Conspiracy or Science: Why Did the Towers Fall?

Extremely short notice on this one, members of will be on hand to protest and to ensure this "hamburger" gets nicely tenderized:

Ronald Hamburger

Conspiracy or Science:
Why Did the Towers Fall?

Sunday, December 3
11 a.m.

Debates have been raging for years about whether or not the twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed due to the impact of the two commercial airliners that struck them on 9/11/2001. Questions about the collapse of building 7, which was not struck by a plane, also feed the conspiratorial fire. Could terrorists have planted explosives throughout the World Trade Center in advance of the crashes? Were the fires caused by the planes enough to bring down these engineering marvels? Wherein lies the truth?

Ronald Hamburger, a structural engineer and Senior Principal at Simpson Gumpertz and Heger consulting engineers in San Francisco, will discuss why those buildings collapsed and illustrate his talk with graphics. He was a principal author of FEMA's initial report on the collapse of the twin towers and later a key participant in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) study.

$6, or free for Friends of the Center.


Looks more like the Hamburgler

Buzz this:

"9/11 - Why We Fight"

Someone should blog it!!!

I did...

I guess all the Mods are still at iHop!


there we go...


Can i get a side order of fries with this Hamberger. Maybe for a extra dollar i can get a copy of the 9/11 commission.

Let's go to the video tape...

As a former member of the Architectural Engineering and Construction (AEC) community I have met more than my fare share of incompetent architects and engineers. What is worse is that even the competent ones take bribes. All you have to do is look at recent NYC history to see how many AEC firms were either investigated, idicted or convicted of corruption - bribery, kickbacks, bid-riggibg. It runs rampant in the AEC community.

Anyone can be bought.

That's all I'm sayin...

Besides, that's one bad mustache.

and another thing...

What a surprise - his firm does a lot of government and military work...

Besides, that's one bad

Besides, that's one bad mustache.


Interesting, do you know of

Interesting, do you know of any good sources to use for this information on corrupt architects?


Check the NY Times archives

Check the NY Times archives. I prefer not to give you specific names as I still have contacts in the industry. Prior to 9/11 there was a major investigation being conducted by the NY DA's office. Many of the cases were settled out of court to help those involved protect their businesses. However, I know of some major players that lost their licenses, paid fines, and even served jail time. It's all in the public domain.

Architects & Engineers

I went to school to be an Architectural Engineer.... I dropped out after working for several architectural firms...... I was disapppointed by the work of this industry.... the people were very nice but I have yet to meet one that is truely knowledgable about their profession..... Architects are really nothing more than paper pushers who know how to read and interpret code books. They seldom do any calculations besides the occupancy of a building or the number of handi-cap parking spaces that are required.
They rely on engineers to do any structural calculations.

There are very few architectural or engineering firms in the world who can handle projects of the scale of the WTC complex.... very few architects make an above average income.... there is very little money in archetecture unless you somehow get your designs into K-Mart of Target.... It is the biggest cut throat industry I have ever seen.... the have never figured out how to make money.... and part of the stipulation of the AIA is that they can not get together to set an appropriate rate for services....Architecture is an industry of passion not $$.

Would an architect or an engineer sell out for a few $$$ ...sure... but in reality I think that they don't really know the answers. For any architect or engineer to say that those buildings to fall in the manner that they did blows my mind..... If these people ever really worked on this type of structure.... it would go against everything they should know.... because the structures that the are currently building have less than half of the structural members which were built into the WTC towers...... If you could see the plans for the buildings to replace the WTC... you would see a completely different plan... with half as much structural members.

to say that these buildings could fall this way should go against everything that they should have been taught..... but there are alot of very bad architects and engineers who are very sucessful.... because they have figured out how to underbid everyone else..... good architects seldom get the most work..... it's all about the $$$$.

Show "that's one bad mustache" by Beefy (not verified)

It depends on your definition of "Terrorists"

Of course terrorists brought the buildings down. It is our task to identify exactly who they are in this case. I don't happen to believe the Arab patsies we were served up had much of a role in it. There is just too much high level covering up combined with the access, motives and know how for them to have done it.
Another day, another shill.

speaking of terrorist and

speaking of terrorist and the definition... anyone notice that multiple planes were accosted with radioactive poison with that whole russian spy thing? Planes were effected, people died, hundreds were affected and could get cancer. Not one news person used the word terrorism on this. Ask yourself why, and who is telling these people what to say.


Is this right? You guys sure this man's name isn't B. King , or Dr. White Castle ??

Who in the hell is Ronald Hamburger?
Well, the dude looks like a child molester anyways, much like his older brother who works as a mascot clown for a burger chain.


and the title freaks me out.. "conspiracy or science" :S goooood , i hate it.
and yea, Ronald Hamburger ?? As if Hamburger wasn't MacDonald enough he's also called Ronald ??
Is this for real?

Bring on the Big Macs

I'll bet you a Big Mac (not that I'd eat it) someone in the media or gov't gave this hamburger guy a big fat check to do this...
Aaaah, the best experts that money can buy!


If this guy is so sure of himself that he feels he can give a presentation on why they fell then why isn't he sure enough of himself to debate the issue with other experts?!?! Sounds like this is a one sided venue----I hope someone is there to question him. I also hope we get an update here. Thanks for posting.

" Meatheads to the Re4scue " :- Fess up or SHUT UP

I sincerely hope that SOMEONE boxes this meathead into putting his burger on the fire at the National 9/11 Truth Conference in March

And if anyone cares to shove something up his bun,
try this,
680 links exposing the PNAC Plot on 9/11 with pix and petitions,

( This clown looks like he's soaked in grease too long )

Show "" by Anonymous (not verified)

Expect nothing but aggravation.

Here's one of his quotes:

"These buildings were incredibly strong, especially with respect to resisting dead loads and wind loads, but they also had a number of vulnerabilities."

From SR(Standard Report):

He's a-shillin'.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.


I got it...Let's ask Mr. Hamburger what franchise he'll invest in with the payoff he's getting for doing this.....
MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4 OK, I'LL STOP NOW...HEHEHE



In his case, the best investment would be a spine and a razor


Lol. Dude looks like a

Lol. Dude looks like a cross between Uncle Leo and Robert Goulet. Perhaps we should thank Mr. Hamburgler for bringing some much needed comic relief to this debate ;)

Well it appears the twin

Well it appears the twin towers were like the Death Star: incredibly strong and powerful, but if Luke shoots a proton torpedo at the right angle through a ventilation shaft, the whole thing explodes in fiery glory... that's called fiction. The twin towers don't play that.

"True enlightenment is attained when one can, at will, see through the illusion of reality." - Me, intoxicated

The World Trade Death Star

FAH analogy Mavericosuave!

Show "Journal of 9/11 Studies is a Fraud and Cannot be Trusted, oops" by CB_Brooklyn

Sr. Pricipal

He's a principal at an enginering firm and he's got time to participate in FEMA and NIST.... for one thing I really don't think it is very legit to be participating in both these studies.... how is the NIST study supposed to be independent of the FEMA study?

Second of all you do not need to be a good engineer to become a principal in an engineering firm.... actually you do not need to be an engineer at all. You could become a principal by bringing in alot of contracts..... government contracts are nice contracts.

I have nothing to back this but it's a very good possibility..... I have been looking at some of the companies around.... and I have seen several companies that had been created based on a government contract.... do you realize how easy it would be to start a sucessful company with the guarantee of a government contract?....easy..... there are quite a few companies whose life blood came this way.

and they all have a vested interest in this war on humanity..... their comfort relies on this corporate structure.... many of them are complicit..... It's sad to say but it's very coneivable.

Another disinfo guy

Of course the MSM gives this guy credibility, He's bought and paid for...I'll bet He wasn't interupted at all..there is nothing independent about these people nor are their studies, they are to one-sided. At least the 9/11 truth movement has looked at the governments side and reviewed their conclusions.
But the 9/11 truth movement has also looked at the evidence and compared it to the governments report (an investigation that the government had no plans whatsoever to even start) and have come to their own conclusions that the government is so mixed up in this and are covering up their complicity.
The Hamburglar is just another in the long line of corruption.
I say move on from this one.

Ronald Hamburger?

I'm sorry... this is too ridiculous.


Dude! How many whoppers you wanna bet that's not even his REAL name? he looks like a freakin' rat!



It is the battle of science!!!

If this man was on Fox news. You can bet a quarter pounder with cheese he would have the agreement of every Neo-Con that is working for Fox news. Like H&C. But if Steven Jones went back on Fox News he would be called a Nut. We have to realize this to Bush is so anti science also. But if the science works in his favor you notice he will keep that kind of science in his favor and feed it to us. There is good science and bad science. There is know wrong way to eat a hamberger now is there? And also Bush has ask congress for a couple of billions of dollars more for the War in iraq last week. Will this war ever end?? Nope because he is going to go ahead onto bigger and better things like Iran. The idea of WW III sends these Neo-Cons into a complete wargasm. We can mention CD at the WTC complex. Because that what it was CD. Good science can prove that. And if men like Mr Hamberger can disprove that then he is the best money can buy. And as for the 9/11 Commission if i want to read about good fantasy i will read J.R.R Tolkien.

Ode to a Hamburger

Oh, burger, sizzling on the grill,
I can not make my heart stand still.
I've got the Heinz anticipation,
That "where's the beef" articulation.

A cattle call of bovine bliss
Summoo-ns us to meat like this.
This charcoal round-up will succeed,
Behooving order—not stampede.

My nose is filled with your aroma,
I'm tripping to cholesterol coma.
You are clearly heavenly chow.
I call you my chopped "Holy Cow."

You are truly rare indeed,
In bun adorned by poppy seed.
My love for you is nothing phony.
Bull-eve me, this is not bull-oney.

You slow me with your mooving kiss,
But I'll catch up and relish this.
I crave your fat, I'm tired of starches.
Eat your heart out, Golden Arches.

—Grandpa Tucker

I can't help but think that if you read between the lines just a little bit, this fits amazingly well here.

Nice title for his lecture

No bias there, not at all.


The problem I see with the experts is that they all start from the premise that to show controlled demolition would be to show USG involvement.

That is not necessarily true, though of course it suggests that.

They then do everything they can to show that the it is PFG (planes, fire, gravity) that brought down the towers.

They tweak their models until they get the politically correct result.

I haven't seen Hamburger's lecture. Maybe he will convince -- none others have, the latest failure being that of Garcia.

come on

Instead of making fun of the way the guy looks, or making fun of his name, why doesnt someone post some audio or a transcript?

ok, ok, but I was enjoying the hamburger jokes

I was waiting for a real techie to write this report, but it falls to me. I did not record the talk or take notes, but I'll try to sum things up. (I did see someone recording this, and maybe it will turn up, or maybe it will be available from CFI West.) I got there early with my sign, but I decided to leave it in the truck and pick up my ticket and check the place out. I ran into Zan right away, and he said "There's more of us here than there are of them". We decided to wait until people were leaving to hand out flyers for our event on Dec. 8. This Center for Inquiry West in the Steve Allen Theatre seems to be like a skeptics society or something. I think the place may have seated around 150 or so. Full house. SRO. There were maybe eight of us from and clearly alot of other people who did not buy the official line. There appeared to be a fair number of tow-the-liners too. The guy who introduced Ronald Hamburger appeared to have questions of his own and said that it is their mission to look at all sides of an issue. (Coming up, they will have a talk about whether the story of Jesus preceeded the birth of Jesus) The tone was set, so we all gave the speaker our respectful attention. He said he was glad to be here. Or at least he was for now. He made a point of telling us that he does not work for the government. Yeah right.

He had slides and some video, and there were times when members of the audience couldn't keep from bursting forth with a question. When he showed a clip where the top of one tower starts to tilt, Chris said "We have a question about that." He said he would answer questions at the end. He was interrupted a few more times like that and gave some quick yes/no answers. I think most of us wanted him to finish his talk so there would be more time for questions.

Alot of it was pretty technical and dry, and I won't be able to relate that too well. And alot that we have all heard before. I think I'm versed just well enough on the technical issues that, combined with my gut feeling, I can usually tell in which direction the truth lies. A couple of the main points that he got grilled on at the end revolved around how severely the core columns were damaged. The biggest laugh was when he said he didn't even remember how many columns there were, and the audience shouted 47! Also, Tony asked about the fires and made it quite clear that he did not believe there were enough combustibles, such as carpet and furniture for the fires to be hot enough and long lasting enough to support his findings.

Andrea asked if it was a pancake, why didn't it look like a stack of pancakes. I think a couple times he used the stock answer that the WTC towers were unlike any other buildings. He touched on Bldg. 7 and said that uncontrolled fires had burned all day and that a couple core columns were severely damaged and then gave a detailed analyses, and I thought that was all pretty lame. He was asked when that report was coming out and he said that it was delayed when the report on the towers took longer than expected. He was asked the question that someone pointed out above, having to do with if the possibility of controlled demolition had been considered, would the investigation have proceeded differently. He didn't have a good answer for that, and I think he may have been starting to feel the heat, and the host had said only two more questions, and that was that.

I don't think he changed many minds, if any, on either side. As we left, someone had arrived with a sign who I don't think had been inside, and we handed out fliers for the screening at UCLA next Friday with a Q & A w/ Ken Jenkins. Check out the events calendar for Dec. 8.

Thanks for the report

Strange that a guy giving such an expert presentation wouldn't be able to recall how many columns there were.

Did he seem like he actually believed the story he was telling?


Good question. How could he even believe himself as far as Bldg. 7 is concerned? I wonder what goes on in these Bush apologists heads.

But the funniest thing, I almost forgot, was when the sign started slipping off the podium that said CFI West. First one corner, then it slipped a little more, and people started snickering. Then one guy shouted "It's a conspiracy!" And we tried to tell Hamburger what we were laughing at, and I don't think he really ever got it until someone came and took the sign down. Huh, this might even answer your question.

Once, again, note the

Once, again, note the headline, "Conspiracy or Science?", which is not only comprised of non-mutually exclusive terms, but, well, doesn't mean anything at all!