.  
    We regularly bring other voices to the conversation and let them have free reign over content and phrasing.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:33pm

    #27

    sand_puppy

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 13 2011

    Posts: 1821

    Yep. NIST admits WTC7 free fall

    After 12 years of using the "average" rate of descent (which "averaged in" an initial period of motionlessness) and stating that there was no free fall, they finally admitted that there was a period of free fall.  I believe that this was in response to David Chandlers video and article which were very widely circulated.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh75fxzxGfs

    But, they did NOT take the next step and revise their explanation for the mechanism of collapse.  They let their progressive mechanism model stand untouched.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 2:34pm

    Reply to #16

    HughK

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 06 2012

    Posts: 571

    Thanks WT and Doug

    WT and Doug,Thanks for your responses.  I appreciate them and while I suspected the bark might have been evidence of a setup, it was nothing more than a suspicion.  You guys very well might be right, and I haven't seen enough cars hit trees to have a well-informed opinion.  Doug, I was just kidding about Dutch Elm Disease…the crash happened in the Netherlands.  🙂
    Cheers,
    Hugh

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 3:19pm

    Reply to #23
    earthwise

    earthwise

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 10 2009

    Posts: 277

    Reminiscent of Michael Hastings death.

    Not too suspicious, though, unless he was moonlighting as a banker. Was a nail gun found in his car by chance?

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 6:24pm

    Reply to #16

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Hugh

    Car examples…

    Another animal behavior I didn't really mention is bark stripping which is done by beavers to create succession in the tree species around their pond, but also by bears to reach tree cambium. Bear bark stripping example here…

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 6:36pm

    Reply to #2
    richcabot

    richcabot

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 05 2011

    Posts: 181

    small correction and some reinforcing observations

    Snowden was not an NSA employee, he worked for a contractor.  Also, his job responsibility did not include handling any of this information, he got access because he was a systems admin.  Had he been an NSA employee he would have been screened frequently by polygraph and his ability to steal information would have been far more restricted.It's old, but the book "Inside the Company" by Philip Agee is very relevant reading.  It describes what the CIA did in other countries during the late fifties and early sixties.  The difference is they, or another alphabet soup agency, are now doing it here.  
    As to the secrecy aspect, out of the many thousands of CIA employees Agee was the only one to lay out in detail what the CIA actually did.  He suffered greatly for it, and now both the laws and the courts are stacked much more heavily against such whistle blowers.  
    Agee's book also details the psychological profiling they use to insure that people of conscience aren't hired in the first place.  This process has no doubt been refined over the years to further reduce the odds that a Philip Agee type might slip through.  
    There are countless examples of conspiracies that stayed below the public radar for many years, yet are now generally accepted.  Iran Contra is one that involved at least hundreds of people, broke numerous laws, reached to the highest eshelons of the government.  People who dared call attention to it were dismissed or liquidated.  It was only hard evidence in the form of a downed airplane and captured pilot that brought it to light.  Even then, the bulk of it was never disclosed in the mainstream media but can be found in books by reputable investigative reporters and individuals caught in the middle.  See for example "Compromised" by Terry Reid or "Family of Secrets" by Russ Baker.
    For ongoing investigative reporting by Russ Baker see http://whowhatwhy.com/

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 7:45pm

    #28

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    Can anyone enilghten me

    on the relevance of the tree bark removal mystery information.

    Thanks in anticipation.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 7:58pm

    Reply to #28

    Time2help

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2011

    Posts: 2222

    Tree Bark found near WTC 7

    [quote=Bankers Slave]Can anyone enlighten me on the relevance of the tree bark removal mystery information.
    Thanks in anticipation.
    [/quote]
    Perhaps a subtle "change of topic" to divert attention away from the discussion at hand?

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 8:14pm

    Reply to #28

    Bankers Slave

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 26 2012

    Posts: 513

    Thats a real pity,

    if what you state is the case.1 million plus innocents dead and rising since 9/11 and still we have people accepting the official story…some very articulate and intelligent ones at that!
    I just hope that some day they will rethink911.org

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 8:28pm

    Reply to #28

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    I'm pretty sure a tree mystery a day

    Keeps the doctor away. 
     
     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 8:42pm

    #29

    Wildlife Tracker

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 14 2012

    Posts: 405

    Anybody want to explain to me why everybody is "up in arms"

    about chemtrails and not the implications to today's coal burning practices?

    Chemtrails may be contributing to the input of heavy metals into our water resources, whereas unfiltered coal burning is contributing to the input of heavy metals into our water resources. 

    See the logic there?

    The best evidence for chemtrails is non-point source pollution of heavy metals that can be directly connected to coal burning power plants. Can't we get mad at that instead?

    Maybe this whole chemtrail business is a planted idea to take our minds away from the downside to burning coal 😉

    Those are real chemtrails folks…

     

     

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 9:27pm

    Reply to #28

    HughK

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 06 2012

    Posts: 571

    No diversions

    Bankers slave and Time2Help, my answer is here.  

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 9:29pm

    Reply to #29

    HughK

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 06 2012

    Posts: 571

    WT: Big picture man

    Thanks, WT, for keeping us focused on the big picture:The amazing power, the amazing dynamism, and eventually the amazing instability and destruction that are fossil fuels.  
    That's the big story of our contemporary civilization for sure.

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 10:17pm

    Reply to #29

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    You are right WT

    Chemtrails are just an example of an exercise in critical thinking.  You are no doubt correct that coal burning represents a much more egregious insult to our atmosphere than does any purported spraying by planes.  Air traffic is by no means without effect though… the combustion particles emitted, and the contrails (clouds) that result Do have effects that we can assess scientifically;

    Aircraft contrails affect climate by reflection of incoming so-
    lar radiation and trapping of outgoing terrestrial radiation.
    Thereby the global net effect results in a warming of the
    atmosphere (Fahey et al., 1999). A common metric for the
    quantification of the climate impact from contrails is con-
    trail radiative forcing (RF), the difference between the ra-
    diative fluxes at the tropopause of two atmospheric scenar-
    ios with and without contrails.

    http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/13/11965/2013/acp-13-11965-2013.pdf

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Sun, May 04, 2014 - 10:32pm

    Reply to #1
    richcabot

    richcabot

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 05 2011

    Posts: 181

    I had a similar response from

    I had a similar response from my brother when I attempted to enlighten him about 9/11.  His response was "that can't be true"  When I asked why, he said "If that was true I'd have to move to Canada, I couldn't be an American".

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Tue, May 06, 2014 - 7:10pm

    Reply to #4

    Andy_in_Hawick

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 06 2009

    Posts: 12

    Nice graphs

    That's good analysis. It is helpful to plot costs and prices (and even production figures) on a logarithmic scale as it shows these trends more clearly; each doubling is the same amount. Thanks

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Tue, May 06, 2014 - 8:59pm

    #30

    Time2help

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2011

    Posts: 2222

    Make it big

    [quote]

    "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

    – Adolf Hitler

    [/quote]

    Login or Register to post comments

  • Wed, May 07, 2014 - 9:14pm

    Reply to #4
    Joel Regen

    Joel Regen

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 13 2009

    Posts: 3

    only missing one other major factor from chart.

    If you follow the markets and, more importantly, the information about the plunge protection team and the exchange stabilization fund, you will discover that, surprise, surprise, the PM markets are rigged!!  I know, it's shocking… so, if that  is true, (I believe it is) and they have done so to protect the dollar ponzi scheme, then it stands to reason that we will see a dramatic rally when the dollar collapses (for reasons I cannot get into here) and there is no more reason to suppress PM prices.http://www.gata.org/node/13425
    thanks .

    Login or Register to post comments

Login or Register to post comments