9/11 Paper Accepted to Major Conference

[Jaytje46]

So it seems that they need cash for a German mathematician to show his paper to the engineering world in New York.

http://action.ae911truth.org/o/50694...st_KEY=1402270

Quote:

German mathematician Ansgar Schneider was pleased to learn last month that his new paper, “The Structural Dynamics of the World Trade Center Catastrophe” — which refutes the official theory of the Twin Towers’ total destruction — was accepted to one of the most prestigious engineering conferences in the world: the annual congress of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE), being held in New York City.

This hugely positive development has created a major problem for Ansgar — a “good problem,” that is. If he doesn’t attend this conference in person, he cannot present his findings and won’t be included in the congress journal. The conference is little more than a month away, and the cost of attending is simply too much for this young academic.

The article has several links going to the donation page, but not a single link to the site of the Conference. I wonder why... Also no link to the paper.

I did find some other papers which he wrote.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06207
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06183

He is not one of the speakers.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9140

He is also not an engineer, else AE9/11 would have called him that, so he also wont be speaking at the Young engineers program.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7915

So not sure when they are going to let him speak tbh..

https://venuewest-my.sharepoint.com/...%2010,2019.pdf

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

Most of the papers presented at conferences are submitted by the attendees. I'm not sure what criteria they used for accepting papers. From their website, they also have a "poster session", and if history is any guide, I'd bet good money that he's actually just presenting a poster. These have very little vetting, in my experience. They're like training wheels for science publications, they give new scientists low-cost and low-risk places to present some simple work.

I don't imagine this will go as well for them as they think, though. From the conference invitation pdf, there's a Pre-Congress Workshop on Structural Failures – "Investigations, Causes, Lessons Learned and Used to Mitigate Failures".

So there will be actual experts in the house to talk to this fellow. I suspect it will be like a live-action post from JayUtah or Nick Terry.

[Captain_Swoop]

Maybe he is the cabaret?

[bknight]

Just another beggar with his paw out for the unsuspecting.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

So it seems that they need cash for a German mathematician to show his paper to the engineering world in New York.

http://action.ae911truth.org/o/50694...st_KEY=1402270

I'll see if I can google anything on him from German sites.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

The article has several links going to the donation page, but not a single link to the site of the Conference. I wonder why...

Uhm - now it has one, to http://www.iabse2019.com/

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

Also no link to the paper.

I think the point of a conference presentation is to have a paper first presented, then published with the conference procedings

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

I did find some other papers which he wrote.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06207
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06183

Taking a brief look at the first of the two, I find two "problems" already:
1. He apparently sets out to debunk Bazant & Verdure (2007) - the "crush-down-then-crush-up" paper. Well, It has already been debunked - GIGO-style: The model that B&V look at does not actually describe the observed collapse mechanisms.^{* edited to add footnote}
2. Ansgar Schneider believes that "the underlying Newtonian equation of motions" play a role in the model - that would be a foolish approach if it really were so.

I'll read it completely later, also the other ... uhm ... write-up.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

He is not one of the speakers.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9140

He is not one of the keynote speakers - that's the page you link to. Keynote speakers are individuals with estreemed prestige, sometimes outside the field (e.g. journalsists, politicians, ...), invited by the Congress organizers to set the tone, invite vision, broaden the scope. These are separate from any technical and academic presentation.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

He is also not an engineer, else AE9/11 would have called him that, so he also wont be speaking at the Young engineers program.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7915

Could be true.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

So not sure when they are going to let him speak tbh..

Try the Program? http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9151

"The IABSE NY team is working hard to provide you with an exciting program!

Take a look at our draft program here and stay tuned for more updates."

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

https://venuewest-my.sharepoint.com/...%2010,2019.pdf

Ah - you found it
Details are yet to be filled in.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

Horatius already explained



<sup>* footnote added on edit:
Here is what's wrong with Bazant & Verdure (2007), and why subsequently Schneider's debunking of it is irrelevant, even if valid: B&V consider that columns buckle all across the buildings, top-down. Page 4-5 of Schneider's first "paper":

"In [Bazant and Zhou, 2002] and [Bazant et al. 2008] a maximal possible value of W = 500 MJ is mentioned, which is based on computations for a three-hinge buckling scenario. Yet meanwhile Korol and Sivakumaran have made empirical studies of buckling columns, which indicate that this value should be about 3 to 4 times bigger [Korol and Sivakumaran, 2014]."

However, it is pretty obvious from looking at the debris on the ground and also the extant videos of the collapses that hardly any columns developed any, let alone 3, buckling hinges. This is not what happened, so arguing the correct numerical magnitude of energy dissipation is purely academic and irrelevant to the actual, historic collapses.</sup>

[Oystein]

AE911T claims that this is "one of the most prestigious engineering conferences in the world".

AE are always quick with unqualified superlatives. Is this claim true?

The IABSE was founded in 1929 in Switzerland, and still has its international headquarters at the Swiss Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zürich, Switzerland. It has 3900 members world-wide, ca. 500 of which in Switzerland. The English Wikipedia is pretty short, with only 4 paragraphs, for a body or event labeled "one of the most prestigious in the world". The German Wiki has a bit more meat (that's where I got the 3900 figure from) - but there doesn't even exist a French or Spanish, let alone Russian, Japanese or Chinese Wiki version, only EN, DE, IT and Tamil. How prestigeous can something be "in the world" that doesn't even have a Wiki article in one of the major native languages of the counbtry where it is centered?


Soooo ... any engineers in the room who have heard of the IABSE before?

[Oystein]

By the way, from the IABSE2019 homepage:

Originally Posted by IABSE

Key Dates

June 1, 2018	Deadline for Congress contributions
June 15, 2018	Call for abstracts
November 1, 2018	Deadline for abstract submissions
November 20, 2018	NEW deadline for abstract submissions
February 1, 2019	Notify authors of abstract acceptance
May 1, 2019	Submittal deadline for full papers
June 24, 2019	Notification of acceptance of full papers and announcement of presentation types
July 15, 2019	Registration deadline for all presenting authors
July 15, 2019	Deadline for early-bird registration
September 2–3, 2019	IABSE Annual Meetings
September 4–6, 2019	Congress

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

[beachnut]

Quote:

German Author Whose Paper Refutes Official Theory of Twin Towers’ Destruction Needs Your Help

There is no official theory, there is reality. 19 terrorists took four planes, caused massive fires and damage to the WTC, Pentagon, and a field in PA. The impact and resulting fires caused the collapse of the WTC towers: not a theory, it is called reality.

Idiots begging for money to spread lies.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by Oystein

By the way, from the IABSE2019 homepage:
[/table]

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

I note an abstract deadline extension there. That is usually a symptom of them not receiving enough submissions, which doesn't sound like the kind of problem that "one of the most prestigious conferences in the world" would have.

[pgimeno]

Originally Posted by Oystein

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

My take is that he has.

On one hand, there's this:

Quote:

Cancellation Policy:

* Cancellation until August 1st, 2019: full refund less a $ 100 administrative fee.

* No cancellation possible after August 1st, 2019.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7891

On the other hand, I'm sure that AE911T has more than enough money to cover the expenses, from membership fees if nothing else. They are just trying to monetize on this. I don't recall AE911T ever saying "The goal has been reached, you can stop sending money".

And yeah, the bigger they make it sound, the more motivated will the donors be, no matter if it's a lie.

[Jaytje46]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Uhm - now it has one, to http://www.iabse2019.com/

I don't see the link in the article.

[Oystein]

Scanning the two former papers by Schneider, they reek of a mathematician using his tools with competence, albeit on a problem he doesn't have sufficient understanding of. Being good at math doesn't automatically mean you are good at physics, and even less that you are good at forensic engineering.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

I don't see the link in the article.

You linked the newsletter - link is not in there. It is however in the website article, which you find on the ae911truth.org homepage:

https://www.ae911truth.org/news/538-...eeds-your-help

[James Redford]

This is great news.

For irrefragable physicochemical proof that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job by deep-state elements of the US government--i.e., via the use of large quantities of thermite in the case of the collapse of the three destroyed World Trade Center towers--see pp. 75-84 of my following article:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

My foregoing article concerns physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics). Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals. However, it also analyzes the societal implications of said, particularly the implications of the exponential advancement of technology and hence also the coming radical life-extension technologies (i.e., transhumanism) in light of a world dominated by a callous oligarchy.