PDA

View Full Version : Guess what ? Our old friend, Ralph Rene, has created a 16 pa



2002-May-19, 07:30 PM
Yes, our old friend, Ralph Rene has now created a 16 page pamphlet on the WTC disaster .....

A quote from http://www.rene-r.com/world_trade.html :

"My pamphlet shows that no one had issued orders to stop the subways until after the first building failed. And that office fires cannot bring down steel buildings and that it took 4.5 hours in 1993 to empty out the damaged tower. Now they tell us that over 90% of the people in the South Tower got out before the second hit."

[The difference between 1993 and 2001 is explained here:
http://www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/7_APwtcevacuation.html ...]

And Ralph Rene then close with the following revealing sentence:

"Read my $5, 16 page pamphlet and learn the truth."

Ahem ! Say, eh, Ralphie ... If it is so important for you to let the American population learn "the truth", then why donīt you just publish those 16 pages on your website, so people can read your brilliant thoughts FOR FREE ??!!




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Look Ma, No Hands ! Oops ... on 2002-05-19 15:46 ]</font>

Ad Hominid
2002-May-19, 07:53 PM
On 2002-05-19 15:30, Look Ma, No Hands ! Oops ... wrote:

Yes, our old friend, Ralph Rene has now created a 16 page pamphlet on the WTC disaster .....


Hooray! Just more evidence that the HBs are being squeezed back into their stronghold in the dark caverns of the conspiracy industry. Bats of a feather squeak together*. The "Grand Unified" conspiracy theory is the Holy Grail of the conspiracy industry (to mix some more metaphors) so we shouldn't be surprised that Rene and the others are branching out like this. They now have powerful allies in their batsqueak assault on the U.S. Government, with new conspira-markets developing in certain parts of the world.

*OK, bats don't have feathers, but HBs and other conspiracy buffs would have no trouble believing that they do, if Sibrel or Rene said so. A giant conspiracy of ornithologists to exclude our chiropteran cousins is no less likely than global plots to misrepresent interstellar distance or the origin of the moon rocks.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ad Hominid on 2002-05-19 15:54 ]</font>

JayUtah
2002-May-19, 07:54 PM
Um, it wasn't an "office fire".

Karamoon
2002-May-20, 05:29 AM
I received a free copy of that when I ordered his Apollo mauscript.

I threw it straight in the bin. The pamphlet that is.

jrkeller
2002-May-20, 02:15 PM
Most people that I know who have experience in mechanical or structural design had a pretty good idea of what happened within hours of the WTC. I talked to my father, a retired design engineer, just hours after the collapse and the first words out of his mouth were that the steel becomes weak when it's heated at high temperatures. Sure enough, that's one of the conclusions.

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm

Of course Ralph knows that better.

JayUtah
2002-May-20, 03:50 PM
Most people that I know who have experience in mechanical or structural design had a pretty good idea of what happened within hours of the WTC.

I and other engineers watched the tragedy unfold while we were at work. There was no question in anyone's mind what had happened. The guys from aerospace knew exactly why those particular planes had been hijacked (heavy fuel loads) and the structural guys knew why the towers collapsed as they watched them collapse.

Office fires shouldn't have weakened the steel because there's just not enough energy in the typical office contents to weaken steel when you burn them. But this wasn't an office fire. Jet fuel has a lot of energy. That's why we use it as fuel.

I guess we're wandering off-topic, though.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JayUtah on 2002-05-20 11:51 ]</font>

jrkeller
2002-May-20, 08:32 PM
While we may be off topic here, just like the moon hoax believers, people with knowledge of the problem can easily explain the problem at hand and not make up some wacky answer to solve the problem.

The Curtmudgeon
2002-May-20, 08:40 PM
On 2002-05-20 01:29, Karamoon wrote:
I received a free copy of that when I ordered his Apollo mauscript.

I threw it straight in the bin. The pamphlet that is.


Hmm, $5 isn't all that much to spend--I've spent more than that on books proving that Jesus was an Atlantean super-scientist who flew in on a UFO. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif Well, maybe not that exact thesis, but close enough. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

But I'd certainly hate for the money to go to Rene. If anyone, like Karamoon, gets a free copy by ordering his Apollo manuscript or the like, and doesn't want it (before or after you read it), let me know, and I'll send you my snail mail address and you can send it to me. I'll reimburse you for the postage when I get it.

I'm sure that the arguments he's so convinced are so important will be nothing more than the usual shallow-brain stuff (like trying to compare office fires with burning jet fuel), but it might be interesting to see if he can come up with anything really novel.

The (okay, I'm a print junky; I'll read just about anything) Curtmudgeon

ktesibios
2002-May-20, 10:12 PM
The report to the House Science Committee, "World Trade Center Building Performance Study
Data Collections, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations" is available online.

Go to:

http://www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm

and click on "Lessons Learned from Ground Zero".

It's in rather large .pdf files, so you'll need Acrobat Reader and either a very fast connection or plenty of patience.

This is probably the most direct and exhaustive research into the collapse available. I won't even try to summarize the conclusions- best to check it out for yourself.

Jim
2002-May-21, 12:29 AM
Here's an excellent discussion of why and how the WTC collapsed:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

It's short and fairly low tech with visuals. More information is available through links.

Synopsis, as Jay says, this was not a typical office fire. The WTC was designed to resist any normal "office fire" but no one forsaw a spill of aviation fuel that covered almost an entire floor.

As for the evacuation in '93 vs '01, in the former, there was a question as to how much damage had been sustained (not much); in the latter, it was immediately obvious (severe). In the former, the damage was hidden from view; not in the latter. In the former, any evacuation would take people toward the danger; in the latter - except for those trapped above the impacts - the evacuation was away from the danger. Finally, in '93 no one was really "ready" for what happened; by '01, they may not have forseen the exact situation, but they were ready for a quick mass evacuation.

SpitfireIX
2006-May-08, 10:34 PM
In the same spirit as the thread bump about Neville Jones' web site's having disappeared, I just noticed that Ralph Rene's web site has disappeared. Maybe the Men in Black got to both of them. :rolleyes:

Maksutov
2006-May-09, 03:42 AM
In the same spirit as the thread bump about Neville Jones' web site's having disappeared, I just noticed that Ralph Rene's web site has disappeared. Maybe the Men in Black got to both of them. :rolleyes:Wasn't Father Jones excluding more and more people from his site? Like anyone who didn't agree 100% with his claims? Perhaps it got to the point where he decided that no one should have access except Jones himself.

Re Ralph, I wouldn't be surprised if he claims that the towers should have toppled over, after having proved that conclusion by using cardboard boxes and a leaf blower.