A Gravy Paper: William Rodriguez, Escape Artist

[RedIbis]

Evasion noted. If you can't suggest a plausible way for the fireballs to be caused by something other than the jet fuel, then you don't have much of a case.

I'm not debating the source of the fireball that Rodriguez reported. I'm criticizing the method that Gravy used to reach his questionable conclusion.

I'll repeat, Rodriguez never uses the phrase "jet fuel fireball" no matter how many different ways Gravy attempts to present it that way.

You guys have found a pet theory you are comfortable with. I am not promoting any theory.

I just find it anti-skeptical and anti-scientific to rigidly adhere to the jet fuel, magic fireball theory, and decide that there are no other possibilities.

 

[Disbelief]

I'm not debating the source of the fireball that Rodriguez reported. I'm criticizing the method that Gravy used to reach his questionable conclusion.

I'll repeat, Rodriguez never uses the phrase "jet fuel fireball" no matter how many different ways Gravy attempts to present it that way.

You guys have found a pet theory you are comfortable with. I am not promoting any theory.

I just find it anti-skeptical and anti-scientific to rigidly adhere to the jet fuel, magic fireball theory, and decide that there are no other possibilities.

Al people seem to be asking is, "What are these other possibilities?" You keep alluding to them like they are right there in front of our eyes, but they are rejected. Do you have anything plausible?

 

[Mercutio]

I just find it anti-skeptical and anti-scientific to rigidly adhere to the jet fuel, magic fireball theory, and decide that there are no other possibilities.

Two questions:

1) Is the evidence consistent with a jet-fuel fireball? (yes or no)

2) Is the evidence consistent with conventional explosives? (yes or no)

ok, a third question-- Why do you think the jet fuel fireball requires "magic"?

 

[Gravy]

But it's so much easier than typing "reported a fireball that is completely consistent with jet fuel, which we know was present in abundance, and utterly incompatible with any conventional explosives, for which there is no evidence anyway, but let's not get carried away, 'cos if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and tastes good in orange sauce, it might still be a wankel rotary engine."

It's more than that, really. Rodriguez tells us that he initially accepted the official version of events, and he repeatedly tells us what the official version of the basement explosion is. We know that he repeated that version as his understanding of the facts, including to NIST in a public venue in 2004. I've seen no evidence that Rodriguez made any claims of bombs in the basement and no fireball in the elevator shaft before 2005. Those claims do not appear in his 2004 lawsuit. Additionally, he tells us why he began to speak out: not because any new evidence came to light, but because he was angry at the 9/11 Commission.

If someone wrote a paper about me that contained gross errors and misrepresentations, I would make sure that those were corrected or retracted. Rodriguez cannot refute these points, since they are his own statements.

He could do the honorable thing and stop claiming that a vast inside job conspiracy put bombs in the north tower basement. Instead, he seems intent on continuing to dig a hole for himself by hobnobbing with people like anti-Semitic fascist wannabe Kevin Barrett, and by using his celebrity to spread falsehoods about 9/11.

His actions are indefensible, in my opinion.

 

[Swing Dangler]

Two questions:

1) Is the evidence consistent with a jet-fuel fireball? (yes or no)

No. Why? No one can trace the route the jet fuel fireball took to the basement levels and still account for the survival of Arturo Griffith and company. No one has placed on a map or diagram the location of the basement survivors in relation to all of this jet fuel. No one witnessed jet fuel streaming down the shafts. No one can explain how people and parts of the structure survived the overpressure nearest to impact, but areas farthest away did not. No one can explain how the elevator shafts and the facade survived the fireball but areas of the basement did not. No one has provided any calculations determining the fuel/air ratio, nor the over pressure data required to account for the destruction. The smell of kerosene could be easily attributed to diesel fuel from destroyed vehicles in the parking garage. No one can attribute the sound event to jet fuel as recorded by Jenny Carr.

2) Is the evidence consistent with conventional explosives? (yes or no)

Yes. Why? The historical record and tactics of a terrorist. The description of the destruction from the event itself, ie. destroyed parking garage, machine shop, cave in at the Path Level plaza, lack of carbon rich smoke, witness descriptions of further damage, injury to the witnesses, audio event on Jenny Carr's video, working hypothesis of the FBI, the event reminded many survivors of the 1993 bombing. As soon as scientific tests are done on a large enough sample showing no explosive residues, conventional explosives fit the events more accurately than the jet fuel fireball/jet fuel pool- theory.

 

[Mobyseven]

The dumb hurts my brain.

 

[gumboot]

No. Why? No one can trace the route the jet fuel fireball took to the basement levels and still account for the survival of Arturo Griffith and company.

Why do you keep insisting the fireball traveled down to the basement levels?

No one witnessed jet fuel streaming down the shafts.

How on earth would anyone in the building be in a position to witness this?

No one can explain how people and parts of the structure survived the overpressure nearest to impact, but areas farthest away did not.

Why do you keep talking about overpressure? You do realise that a fuel fire ball does not have high overpressure, yes? Do you even know what overpressure is?

The smell of kerosene could be easily attributed to diesel fuel from destroyed vehicles in the parking garage.

Except that the smell of kerosene (which smells nothing like diesel, by the way) was reported consistently immediately after impact all the way through the building. So unless burning diesel-powered cars were covertly placed throughout the towers prior to impact, you really have nothing here.

injury to the witnesses

It's interesting that you mention this. One of the most vivid, and one of the only consistent elements of Mr Rodriguez's account is the injuries he witnessed - skin hanging off arms and such things.

These accounts are, for me, the primary piece of evidence proving the damage was caused by jet fuel. The injuries described are called "flash burns". They're the tell-tale sign of burns from a fuel fireball. They're very unique, very horrible, and actually not as serious as they sound. The top layers of skin are totally burned, and often strip away when touched, but the skin underneath is usually okay. Any Vietnam War veteran who ever witnessed victims of a napalm attack know it well.

The same wounds were described at the Pentagon. They are 100% consistent with a jet fuel fireball. They are 100% inconsistent with a high explosive detonation. Simply put, skin cannot be burned off a person by a high explosive, because the blast wave extends well beyond the high heat area. Thus anyone close enough to the blast to suffer burns will be blown into pieces.

Conclusion? Whatever injured those people in the basement was a fuel fireball, not an explosion.

-Gumboot

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

No. Why? No one can trace the route the jet fuel fireball took to the basement levels and still account for the survival of Arturo Griffith and company.

So you disagree with Rodriguez's account of the event?

Yes. Why? The historical record and tactics of a terrorist. The description of the destruction from the event itself, ie. destroyed parking garage, machine shop, cave in at the Path Level plaza, lack of carbon rich smoke, witness descriptions of further damage, injury to the witnesses, audio event on Jenny Carr's video, working hypothesis of the FBI, the event reminded many survivors of the 1993 bombing. As soon as scientific tests are done on a large enough sample showing no explosive residues, conventional explosives fit the events more accurately than the jet fuel fireball/jet fuel pool- theory.

What the...? You've already forgotten the fireball? What conventional explosive creates a fireball, Swing Dangler?

What conventional explosive in the basement of a building causes a fireball to come down an elevator shaft?

(Feel free to answer these questions, too, RedIbis.)

 

[RedIbis]

Instead, he seems intent on continuing to dig a hole for himself by hobnobbing with people like anti-Semitic fascist wannabe Kevin Barrett, and by using his celebrity to spread falsehoods about 9/11.

You seem to want to accuse Rodriguez of guilt by association.

First of all, isn't Barrett part of MUJCA, and you know what the J stands for, right? Or are you conflating criticisms of Israeli military practices with anti-semitism?

Secondly, if you are going to accuse Rodriguez of associating with anti-semites in a poor attempt at character assassination, why don't you report on his work with Jewish agencies after 9/11?

 

[Arus808]

I noticed that Red Ibis has ignored Gravy's proof and only answered posts after his Grayv's answers showing that rodriguez had lied. Why is that?

 

[RedIbis]

I noticed that Red Ibis has ignored Gravy's proof and only answered posts after his Grayv's answers showing that rodriguez had lied. Why is that?

I would attempt to answer the questions if I could make any sense at all out of it.

What proof are you vaguely referring to?

 

[Arus808]

now you're dodging, as it has been clarified by Gravy and by other posters.

He has proved through Rodriguez's own testimony that he has lied.
So please, point out where in Gravy's paper where Gravy's has misquoted him, when he's using HIS exact testimony?

 

[RedIbis]

now you're dodging, as it has been clarified by Gravy and by other posters.

He has proved through Rodriguez's own testimony that he has lied.
So please, point out where in Gravy's paper where Gravy's has misquoted him, when he's using HIS exact testimony?

No, he has not proven where Gravy has lied.

I've pointed out, since this thread and the other Gravy paper thread were started, several places where Gravy misrepresents Rodriguez's testimony.

Go back and check #281 again. Gravy reads "jet fuel fireball" when Rodriguez used the word "explosion."

 

[Disbelief]

No, he has not proven where Gravy has lied.

I've pointed out, since this thread and the other Gravy paper thread were started, several places where Gravy misrepresents Rodriguez's testimony.

Go back and check #281 again. Gravy reads "jet fuel fireball" when Rodriguez used the word "explosion."

I saw Rodriguez use "ball of fire." Where does he say explosion?

 

[Unfit4Command]

No. Why? No one can trace the route the jet fuel fireball took to the basement levels and still account for the survival of Arturo Griffith and company. No one has placed on a map or diagram the location of the basement survivors in relation to all of this jet fuel. No one witnessed jet fuel streaming down the shafts. No one can explain how people and parts of the structure survived the overpressure nearest to impact, but areas farthest away did not. No one can explain how the elevator shafts and the facade survived the fireball but areas of the basement did not. No one has provided any calculations determining the fuel/air ratio, nor the over pressure data required to account for the destruction. The smell of kerosene could be easily attributed to diesel fuel from destroyed vehicles in the parking garage. No one can attribute the sound event to jet fuel as recorded by Jenny Carr.

Yes. Why? The historical record and tactics of a terrorist. The description of the destruction from the event itself, ie. destroyed parking garage, machine shop, cave in at the Path Level plaza, lack of carbon rich smoke, witness descriptions of further damage, injury to the witnesses, audio event on Jenny Carr's video, working hypothesis of the FBI, the event reminded many survivors of the 1993 bombing. As soon as scientific tests are done on a large enough sample showing no explosive residues, conventional explosives fit the events more accurately than the jet fuel fireball/jet fuel pool- theory.

Could you please give the route at which explosives were carried into the building and planted on the steel? If not, then it didn't happen.

Also, no one can explain why no one in the building reported seeing people ripping out walls and planting the explosives. No one reports seeing any of these strange devices either...or why the bomb sniffing dogs didn't find them.

Explain how this happened, if you can't, it didn't happen!

The jet fuel fireball theory makes the most sense. When the planes impacted the building several people reported fireballs shooting down the shafts as well as a strong smell of kerosene, even on the lower levels.

Firefighter Peter Blaich:

As we got to the third floor of the B stairway, we forced open an elevator door which was burnt on all three sides. The only thing that was remaining was the hoistway door. And inside the elevator were about I didnt recognize them initially, but a guy from 1 Truck said oh my God, those are people. They were pretty incinerated. And I remember the overpowering smell of kerosene. Thats when Lieutenant Foti said oh, thats the jet fuel. I remember it smelled like if youre camping and you drop a kerosene lamp.

The same thing happened to the elevators in the main lobby. They were basically blown out. I dont recall if I actually saw people in there. What got me initially in the lobby was that as soon as we went in, all the windows were blown out, and there were one or two burning cars outside. And there were burn victims on the street there, walking around. We walked through this giant blown-out window into the lobby.

There was a lady there screaming that she didnt know how she got burnt. She was just in the lobby and then next thing she knew she was on fire. She was burnt bad. And somebody came over with a fire extinguisher and was putting water on her.

Thats the first thing that got me. That and in front of one of the big elevator banks in the lobby was a desk and I definitely made out one of the corpses to be a security guard because he had a security label on his jacket. Im assuming that maybe he was at a table still in a chair and almost completely incinerated, charred all over his body, definitely dead. And you could make out like a security tag on his jacket. And I remember seeing the table was melted, but he was still fused in the chair and that elevator bank was melted, so I imagine the jet fuel must have blown right down the elevator shaft and I guess caught the security guard at a table, I guess at some type of checkpoint.”

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/blaich.html

``I saw a couple of elevators in free fall; you could hear them whizzing down and as they crashed, there was this huge explosion, like a fireball exploding out of the bank of elevators,'' Kravette said. ``People were engulfed in flames.''

http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/CantorFitzgerald.html

“As he waited for orders, Meldrum, the chauffeur (Fire engine driver), noticed that all windows in the high lobby were blown out. Glass and marble from busted walls littered the floors, crunched underfoot. He caught an occasional whiff of jet fuel, a smell like kerosene, wafting from elevator shafts. On the floor by the elevators he saw burned people.”

http://www.projo.com/words/st20021016.htm

“ For those of you who may not know the story, she was entering the lobby of the North Tower of the World Trade Center when a fireball exploded from the elevator shaft. She and two others managed to run out of the building, all three of them on fire. A passerby across the street ran to them, reaching Lauren first, and put the flames out. He then put Lauren in an ambulance, so she was the first person evacuated. He certainly saved her life.”

http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780553896930&view=excerpt

"When I walked out into the lobby, it was incredible," he recalled. "The whole lobby was soot and black, elevator doors were missing. The marble was missing off some of the walls. 20-foot section of marble, 20 by 10 foot sections of marble, gone from the walls".

The west windows were all gone. They were missing. These are tremendous windows. They were just gone. Broken glass everywhere, the revolving doors were all broken and their glass was gone. Every sprinkler head was going off. I am thinking to myself, how are these sprinkler heads going off? It takes a lot of heat to set off a sprinkler head. It never dawned on me that there was a giant fireball that came through the air of the lobby. I never knew that until later on. The jet fuel actually came down the elevator shaft, blew off all the (elevator) doors and flames rolled through the lobby. That explained all the burnt people and why everything was sooted in the lobby.”

http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

Many more similar testimonies are in Gravy's paper.

I don't understand why you want people to explain the path of the fireball. What's hard to explain? The plane hit, elevator cables were severed and damaged, elevators began to crash, and the fireball followed the elevators. Some people were lucky enough to escape the elevators before being engulfed in the flames, that left an "overpowering smell of kerosene" inside charred elevators, "a smell like kerosene, wafting from elevator shafts[FONT=&quot]," and left burned people, not people blown apart like what high powered explosives would do.
[/FONT]

 

[RedIbis]

No, he has not proven where Gravy has lied.

I've pointed out, since this thread and the other Gravy paper thread were started, several places where Gravy misrepresents Rodriguez's testimony.

Go back and check #281 again. Gravy reads "jet fuel fireball" when Rodriguez used the word "explosion."

I made a stupid error here. I mean Rodriguez in the first sentence.

Is there a time limit on editing? I don't have that function. It was hours earlier.

 

[RedIbis]

I saw Rodriguez use "ball of fire." Where does he say explosion?

In the very same post, read it again.

'When the explosion happened in the basement there was fire all over, and this guy tried to cover his face… '” (Video: William Rodriguez An American Hero. 2005, Snowshoe Films)

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I made a stupid error here. I mean Rodriguez in the first sentence.

Is there a time limit on editing? I don't have that function. It was hours earlier.

I think the time limit on editing is something like 15 minutes to 30 minutes.. Early on in the forum history we had people who were being dishonest and editing threads after they had been challenged on a statement they had made, so a time limit seemed reasonable.

We even had people go back and entirely delete OP's...

 

[RedIbis]

I think the time limit on editing is something like 15 minutes to 30 minutes.. Early on in the forum history we had people who were being dishonest and editing threads after they had been challenged on a statement they had made, so a time limit seemed reasonable.

We even had people go back and entirely delete OP's...

Thanks for the info. It's understandable that the edit function would be time sensitive for those reasons.

One thing I'm sure we can all relate to is the quick post at work and then looking back at it hours later and realizing you made a simple error.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Thanks for the info. It's understandable that the edit function would be time sensitive for those reasons.

One thing I'm sure we can all relate to is the quick post at work and then looking back at it hours later and realizing you made a simple error.

Sure, I can relate.

I sometimes read the Straight Dope Message Board, and they just began allowing editing for the first time this year. Needless to say, they had lots of follow on posts just to correct spelling mistakes and the like.

I think a limited editing period is reasonable here.

Glad I could help.