Mike Barnwell

 at 12:13am · 

The 9/11 crime has taught me one thing: all humans, whether religious, atheist or agnostic, whether Republican, Democrat or Progressive, are susceptible to the conditioning process of government propaganda. We all know there is something wrong with the government conspiracy theory about 9/11, but we dare not question it. Anyone who dares to question the plausibility of the government's conspiracy theory is ridiculed, shunned or derided. Most of us can never bring ourselves to believe our government could be capable of complicity in the murder of 3,000 American citizens. This incapacity on our part to detect this evil in our government is a tribute to the effectiveness of the propaganda machinery and our susceptibility to belief in mankind's inherent goodness. It is only with constant vigilance we can resist all forms of state-sponsored propaganda.

Top of Form

CommentShare

33

Comments

John Herrick

John Herrick Sorry you are being ridiculous. There was no complicity. There is no "propaganda", only reality. I have analyzed Building 7, I was loaned the architectural plans including the structural plans. It is a wonder that it stood up on its own much less with a fire stressing the members. If as they say there were bombs, why did it take all day to come down?

 ·  ·  at 3:42pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell I'm not being ridiculous John. There are 2,900+ architects and engineers who share the same skepticism about the official version of 9/11. So at least I'm in good company.

 ·  ·  at 4:08pm



 

 

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John, the fact that it went into freefall for 2.25 seconds, the equivalent of 8 stories, is the smoking gun for me. That is compelling evidence.

 ·  ·  at 3:54pm

John Herrick

John Herrick You need to explain to me what you mean by "freefall".

 ·  ·  at 5:51pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John I am not an expert in Physics but I find this presentation by David Chandler of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth to be persuasive. He did a pretty good job of explaining the concept of 'freefall'. There are lots of conspiracists out there. However, the members of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth impress me as reasonable pursuers of the truth.

 ·  ·  at 6:28pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell Sorry. Here is the link to his article. http://www1.ae911truth.org/.../872-freefall-and-building...

https://external.ftpa1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQC2tAtBWj6CdYJ3&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.ae911truth.org%2Fimages%2Fwebsite_banner%2Feso-left-panel-banner.png&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&_nc_hash=AQBS0gNnrYu-dksa

 

Freefall and Building 7 on 9/11

Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after…

WWW1.AE911TRUTH.ORG

 ·  ·  at 6:29pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John Herrick, I have been struggling with the implications of the video evidence of 9/11. Everytime I lean towards the government's theory and then I go back and look at the videos of WTC7 falling, I am jolted right back to possible government complici...See More

 ·  ·  at 6:48pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell "The freefall of Building 7 is one of the clearest of many "smoking guns" that proves explosives were planted in the World Trade Center buildings prior to 9/11, 2001."

 ·  ·  at 7:06pm

John Herrick

John Herrick I explained the "freefall" of Building 7. There was nothing in the way from the ground floor to floor 8 where the offices started. There is no need for explosives.

 ·  · 6 hrs

 

John Herrick

John Herrick Building 7 did not have any floors between floor 1 and 4 and none between 4 and 7. The area between 1 and 4 was air, a soaring space. The area between 4 and 7 was an open area for machinery.
If the building fell at "freefall" speed, then it makes sense, there was nothing to impede the fall at first.

 ·  ·  at 8:58pm

John Herrick

John Herrick In addition there were two huge tanks of water on the top floor. These were for manual fire protection but were not used, a huge weight that helped bring the building down.

 ·  ·  at 9:06pm

John Herrick

John Herrick Third, the building was built over a ConEd substation which took up half of the block. In addition there was a subway under the end of the building and a ramp down to supply the rest of the World Trade Center. Between those three, the structure had to span areas no other building ever has had to.

 ·  ·  at 9:10pm

John Herrick

John Herrick Note the orange area. This area was an auditorium over the ramp and the subway where no supports could be provided.

No automatic alt text available.

 

 ·  ·  at 9:13pm

John Herrick

John Herrick The people who made up the conspiracy did not have the construction plans. They make up stuff, with nothing to base it upon.

 ·  ·  at 9:16pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John, are you saying that all these 2,900 Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth made up stuff with nothing to base it on? Let me just say, I find these men/women to be credible. They seem to people with integrity.

 ·  ·  at 9:21pm

John Herrick

John Herrick Did you read my posts? Those guys did NOT have the plans, they had no idea what was going on.

 ·  ·  at 9:30pm

John Herrick

John Herrick Did they say anything about the void in the building, the tanks on the roof, the ConEd substation, the subway, and the ramp? No.

 ·  ·  at 9:32pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John, this is an involved subject. It has been going for the last 16 years. There have been many wild theories, including the government's.Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

 are the most professional when it comes to this subject. If you are interested you should check out their work. 

I did read your post. With all due respect to my fellow atheist friend, I don't find them convincing. Do you really think that none of those 2,900 A&Es would pursue this subject for the last dozen years and not be acquainted with the plans of the WTC7? These A&Es know every nook and cranny of those buildings. If you have the time, check the works of Steven E. Jones, David Ray Griffin and Dr. Niels Harrit. A lot of people discount the opposing theories of 9/11 without looking at the evidence offered. I had bought wholesale the government's conspiracy theory until my eyes were opened to credible alternative theories.

 ·  ·  at 10:57pm

John Herrick

John Herrick sorry you feel that way. And no, they have no idea what was in that building.

 ·  ·  at 11:04pm

John Herrick

John Herrick On September 7, 2006, Jones removed his paper from BYU's website at the request of administrators and was placed on paid leave. The university cited its concern about the "increasingly speculative and accusatory nature" of Jones' work.
BYU College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences and the faculty of structural engineering issued statements in which they distanced themselves from Jones' work. They noted that Jones' "hypotheses and interpretations of evidence were being questioned by scholars and practitioners,

I.E. He is a nutter.

 ·  ·  at 11:16pm

John Herrick

John Herrick David Ray Griffin is another nutter

. He is currently a co-director of the Center for Process Studies and is one of the foremost contemporary exponents of process theology, founded on the process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne.
Griffin grew up in a small town in Oregon, where he was an active participant in his Disciples of Christ church. After deciding to become a minister, Griffin entered Northwest Christian College but became disenchanted with the conservative-fundamentalist theology that was taught there. While getting his master's degree in counseling from the University of Oregon, Griffin attended a lecture series delivered by Paul Tillich at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. At this time, Griffin made his decision to focus on philosophical theology. He eventually attended the Claremont Graduate University, where Griffin received his Ph.D. in 1970.[4]
As a student in Claremont, Griffin was initially interested in Eastern religions, particularly Vedanta. However, he started to become a process theologian while attending John B. Cobb’s seminar on Whitehead’s philosophy. According to Griffin, process theology, as presented by Cobb, “provided a way between the old supernaturalism, according to which God miraculously interrupted the normal causal processes now and then, and a view according to which God is something  a cosmic hydraulic jack, exerting the same pressure always and everywhere (which described rather aptly the position to which I had come)" (Primordial Truth and Postmodern Theology). Griffin applied Whitehead’s thought to the traditional theological subjects of christology and theodicy and argued that process theology also provided a sound basis for addressing contemporary social and ecological issues.[5]
After teaching theology and Eastern religions at the University of Dayton, Griffin came to appreciate the distinctively postmodern aspects of Whitehead's thought. In particular, Griffin found Whitehead's nonsensationist epistemology and panexperientialist ontology immensely helpful in addressing the major problems of modern philosophy, including the problems of mind-body interaction, the interaction between free and determined things, the emergence of experience from nonexperiencing matter, and the emergence of time in the evolutionary process.

>>>He is no professional engineer, as I am.

 ·  ·  at 11:21pm

John Herrick

John Herrick In an article titled "Madness in the Royal Library" published in the Danish newspaper Weekendavisen on December 7, 2012, journalist Søren Villemoes accused esteemed chemist Dr. Niels Harrit of being a "crackpot" .

Another nutter.

You know Mike Barnwell don't you that it has been proven that it is not possible for thermite to do anything to that steel. It is the same material used in sparklers.

 ·  ·  at 11:34pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell John my friend, I wouldn't burden you with too much more stuff, but I crave your indulgence this once and invite you to listen to this discourse by Professor David Ray Griffin. Judge the contents of his discourse by the merits of his presentation. If you do find the time to look at it give me your impressions. I will not burden you further. 

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search...

David Ray Griffin - Saferbrowser Yahoo Video Search Results

The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.

VIDEO.SEARCH.YAHOO.COM

 ·  ·  at 11:59pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell Remember this quote, John: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

 ·  · Yesterday at 12:12am

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell The Big Lie

"All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]"

 ·  · Yesterday at 12:29am

John Herrick

John Herrick From your post Mike Barnwell, David Ray Griffin claims 9-11 was an inside job, a false flag attack to allow Bush to attack Afghanistan and then Iraq
Everyone attacked his group.
Cites Steven Jones 
(NOTE: On September 7, 2006, Jones removed his paper from BYU's website at the request of administrators and was placed on paid leave. The university cited its concern about the "increasingly speculative and accusatory nature" of Jones' work.
BYU College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences and the faculty of structural engineering issued statements in which they distanced themselves from Jones' work. They noted that Jones' "hypotheses and interpretations of evidence were being questioned by scholars and practitioners)

Call to journalists to look at "evidence".

Cites Bill Moyers re: deceiving people to promote war.
"Buying the War" cheerleaders for the war.
Saddam Hussein and lack of weapons of mass destruction. (Note that Saddam was working on them as evidenced by the found stainless steel pipes which are used to separate U235 from the U238)

Bill Moyers says that they were providing disinformation: “truthers” have no information, only cherry pick a few supposed anomalies to try to make a case.

Rick Perry said “Lacking any real evidence. they cherry pick to create a Bogus conspiracy”

>>>>From the first 7 minutes Mike, Griffin has provided quite a good case AGAINST the "truthers".

 ·  · Yesterday at 8:51am

John Herrick

John Herrick Griffin dismisses the 9-11 report because Bush “lied”…which Bush did no such thing.
Besides, the 9-11 report was not created by Bush, but by an independent group of engineers and scientists. This is called creating a straw man then criticizing the straw man.

 ·  · Yesterday at 8:55am

John Herrick

John Herrick Now criticizing the commissioners, again a strawman, it was not the commissioners who wrote the 9-11 report.

 ·  · Yesterday at 8:58am

John Herrick

John Herrick So far, 9 minutes in, noting of any "evidence". Just inuendo.

 ·  · Yesterday at 9:00am

John Herrick

John Herrick Now he is on to Miracles? This is getting crazy.

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:05am

John Herrick

John Herrick Building 7 was a miracle? 
Not hit by a plane...check
Fire had not ever brought down a building alone....check
No jet fuel....check
There were fires, but they were not very big.....OOPS, that is a lie. (lie to promote what?) See photo below. Floors 5 through 8 (the mechanical equipment floors where the diesel engines were were fully engulfed).
Fires so hot that steel beams were weakened....check
Fires continued for 7 hours........check
Building compromised by falling debris.....check
(see diagram above with the orange area)
Diesel fuel was found not to be a part........check
Physical damage from the debris had little effect......check
Building brought down by fire without the aid of explosives...check
Thus a miracle........NO, it came down because of the items I listed, items they know nothing about.

No automatic alt text available.

 

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:26am · Edited

John Herrick

John Herrick Miracle #2
Symmetrical collapse....NO, look at the videos! The left side in the video was not the same as the right! But so what? It was a box!
All 82 columns had to fail at the same time.....which they did. The failure of a portion pulled the rest out of line, see detail below.

No automatic alt text available.

 

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:24am

John Herrick

John Herrick "It is difficult to understand how this could have occurred without the aid of explosives"......no, it is logical, given the unconventional structure due to the ConEd generators, the subway, and the ramp. He does not mention them.
Past buildings did not collapse......past buildings did not have the ConEd generators, the subway, and the ramp.
Asymmetrical fires could not have caused a symmetrical collapse.....wrong, see the diagram. The steel was asymmetrical due to the ConEd generators, the subway, and the ramp.
Sudden onset of the collapse....what? He wanted parts to fail first? Look at the diagram! The entire mid part of the structure was compromised!
Fire would have weakened the steel gradually....check
No sign of a slow start....check, the building started and with nothing to stop it on floors 1 to 8, it just came down. 
(now on to showing controlled demolition, another strawman)

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:41am

John Herrick

John Herrick Is this armchair guy all you have Mike? All he has is "look, I see demolition", where everyone else has facts and reality.
Where is his explanation as to how thousands of pounds of explosives were installed?
Where is his explanation as to how someone would have known Building 7 would have had ANY debris damage?
Where is his explanation as to why the guys with the explosives waited 7 hours to set the explosives off?

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:46am · Edited

John Herrick

John Herrick So far, just a fallacy of disbelief.

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:53am

John Herrick

John Herrick >>>Remember this guy is a preacher, into nonsensical stuff
After teaching theology and Eastern religions at the University of Dayton, Griffin came to appreciate the distinctively postmodern aspects of Whitehead's thought. In particular, Griffin found Whitehead's nonsensationist epistemology and panexperientialist ontology immensely helpful in addressing the major problems of modern philosophy, including the problems of mind-body interaction, the interaction between free and determined things, the emergence of experience from nonexperiencing matter, and the emergence of time in the evolutionary process.
>>>>He has had no training in structural engineering.

 ·  · Yesterday at 10:57am

John Herrick

John Herrick Miracle #3
Freefall for 2 seconds......explained above, the open space from floor 1 to 8 explains it. Explosives not needed.

 ·  · Yesterday at 11:08am

John Herrick

John Herrick Twin Towers 
Miracle #4
Again, freefall. (This time "essentially" freefall.) ....big difference. Not a problem...check
Structural damage, fires, gravity............check
47 core columns........wrong, the 47 core columns were only in the lower part of the buildings, NOT at the 87th floor and up.
Top part fell down on the lower part........check
Sports car hits back of semi doing 90 (or 80) miles an hour and that pushes semi down the highway at 80 miles an hour ......that is not what the argument is, another strawman that does not work at all.
NIST wants us to believe that the falling rubble is not resisted by anything but air...............wrong, the 80 floors IS mostly air, but the perimeter support beams were pushed out, allowing the massive top part to come through.
(see below)

Image may contain: outdoor

 

 ·  · Yesterday at 11:24am

John Herrick

John Herrick Miracle #5
The beginning of the fall began with a massive explosion......Another lie, there was NO explosion...besides, where is the explanation as to who knew which floor the planes were to hit, how the explosives were transported into the building an...See More

No automatic alt text available.

 

 ·  · Yesterday at 11:32am

John Herrick

John Herrick

No automatic alt text available.

 

 ·  · Yesterday at 11:32am

John Herrick

John Herrick Explosives such as RDX or nanothermite (nanothermite does not exist) could explain ejected beams..............NOTE: he did not watch the video behind him that showed the top of the structure falling to the side, an explanation of some of the peripheral damage, otherwise the falling debris forced the outside columns out, as shown on the previous photo of the aftermath.

 ·  · Yesterday at 11:40am

John Herrick

John Herrick Miracle #6
Fires in the towers melted the steel and evaporated steel............Another lie, no steel had melted, the steel member shown appears to have rusted through.
Spherical iron particles proves that iron had melted....NOTE: the heating of rust p...See More

 ·  · Yesterday at 12:02pm

John Herrick

John Herrick He summarizes saying that the six miracles violate the principles of physics. In fact they do not, each is easily explained.

 ·  · Yesterday at 12:15pm

John Herrick

John Herrick Do you want to know the reason they do this? Money. There is a lot of money to be made in those speaking fees. Thousands.

 ·  · Yesterday at 1:40pm

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell Hey John, I appreciate the fact that you took the time to watch the suggested video and have attempted a detailed rebuttal. I truly admire you for such enthusiasm and attention to detail. Accordingly, I will try to respond to your rebuttals. It will take me some time to frame my responses, so bare with me and give me some time.

 ·  · 15 hrs

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell With respect to Miracle #4 you said: "47 core columns........wrong, the 47 core columns were only in the lower part of the buildings, NOT at the 87th floor and up." You are in big trouble here, John. The central core of 47 columns went all the way to the top. "NIST claimed that six of the North Tower’s core columns and ten of the South Tower’s were severed." where the planes impacted the towers. So for starters you may want to double check this claim of yours. This quickly caught my attention.

 ·  · 13 hrs

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell I would  you to ponder the following very carefully, John: "[E]ach of these 110-story Twin Towers fell upon itself in about ten seconds at nearly free-fall speed. This violates Newton’s Law of Conservation of Momentum that would require that as the stationary inertia of each floor is overcome by being hit, the mass (weight) increases and the free-fall speed decreases. Even if Newton’s Law is ignored, the prevailing theory would have us believe that each of the Twin Towers inexplicably collapsed upon itself crushing all 287 massive columns on each floor while maintaining a free-fall speed as if the 100,000, or more, tons of supporting structural-steel framework underneath didn’t exist.78" - Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle Locations 820-821). Interlink Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 ·  · 12 hrs

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell "Another structural engineer, Edward Knesl, has written: It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below. . . . The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn’t know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse.79" - Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle Locations 822-827). Interlink Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 ·  · 12 hrs

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell "Basic principles of engineering (for example, the conservation of momentum principle) would dictate that the undamaged steel structure below the collapse initiation zone would, at the very least, resist and slow the downward movement of the stories above. There is, indeed, a good chance that the structural strength of the steelwork below would arrest the downward movement of the stories above. NIST must explain why the intact structure below the impact zone offered so little resistance to the collapse of the building.80" - Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle Locations 830-833). Interlink Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 ·  · 12 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Mike Barnwell Miracle #4 core columns.
" the perimeter columns -- and  steel columns in all tall buildings -- the thickness of the steel in the core columns tapered from bottom to top. Near the bottoms of the towers the steel was four inches thick, whereas near the tops it may have been as little as 1/4th inch thick."

You are right, they were continuous, they just were not substantial after a point.

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Mike Barnwell said: " "[E]ach of these 110-story Twin Towers fell upon itself in about ten seconds at nearly free-fall speed. This violates Newton’s Law of Conservation of Momentum "

The key part of that is "nearly". Since "nearly" does not mean "free fall", then I do not see a problem.

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Mike Barnwell said: "It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below. " and " the undamaged steel structure below the collapse initiation zone would, at the very least, resist and slow the downward movement of the stories above. "

It does not take a genius to know that a multi thousand ton hammer moving hundreds of feet per minute can crumple a metal column or a steel structure instantly. This is just a fallacy from ignorance.

 ·  · 6 hrs · Edited

John Herrick

John Herrick Look at the evidence Mike, the buildings did come down, they crushed the lower structure to bits. You do not need "explosives" to do that.

If you look at the photos do you see cuts in the columns from the "explosives"? Do you see ANY evidence of "exp...See More

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

Write a ...



 

 

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell I am not an engineer but I get the gist of what the experts are hereby saying.

 ·  · 12 hrs

Mike Barnwell

Mike Barnwell And BTW, John, somewhere above you seemed to insinuate that because Dr. David Ray Griffin is a Theologian he is automatically unqualified to have an informed opinion on the matter being debated. I have read some of his books and listened to some of his presentations and I am persuaded that he knows what he is talking about.

 ·  · 12 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Not that he is a theologian, but he is not a trained structural engineer!

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Mike Barnwell said: "I am not an engineer but I get the gist of what the experts are hereby saying."

Which "experts"? I am an expert structural engineer, and yet you do not believe me?

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Mike Barnwell said: "A lot of people discount the opposing theories of 9/11 without looking at the evidence offered. I had bought wholesale the government's conspiracy theory until my eyes were opened to credible alternative theories."

I have looked at all the "evidence" and found that there is nothing there, I have given you a true explanation that counters each point. The "alternative theories" are not credible.

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Miracle #1 - Fire.....There was a huge fire in floors 5 through 8, sufficient to cause expansion in the steel and thus dislodge steel columns.
Miracle #2 - Symmetrical collapse......yes, the upper 40 stories were a box, and it all came down together.
Miracle #3 - "Freefall for 2 seconds" .....yes there was a void from the ground floor to floor 8. Not a miracle, reality.
Miracle #4 - Twin Towers nearly freefall ....yes, nearly.
Miracle #5 - "Massive explosion in the Twin Towers before they began to fall".....there is no evidence of that! The only loud noises heard were elevators falling, and the people's bodies hitting the roofs down below. There was no "massive explosion", listen to the videos!
Miracle #6 - Fires in the towers melted the steel and evaporated steel............Another lie, no steal beams or columns melted or "evaporated". Microscopic beads of iron were rust.

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick Are those 6 items your "evidence", if so, FAIL.

 ·  · 6 hrs

John Herrick

John Herrick A theologian would look for miracles, an engineer would see the reality.

Bottom of Form