Letter to, and response from, Implosion World.
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7541
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 02:53 PM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 7 2006, 08:34 AM)
Again, I contend that thermite fires account for ALL the following facts & parameters, (which no one from the gravity-driven collapse supporters has yet to account for in their nonsensical postulations)...
a - a compressed mass of rubble continued to burn for weeks after the 'attack / collapse'
b - a 'lake' of water was applied to douse this persistant fire
c - water had NO EFFECT to douse or suppress the fires
d - water will 'FEED' a thermite / diasite reaction
e - a thermite / diasite reaction gives off ultraviolet radiation (and this ultraviolet radiation could possibly account for the anomalous lightening of videos and photographs at the end of the collapses, which many writers have commented on)
f - Pyrocool absorbs ultraviolet radiation whilst dousing the oxygen-absorbing ability of a thermite / diasite based incendiary
g - Pyrocool reached the areas of the 'underground fires' and put them out, whereas ALL other fire-fighting efforts failed.
h - Pyrocool was specifically developed to fight 'incendiary' fires (primarily for use in military theaters).
AND Additionally...
i - Thermite melts steel
j - the smoke coming from the fires was white (just like the white smoke referred to by Pecararo in the basement explosions).... thermite produces white smoke.
Until someone comes up with a better theory for the underground fires THAT ACCOUNTS FOR ALL the above factors, I'll have to stick with the Most Plausible One (as presented above - thermite... OR something else which has the same properties and fulfills All the above parameters.)
Now Foxx, weren't you supporting Hoffman's analysis earlier????
You know the one where the AVERAGE temperature of the PYROCLASTIC CLOUD was over 1,000 deg C.
Caused by the HEATING of the CONCRETE to this TEMP.
So, according to HOFFMAN, it doesn't MATTER where you started in the pile, you were HOT by the time it was all over.
So which is it. Did the collapse CAUSE HEATING or NOT???
As to thermite....
Let me just say
Thermite is:
A ) HEAVY
B ) BURNS FAIRLY QUICKLY
C ) LEAVES TELL TALE SLAG
How many TONS of Thermite would it take to burn for several weeks?
You see, while paper and such could ignite at reasonable temps, thermite has a VERY HIGH ignition temp.
Why was NO SLAG found??
Arthur
How about adding a little sulfur to bring the ignition tempter down? Helps explain appendix c in the FEMA report.
Metamars, thanks for your observations...
Metamars, thanks for your observations...
I wouldn't put it like this. First of all, a lot of the items you list I would think more of as "phenomena", rather than "factors". In other words, effects, rather than causes. In more complicated systems, a cause can also be a (possibly contributory) cause of something else.
Perhaps the use of the word 'factors' confused my meaning in the above quote.
What I meant by 'factors' was... "any of the facts or circumstances, which, taken together, constitute a result or situation".
I agree that the list of 'factors' I listed included both 'causes' (ie - the fact that Pyrocool was required to put out the fires) and 'effects' (ie - water had no effect to douse or suppress the fires). These are related 'circumstances' which were observed with regard to the fires. The list I used was not meant to be definitive in any kind of quantitative way, but was simply a list of qualitative circumstances which should be addressed in formulating a plausible theory as to the actual CAUSE of the anomaly.
I don't believe anyone can logically deny any of the listed 'factors', so in order to formulate a legitimate plausible postulation of a likely CAUSE... ALL such factors must be taken into account. If a hypothesis only addresses 1/2 the list of circumstances, then (in my view) it cannot be taken seriously.
We all realize that even the possible combustable rubble which was not pulverized on the way down would have been compacted into a tight mass, oxygen is required for combustion & forced air supply is required to forge / melt steel. These factors have led the gravity-driven collapse supporters to propose ridiculous assumptions such as Arthurs Amazing Bellows Theory, and once that was rebuted as ridiculous, 'Reality Check' comes up with the equally ridiculous Amazing Charcoal Pit theory (as an attempt to account for the lack of a readily available air supply to create conditions to heat the steel to melting or at least forging temperatures).
Both of those postulations ignore the significant circumstance that a 'lake' of water was poured into the pit - and had NO Effect in dousing the fire. IF, a lake of water had not been applied to the fires, THEN maybe (JUST MAYBE) 'arthurian' and 'RC' postulations could have had a chance at plausibility.
Alternatively, the attraction of the 'thermite theory' as a CAUSE of the underground fires adequately and plausibly provides an 'answer' to these two factors...
1 - lack of a ready supply of oxygen,
AND
2 - a 'lake' of water being applied.... in that
Thermite carries it's own oxygen supply & adding water simply INCREASES the burn of thermite.
Now while 'thermite' meets these objectives, (and is the only compound that I KNOW OF which HAS these characteristics), THAT does not preclude the possibility of the military having other 'unknown' / unpublicized compounds / incendiaries / explosives which could fulfill both these conditions. As I wasn't part of the operation, obviously I don't KNOW for a fact WHAT was used. However due to the factors 1 & 2 above... ANYTHING which CAUSED the underground fires MUST satisfy BOTH factors (limited supply of oxygen whilst applying a lake of water).
As to 'Arthurs' latest attempts to rebut this thermite theory...
Reply by 'Arthur'
Now Foxx, weren't you supporting Hoffman's analysis earlier???? You know the one where the AVERAGE temperature of the PYROCLASTIC CLOUD was over 1,000 deg C. Caused by the HEATING of the CONCRETE to this TEMP. So, according to HOFFMAN, it doesn't MATTER where you started in the pile, you were HOT by the time it was all over. So which is it. Did the collapse CAUSE HEATING or NOT???[/b]
Weren't you disputing the heating of the concrete pyroclastic cloud to 1000 deg C? If NOT, then add this factor to the previous list.
Adds nor detracts zero from the 'thermite' theory.
Adds nor detracts zero from the 'thermite' theory.
How many TONS of Thermite would it take to burn for several weeks?
As I said, I wasn't part of the 'operation' so I have no idea.
Can you tell me how many TONS of 'supplies & materials' were trucked into the basement every day, and provide an accounting for each of those TONS?
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
Why was NO SLAG found??
Please quote the scientific report you refer to that NO 'slag' was found.
The slag would simply appear as bits of iron (steel), and if you weren't specifically LOOKING for bits of IRON as a possible clue to the cause, then why would someone report on it?
Again, you are simply throwing out anything you can think of to possibly rebut my arguement... without taking the majority of factors in the list into account. When you come up with some reasonable CAUSE which accounts for ALL the factors in the list, let us know.
Metamars (and other resonable people)...
As an additional 'speculation' , the possibility of using 'thermite' compounds, MAY have been meant to dispose completely of any possible evidence left over AFTER the demolitions, of devices (possibly exotic / secret) USED in the demo's... and MAY have been a separate circumstance unrelated to the actual demo's ?
Just speculating out loud, although obviously I could not present any evidence for such speculation.
a - a compressed mass of rubble continued to burn for weeks after the 'attack / collapse'
b - a 'lake' of water was applied to douse this persistant fire
c - water had NO EFFECT to douse or suppress the fires
d - water will 'FEED' a thermite / diasite reaction
e - a thermite / diasite reaction gives off ultraviolet radiation (and this ultraviolet radiation could possibly account for the anomalous lightening of videos and photographs at the end of the collapses, which many writers have commented on)
f - Pyrocool absorbs ultraviolet radiation whilst dousing the oxygen-absorbing ability of a thermite / diasite based incendiary
g - Pyrocool reached the areas of the 'underground fires' and put them out, whereas ALL other fire-fighting efforts failed.
h - Pyrocool was specifically developed to fight 'incendiary' fires (primarily for use in military theaters).
AND Additionally...
i - Thermite melts steel
j - the smoke coming from the fires was white (just like the white smoke referred to by Pecararo in the basement explosions).... thermite produces white smoke.
Until someone comes up with a better theory for the underground fires THAT ACCOUNTS FOR ALL the above factors, I'll have to stick with the Most Plausible One (as presented above - thermite... OR something else which has the same properties and fulfills All the above parameters.)
Now Foxx, weren't you supporting Hoffman's analysis earlier????
You know the one where the AVERAGE temperature of the PYROCLASTIC CLOUD was over 1,000 deg C.
Caused by the HEATING of the CONCRETE to this TEMP.
So, according to HOFFMAN, it doesn't MATTER where you started in the pile, you were HOT by the time it was all over.
So which is it. Did the collapse CAUSE HEATING or NOT???
As to thermite....
Let me just say
Thermite is:
A ) HEAVY
B ) BURNS FAIRLY QUICKLY
C ) LEAVES TELL TALE SLAG
How many TONS of Thermite would it take to burn for several weeks?
You see, while paper and such could ignite at reasonable temps, thermite has a VERY HIGH ignition temp.
Why was NO SLAG found??
Arthur
How about adding a little sulfur to bring the ignition tempter down? Helps explain appendix c in the FEMA report.
QUOTE
Originally posted by Foxx
In order for a 'theory' to be plausible, it MUST take into account all known factors.
In order for a 'theory' to be plausible, it MUST take into account all known factors.
Metamars, thanks for your observations...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by Foxx In order for a 'theory' to be plausible, it MUST take into account all known factors. |
Metamars, thanks for your observations...
I wouldn't put it like this. First of all, a lot of the items you list I would think more of as "phenomena", rather than "factors". In other words, effects, rather than causes. In more complicated systems, a cause can also be a (possibly contributory) cause of something else.
Perhaps the use of the word 'factors' confused my meaning in the above quote.
What I meant by 'factors' was... "any of the facts or circumstances, which, taken together, constitute a result or situation".
I agree that the list of 'factors' I listed included both 'causes' (ie - the fact that Pyrocool was required to put out the fires) and 'effects' (ie - water had no effect to douse or suppress the fires). These are related 'circumstances' which were observed with regard to the fires. The list I used was not meant to be definitive in any kind of quantitative way, but was simply a list of qualitative circumstances which should be addressed in formulating a plausible theory as to the actual CAUSE of the anomaly.
I don't believe anyone can logically deny any of the listed 'factors', so in order to formulate a legitimate plausible postulation of a likely CAUSE... ALL such factors must be taken into account. If a hypothesis only addresses 1/2 the list of circumstances, then (in my view) it cannot be taken seriously.
We all realize that even the possible combustable rubble which was not pulverized on the way down would have been compacted into a tight mass, oxygen is required for combustion & forced air supply is required to forge / melt steel. These factors have led the gravity-driven collapse supporters to propose ridiculous assumptions such as Arthurs Amazing Bellows Theory, and once that was rebuted as ridiculous, 'Reality Check' comes up with the equally ridiculous Amazing Charcoal Pit theory (as an attempt to account for the lack of a readily available air supply to create conditions to heat the steel to melting or at least forging temperatures).
Both of those postulations ignore the significant circumstance that a 'lake' of water was poured into the pit - and had NO Effect in dousing the fire. IF, a lake of water had not been applied to the fires, THEN maybe (JUST MAYBE) 'arthurian' and 'RC' postulations could have had a chance at plausibility.
Alternatively, the attraction of the 'thermite theory' as a CAUSE of the underground fires adequately and plausibly provides an 'answer' to these two factors...
1 - lack of a ready supply of oxygen,
AND
2 - a 'lake' of water being applied.... in that
Thermite carries it's own oxygen supply & adding water simply INCREASES the burn of thermite.
Now while 'thermite' meets these objectives, (and is the only compound that I KNOW OF which HAS these characteristics), THAT does not preclude the possibility of the military having other 'unknown' / unpublicized compounds / incendiaries / explosives which could fulfill both these conditions. As I wasn't part of the operation, obviously I don't KNOW for a fact WHAT was used. However due to the factors 1 & 2 above... ANYTHING which CAUSED the underground fires MUST satisfy BOTH factors (limited supply of oxygen whilst applying a lake of water).
As to 'Arthurs' latest attempts to rebut this thermite theory...
QUOTE
Originally posted by Foxx
Again, I contend that thermite fires account for ALL the following facts & parameters, (which no one from the gravity-driven collapse supporters has yet to account for in their nonsensical postulations)...
a - a compressed mass of rubble continued to burn for weeks after the 'attack / collapse'
b - a 'lake' of water was applied to douse this persistant fire
c - water had NO EFFECT to douse or suppress the fires
d - water will 'FEED' a thermite / diasite reaction
e - a thermite / diasite reaction gives off ultraviolet radiation (and this ultraviolet radiation could possibly account for the anomalous lightening of videos and photographs at the end of the collapses, which many writers have commented on)
f - Pyrocool absorbs ultraviolet radiation whilst dousing the oxygen-absorbing ability of a thermite / diasite based incendiary
g - Pyrocool reached the areas of the 'underground fires' and put them out, whereas ALL other fire-fighting efforts failed.
h - Pyrocool was specifically developed to fight 'incendiary' fires (primarily for use in military theaters).
AND Additionally...
i - Thermite melts steel
j - the smoke coming from the fires was white (just like the [/b]white smoke[/b] referred to by Pecararo in the basement explosions).... thermite produces white smoke.
Until someone comes up with a better theory for the underground fires THAT ACCOUNTS FOR ALL the above factors, I'll have to stick with the Most Plausible One (as presented above - thermite... OR something else which has the same properties and fulfills All the above parameters.)
Again, I contend that thermite fires account for ALL the following facts & parameters, (which no one from the gravity-driven collapse supporters has yet to account for in their nonsensical postulations)...
a - a compressed mass of rubble continued to burn for weeks after the 'attack / collapse'
b - a 'lake' of water was applied to douse this persistant fire
c - water had NO EFFECT to douse or suppress the fires
d - water will 'FEED' a thermite / diasite reaction
e - a thermite / diasite reaction gives off ultraviolet radiation (and this ultraviolet radiation could possibly account for the anomalous lightening of videos and photographs at the end of the collapses, which many writers have commented on)
f - Pyrocool absorbs ultraviolet radiation whilst dousing the oxygen-absorbing ability of a thermite / diasite based incendiary
g - Pyrocool reached the areas of the 'underground fires' and put them out, whereas ALL other fire-fighting efforts failed.
h - Pyrocool was specifically developed to fight 'incendiary' fires (primarily for use in military theaters).
AND Additionally...
i - Thermite melts steel
j - the smoke coming from the fires was white (just like the [/b]white smoke[/b] referred to by Pecararo in the basement explosions).... thermite produces white smoke.
Until someone comes up with a better theory for the underground fires THAT ACCOUNTS FOR ALL the above factors, I'll have to stick with the Most Plausible One (as presented above - thermite... OR something else which has the same properties and fulfills All the above parameters.)
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by Foxx Again, I contend that thermite fires account for ALL the following facts & parameters, (which no one from the gravity-driven collapse supporters has yet to account for in their nonsensical postulations)... a - a compressed mass of rubble continued to burn for weeks after the 'attack / collapse' b - a 'lake' of water was applied to douse this persistant fire c - water had NO EFFECT to douse or suppress the fires d - water will 'FEED' a thermite / diasite reaction e - a thermite / diasite reaction gives off ultraviolet radiation (and this ultraviolet radiation could possibly account for the anomalous lightening of videos and photographs at the end of the collapses, which many writers have commented on) f - Pyrocool absorbs ultraviolet radiation whilst dousing the oxygen-absorbing ability of a thermite / diasite based incendiary g - Pyrocool reached the areas of the 'underground fires' and put them out, whereas ALL other fire-fighting efforts failed. h - Pyrocool was specifically developed to fight 'incendiary' fires (primarily for use in military theaters). AND Additionally... i - Thermite melts steel j - the smoke coming from the fires was white (just like the [/b]white smoke[/b] referred to by Pecararo in the basement explosions).... thermite produces white smoke. Until someone comes up with a better theory for the underground fires THAT ACCOUNTS FOR ALL the above factors, I'll have to stick with the Most Plausible One (as presented above - thermite... OR something else which has the same properties and fulfills All the above parameters.) |
Reply by 'Arthur'
Now Foxx, weren't you supporting Hoffman's analysis earlier???? You know the one where the AVERAGE temperature of the PYROCLASTIC CLOUD was over 1,000 deg C. Caused by the HEATING of the CONCRETE to this TEMP. So, according to HOFFMAN, it doesn't MATTER where you started in the pile, you were HOT by the time it was all over. So which is it. Did the collapse CAUSE HEATING or NOT???[/b]
Weren't you disputing the heating of the concrete pyroclastic cloud to 1000 deg C? If NOT, then add this factor to the previous list.
QUOTE
Thermite is:
A ) HEAVY
B ) BURNS FAIRLY QUICKLY
C ) LEAVES TELL TALE SLAG
A ) HEAVY
B ) BURNS FAIRLY QUICKLY
C ) LEAVES TELL TALE SLAG
Adds nor detracts zero from the 'thermite' theory.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Thermite is: A ) HEAVY B ) BURNS FAIRLY QUICKLY C ) LEAVES TELL TALE SLAG |
Adds nor detracts zero from the 'thermite' theory.
How many TONS of Thermite would it take to burn for several weeks?
As I said, I wasn't part of the 'operation' so I have no idea.
Can you tell me how many TONS of 'supplies & materials' were trucked into the basement every day, and provide an accounting for each of those TONS?
QUOTE
while paper and such could ignite at reasonable temps, thermite has a VERY HIGH ignition temp.
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| while paper and such could ignite at reasonable temps, thermite has a VERY HIGH ignition temp. |
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
Why was NO SLAG found??
Please quote the scientific report you refer to that NO 'slag' was found.
The slag would simply appear as bits of iron (steel), and if you weren't specifically LOOKING for bits of IRON as a possible clue to the cause, then why would someone report on it?
Again, you are simply throwing out anything you can think of to possibly rebut my arguement... without taking the majority of factors in the list into account. When you come up with some reasonable CAUSE which accounts for ALL the factors in the list, let us know.
Metamars (and other resonable people)...
As an additional 'speculation' , the possibility of using 'thermite' compounds, MAY have been meant to dispose completely of any possible evidence left over AFTER the demolitions, of devices (possibly exotic / secret) USED in the demo's... and MAY have been a separate circumstance unrelated to the actual demo's ?
Just speculating out loud, although obviously I could not present any evidence for such speculation.
QUOTE (reasonwhy+)
How about adding a little sulfur to bring the ignition tempter down? Helps explain appendix c in the FEMA report.
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 02:43 PM)
QUOTE (gordon+Jan 7 2006, 01:25 PM)
I would argue that this gives a remarkably good model for a spreadsheet.
And I didn't get sixteen million dollars.
G
And you didn't model the planes impact nor the fires nor the sum of events leading to the local collapse, which is of course what took 16 million dollars.
Arthur
And NIST forget the most important aspect explaining how global collapse ensued.
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
And I didn't get sixteen million dollars.
G
And you didn't model the planes impact nor the fires nor the sum of events leading to the local collapse, which is of course what took 16 million dollars.
Arthur
And NIST forget the most important aspect explaining how global collapse ensued.
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
QUOTE (adoucette+)
How many TONS of Thermite would it take to burn for several weeks?
As I said, I wasn't part of the 'operation' so I have no idea.
Can you tell me how many TONS of 'supplies & materials' were trucked into the basement every day, and provide an accounting for each of those TONS?
As I said, I wasn't part of the 'operation' so I have no idea.
Can you tell me how many TONS of 'supplies & materials' were trucked into the basement every day, and provide an accounting for each of those TONS?
QUOTE (adoucette+)
while paper and such could ignite at reasonable temps, thermite has a VERY HIGH ignition temp.
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
Irrelevant. Although 'paper & such' has a lower ignition point such rubble fires can't melt steel. The Higher ignition temps of 'thermite' can be initiated by 'detonators' (phosphorus / magnesium). I see no impediments to plausibly igniting 'thermite'.
QUOTE (adoucette+)
Why was NO SLAG found??
Please quote the scientific report you refer to that NO 'slag' was found.
The slag would simply appear as bits of iron (steel), and if you weren't specifically LOOKING for bits of IRON as a possible clue to the cause, then why would someone report on it?
What a crock.
Here we have TONS AND TONS of thermite being loaded into EACH tower. Packed into and around each column and what's more, there is SO MUCH EXCESS thermite that it burns for weeks afterward. Yet NO ONE MENTIONS THIS after the fact.
Now these TONS of thermite turn into molten IRON, in quantities equal to roughly 1/2 of its starting weight. So much so that it COULD NOT BE IGNORED.
Now they haul all this off and there is NOT ONE picture of a MOLTEN (meaning MELTED) pool of Iron, nor one picture of a SOLIDIFIED hunk of SLAG.
NOT ONE.
But WITH NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that THERMITE is involved, Foxx has DEDUCED that THERMITE MUST HAVE BEEN USED because of the color of the friggin smoke.
His mental prowness puts the likes of the Pink Panther to SHAME.
Keep this up and you get to join Steve1957 and galdur in the MORON CLUB.
Arthur
Please quote the scientific report you refer to that NO 'slag' was found.
The slag would simply appear as bits of iron (steel), and if you weren't specifically LOOKING for bits of IRON as a possible clue to the cause, then why would someone report on it?
What a crock.
Here we have TONS AND TONS of thermite being loaded into EACH tower. Packed into and around each column and what's more, there is SO MUCH EXCESS thermite that it burns for weeks afterward. Yet NO ONE MENTIONS THIS after the fact.
Now these TONS of thermite turn into molten IRON, in quantities equal to roughly 1/2 of its starting weight. So much so that it COULD NOT BE IGNORED.
Now they haul all this off and there is NOT ONE picture of a MOLTEN (meaning MELTED) pool of Iron, nor one picture of a SOLIDIFIED hunk of SLAG.
NOT ONE.
But WITH NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that THERMITE is involved, Foxx has DEDUCED that THERMITE MUST HAVE BEEN USED because of the color of the friggin smoke.
His mental prowness puts the likes of the Pink Panther to SHAME.
Keep this up and you get to join Steve1957 and galdur in the MORON CLUB.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 06:18 PM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+)
How about adding a little sulfur to bring the ignition tempter down? Helps explain appendix c in the FEMA report.
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
Arthur Quote:... Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
As pointed out in my last post, the ignition temperatures of thermite are irrelevant.
Arthur Quote: ... And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Totally unsubstantiated...
There are innumerable reports of the STENCH at Ground Zero.
Although, I have yet to run across any which specifically states the stench as being specific to the odor of rotting eggs... the odor of thermite (if it was mixed with sulphur) would also be mixed with OTHER stenches such as burning / rotting corpses (apologies for such graphics - but they can not be discounted) along with anything else which may have been burning, decomposing, or merely present. Not to mention that 'thermite' in the basement area MAY NOT have been 'diasite' (which is the term for the sulphur formula), and may have been another form of thermite which didn't use sulphur as a binder.
Adoucette, does it not appear to yourself how weak your arguments & rebuttals actually ARE in this area?
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
Arthur Quote:... Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
As pointed out in my last post, the ignition temperatures of thermite are irrelevant.
Arthur Quote: ... And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Totally unsubstantiated...
There are innumerable reports of the STENCH at Ground Zero.
Although, I have yet to run across any which specifically states the stench as being specific to the odor of rotting eggs... the odor of thermite (if it was mixed with sulphur) would also be mixed with OTHER stenches such as burning / rotting corpses (apologies for such graphics - but they can not be discounted) along with anything else which may have been burning, decomposing, or merely present. Not to mention that 'thermite' in the basement area MAY NOT have been 'diasite' (which is the term for the sulphur formula), and may have been another form of thermite which didn't use sulphur as a binder.
Adoucette, does it not appear to yourself how weak your arguments & rebuttals actually ARE in this area?
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Jan 7 2006, 06:28 PM)
And NIST forget the most important aspect explaining how global collapse ensued.
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
How global collapse ensued is the LEAST important aspect in WTC 1 and 2.
It is important in WTC 7, which is why NIST is evaluating that aspect of THAT tower.
Gordon has shown nothing yet. We've asked for him to print the formulas and received a few generalities. Excel spreadsheet cells can be copy/pasted as text so it should be an easy request to satisfy.
Arthur
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
How global collapse ensued is the LEAST important aspect in WTC 1 and 2.
It is important in WTC 7, which is why NIST is evaluating that aspect of THAT tower.
Gordon has shown nothing yet. We've asked for him to print the formulas and received a few generalities. Excel spreadsheet cells can be copy/pasted as text so it should be an easy request to satisfy.
Arthur
The SMELL OF TONS OF BURNING SULFUR WOULD NOT BE MISIDENTIFIED AS ANYTHING ELSE, SULFUR IS JUST TOO DAMN UNIQUE OF A SMELL.
Get real.
Arthur
Get real.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 06:18 PM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+)
How about adding a little sulfur to bring the ignition tempter down? Helps explain appendix c in the FEMA report.
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
Where do you people get your information? Seriously. Could you point me to a link that states sulfur does or doesn't modify the ignition temperature of Thermite?
And I can just image your response if someone posted a link to witness testimony of burning sulfur smells:
"I don't put any stock in anything witnesses say. Under extreme duress, people's response to sights, smells, and sounds are totally distorted. What they think they smelled was NOT sulfur, no, no, no. What they really smelled was the fart gas from themselves and people around them crapping their pants in fear."
Wait a minute! Maybe it was the fart gas that kept the rubble fires stoked?
Heh, well I guess that is a subjective analysis dependant upon emotion. When are you going to get around to actually providing any science to rebut the basement thermite theory?... the lake of water?... the stench?... the Pyrocool?... the lack of forced air bellows?... the ultraviolet radiation factor of pyrocool and the fact that thermite gives off UVR?...
You have now increased your unsubstantiated quantity from TONS, to TONS & TONS, yet offer no quantifiers of exactly how many TONS (even IF TONS were required... just more emotional outbursts without providing a shred of evidence to support your 'pope-ish proclamation'.
Even IF TONS & TONS would be required, you still haven't addressed how MANY TONS of materials & supplies were shipped into the basement on a daily basis. Get a grip man... ANYONE who would have the balls to pull off this public demolition would not be short of abilities to import such required quantities.
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
Do you honestly believe for one second that EVERYTHING classified under National Secrecy related to weapons is already KNOWN to the general public ??? There is absolutely no denying that 9/11 was a tactical military operation. The only difference of opinion between you and I on this, is that you believe some Fairy Tale that cave-dwellers used Magic to create all the phenomena on 9/11... however still have not been able to present ANY plausible theory as to these anomalous underground fires (apart from Magic). At least my theory is based upon Science.
Going by your emotional response, I will have to assume that you believe that is physically & scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to import sufficient quantities of some form of incendiary into the basement area... If so HOW is it possible that they imported TONS & TONS of other materials & supplies into the basement levels on a daily basis.
Please don't cry about it, stick to the SCIENCE facts - or go over to the Magic forum.
They could easily mistake it if mixed with other obnoxious fumes.
Oh, it's POISONOUS now ALSO. It'll kill you.
No wonder people are offended by others farting in public (or private for that matter). Perhaps we should pass a law that farting is illegal and anyone doing so should be arrested for attempted murder...
One wiff of a rotting egg will kill you? ... amazing that anyone who knows what a rotting egg smells like has lived to report it to others.
Sure, it's 'poisonous' and 'sickening' but I highly doubt it's as instantaneously deadly as cyanide... get REAL!
I find it Amazing that NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS have been documented amongst ground-zero responders ... or wait a minute... maybe I'm misinformed there?
Your attempts to rebut this theory remind me of the song by Lenny Kravitz...
"Always on the RUN"
In the quantities Foxx is describing it H2S is poisonous.
Which is enough Diamite to burn for weeks.
Which is TONS and TONS of the stuff.
http://www.swopnet.com/engr/Gayman/Gayman_H2S.html
Arthur
Because Sulfur doesn't change the ignition temperature of Thermite.
And though it could possibly affect the burn rate, NO ONE WOULD FAIL TO NOTICE THE STENCH COMING FROM A LOT OF BURNING SULFUR.
Arthur
Where do you people get your information? Seriously. Could you point me to a link that states sulfur does or doesn't modify the ignition temperature of Thermite?
And I can just image your response if someone posted a link to witness testimony of burning sulfur smells:
"I don't put any stock in anything witnesses say. Under extreme duress, people's response to sights, smells, and sounds are totally distorted. What they think they smelled was NOT sulfur, no, no, no. What they really smelled was the fart gas from themselves and people around them crapping their pants in fear."
Wait a minute! Maybe it was the fart gas that kept the rubble fires stoked?
Arthur said,Gordon has shown nothing yet. We've asked for him to print the formulas and received a few generalities. Excel spreadsheet cells can be copy/pasted as text so it should be an easy request to satisfy.
I thought that I had explained everything in my last post but if there is anything else you need or any further explanation, don't hesitate to ask. Be as specific as you like. You can also have a full copy if you like.
G
I thought that I had explained everything in my last post but if there is anything else you need or any further explanation, don't hesitate to ask. Be as specific as you like. You can also have a full copy if you like.
G
Mel, this info is easy to find, but knowing a bit of CHEMISTRY helps.
http://www.iki.org.uk/index.php/Thermite_things
Thermites are a group of pyrotechnics mixtures in which a reactive metal reduces oxygen from a metallic oxide. This produces a lot of heat, slag and pure metal. The most common themite is ferroaluminum thermite, made from aluminum (reactive metal) and iron oxide (metal oxide). When it burns it produces aluminum oxide (slag) and pure iron.
The usual proportions of ferro-thermite are 25% aluminum and 75% iron oxide.
The aluminum is usually coarse powder to help slow down the burning rate. The chemicals are mixed together thoroughly and compressed into a suitable container. A first fire mix is poured on top and ignited.
Thermites are generally very safe to mix and store. They are not shock or friction sensitive and ignite at about 2000 degrees F. A first fire mix is a mixture that ignites easier than thermite and burns hot enough to light the thermite reliably.
First Fire Mix:
Potassium Nitrate 5 parts
Fine ground Aluminum 3 parts
Sulfur 2 parts
Mix the above thoroughly and combine 2 parts of it with 1 part of finely powdered ferro-thermite. The resulting mixture can be light by safety fuse and burns intensely.
One problem with thermites is the difference in weight between the aluminum and the oxide. This causes them to separate out rendering the thermite useless. One way to fix this is to use a binder to hold the chemicals to eachother. Sulfur is good for this. Called Diasite, this formula uses sulfur to bind all the chemicals together. It's drawback is the thermite must be heated to melt the sulfur. Iron Oxide 70% Aluminum 23% Sulfur 7%. Mix the oxide and aluminum together and put them in an oven at 325 degrees F. and let the mix heat for a while. When the mixture is hot sprinkle the sulfur over it and mix well. Put this back in the oven for a few minutes to melt all the sulfur. Pull it back out and mix it again. While it is still hot, load into containers for use. When it cools, drill out the diasite to hold about 10-15 grams of first fire mix. When diasite burns it forms sulfide compounds that release hydrogen sulfide when in contact with water. This rotten egg odor can hamper fire fighting efforts.
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
There is apparently NO LIMIT to the idiotic ideas that CTers are willing to postulate.
Arthur
http://www.iki.org.uk/index.php/Thermite_things
Thermites are a group of pyrotechnics mixtures in which a reactive metal reduces oxygen from a metallic oxide. This produces a lot of heat, slag and pure metal. The most common themite is ferroaluminum thermite, made from aluminum (reactive metal) and iron oxide (metal oxide). When it burns it produces aluminum oxide (slag) and pure iron.
The usual proportions of ferro-thermite are 25% aluminum and 75% iron oxide.
The aluminum is usually coarse powder to help slow down the burning rate. The chemicals are mixed together thoroughly and compressed into a suitable container. A first fire mix is poured on top and ignited.
Thermites are generally very safe to mix and store. They are not shock or friction sensitive and ignite at about 2000 degrees F. A first fire mix is a mixture that ignites easier than thermite and burns hot enough to light the thermite reliably.
First Fire Mix:
Potassium Nitrate 5 parts
Fine ground Aluminum 3 parts
Sulfur 2 parts
Mix the above thoroughly and combine 2 parts of it with 1 part of finely powdered ferro-thermite. The resulting mixture can be light by safety fuse and burns intensely.
One problem with thermites is the difference in weight between the aluminum and the oxide. This causes them to separate out rendering the thermite useless. One way to fix this is to use a binder to hold the chemicals to eachother. Sulfur is good for this. Called Diasite, this formula uses sulfur to bind all the chemicals together. It's drawback is the thermite must be heated to melt the sulfur. Iron Oxide 70% Aluminum 23% Sulfur 7%. Mix the oxide and aluminum together and put them in an oven at 325 degrees F. and let the mix heat for a while. When the mixture is hot sprinkle the sulfur over it and mix well. Put this back in the oven for a few minutes to melt all the sulfur. Pull it back out and mix it again. While it is still hot, load into containers for use. When it cools, drill out the diasite to hold about 10-15 grams of first fire mix. When diasite burns it forms sulfide compounds that release hydrogen sulfide when in contact with water. This rotten egg odor can hamper fire fighting efforts.
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
There is apparently NO LIMIT to the idiotic ideas that CTers are willing to postulate.
Arthur
QUOTE (gordon+Jan 7 2006, 06:54 PM)
Arthur said,Gordon has shown nothing yet. We've asked for him to print the formulas and received a few generalities. Excel spreadsheet cells can be copy/pasted as text so it should be an easy request to satisfy.
I thought that I had explained everything in my last post but if there is anything else you need or any further explanation, don't hesitate to ask. Be as specific as you like. You can also have a full copy if you like.
G
I asked for a full iteration of the formulas used for the collapse of one story.
If that is too difficult to do, email it to me via the forum.
Arthur
I thought that I had explained everything in my last post but if there is anything else you need or any further explanation, don't hesitate to ask. Be as specific as you like. You can also have a full copy if you like.
G
I asked for a full iteration of the formulas used for the collapse of one story.
If that is too difficult to do, email it to me via the forum.
Arthur
QUOTE
Originally posted by AdoucetteHis mental prowness puts the likes of the Pink Panther to SHAME.
Keep this up and you get to join Steve1957 and galdur in the MORON CLUB.
Arthur
Keep this up and you get to join Steve1957 and galdur in the MORON CLUB.
Arthur
Heh, well I guess that is a subjective analysis dependant upon emotion. When are you going to get around to actually providing any science to rebut the basement thermite theory?... the lake of water?... the stench?... the Pyrocool?... the lack of forced air bellows?... the ultraviolet radiation factor of pyrocool and the fact that thermite gives off UVR?...
You have now increased your unsubstantiated quantity from TONS, to TONS & TONS, yet offer no quantifiers of exactly how many TONS (even IF TONS were required... just more emotional outbursts without providing a shred of evidence to support your 'pope-ish proclamation'.
Even IF TONS & TONS would be required, you still haven't addressed how MANY TONS of materials & supplies were shipped into the basement on a daily basis. Get a grip man... ANYONE who would have the balls to pull off this public demolition would not be short of abilities to import such required quantities.
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
Do you honestly believe for one second that EVERYTHING classified under National Secrecy related to weapons is already KNOWN to the general public ??? There is absolutely no denying that 9/11 was a tactical military operation. The only difference of opinion between you and I on this, is that you believe some Fairy Tale that cave-dwellers used Magic to create all the phenomena on 9/11... however still have not been able to present ANY plausible theory as to these anomalous underground fires (apart from Magic). At least my theory is based upon Science.
Going by your emotional response, I will have to assume that you believe that is physically & scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to import sufficient quantities of some form of incendiary into the basement area... If so HOW is it possible that they imported TONS & TONS of other materials & supplies into the basement levels on a daily basis.
Please don't cry about it, stick to the SCIENCE facts - or go over to the Magic forum.
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 06:58 PM)
Mel, this info is easy to find, but knowing a bit of CHEMISTRY helps.
http://www.iki.org.uk/index.php/Thermite_things
Thermites are a group of pyrotechnics mixtures in which a reactive metal reduces oxygen from a metallic oxide. This produces a lot of heat, slag and pure metal. The most common themite is ferroaluminum thermite, made from aluminum (reactive metal) and iron oxide (metal oxide). When it burns it produces aluminum oxide (slag) and pure iron.
The usual proportions of ferro-thermite are 25% aluminum and 75% iron oxide.
The aluminum is usually coarse powder to help slow down the burning rate. The chemicals are mixed together thoroughly and compressed into a suitable container. A first fire mix is poured on top and ignited.
Thermites are generally very safe to mix and store. They are not shock or friction sensitive and ignite at about 2000 degrees F. A first fire mix is a mixture that ignites easier than thermite and burns hot enough to light the thermite reliably.
First Fire Mix:
Potassium Nitrate 5 parts
Fine ground Aluminum 3 parts
Sulfur 2 parts
Mix the above thoroughly and combine 2 parts of it with 1 part of finely powdered ferro-thermite. The resulting mixture can be light by safety fuse and burns intensely.
One problem with thermites is the difference in weight between the aluminum and the oxide. This causes them to separate out rendering the thermite useless. One way to fix this is to use a binder to hold the chemicals to eachother. Sulfur is good for this. Called Diasite, this formula uses sulfur to bind all the chemicals together. It's drawback is the thermite must be heated to melt the sulfur. Iron Oxide 70% Aluminum 23% Sulfur 7%. Mix the oxide and aluminum together and put them in an oven at 325 degrees F. and let the mix heat for a while. When the mixture is hot sprinkle the sulfur over it and mix well. Put this back in the oven for a few minutes to melt all the sulfur. Pull it back out and mix it again. While it is still hot, load into containers for use. When it cools, drill out the diasite to hold about 10-15 grams of first fire mix. When diasite burns it forms sulfide compounds that release hydrogen sulfide when in contact with water. This rotten egg odor can hamper fire fighting efforts.
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
There is apparently NO LIMIT to the idiotic ideas that CTers are willing to postulate.
Arthur
What you leave out is there are numerous mixtures for thermite and ways to start the reaction. This might be why they used so much water to reduce the chance of explosions?
Fighting thermite fires:
Two ways to fight thermite fires are either smothering the thermite with sand. This doesn't put out the thermite but it does help contain it and block some of the heat.
The other way is to flood the thermite with a great amount of water. This helps to break the thermite apart and stop the reaction. If you use a small amount of water, an explosion may result as the thermite may reduce the water and release hydrogen gas.
http://www.iki.org.uk/index.php/Thermite_things
Thermites are a group of pyrotechnics mixtures in which a reactive metal reduces oxygen from a metallic oxide. This produces a lot of heat, slag and pure metal. The most common themite is ferroaluminum thermite, made from aluminum (reactive metal) and iron oxide (metal oxide). When it burns it produces aluminum oxide (slag) and pure iron.
The usual proportions of ferro-thermite are 25% aluminum and 75% iron oxide.
The aluminum is usually coarse powder to help slow down the burning rate. The chemicals are mixed together thoroughly and compressed into a suitable container. A first fire mix is poured on top and ignited.
Thermites are generally very safe to mix and store. They are not shock or friction sensitive and ignite at about 2000 degrees F. A first fire mix is a mixture that ignites easier than thermite and burns hot enough to light the thermite reliably.
First Fire Mix:
Potassium Nitrate 5 parts
Fine ground Aluminum 3 parts
Sulfur 2 parts
Mix the above thoroughly and combine 2 parts of it with 1 part of finely powdered ferro-thermite. The resulting mixture can be light by safety fuse and burns intensely.
One problem with thermites is the difference in weight between the aluminum and the oxide. This causes them to separate out rendering the thermite useless. One way to fix this is to use a binder to hold the chemicals to eachother. Sulfur is good for this. Called Diasite, this formula uses sulfur to bind all the chemicals together. It's drawback is the thermite must be heated to melt the sulfur. Iron Oxide 70% Aluminum 23% Sulfur 7%. Mix the oxide and aluminum together and put them in an oven at 325 degrees F. and let the mix heat for a while. When the mixture is hot sprinkle the sulfur over it and mix well. Put this back in the oven for a few minutes to melt all the sulfur. Pull it back out and mix it again. While it is still hot, load into containers for use. When it cools, drill out the diasite to hold about 10-15 grams of first fire mix. When diasite burns it forms sulfide compounds that release hydrogen sulfide when in contact with water. This rotten egg odor can hamper fire fighting efforts.
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
There is apparently NO LIMIT to the idiotic ideas that CTers are willing to postulate.
Arthur
What you leave out is there are numerous mixtures for thermite and ways to start the reaction. This might be why they used so much water to reduce the chance of explosions?
Fighting thermite fires:
Two ways to fight thermite fires are either smothering the thermite with sand. This doesn't put out the thermite but it does help contain it and block some of the heat.
The other way is to flood the thermite with a great amount of water. This helps to break the thermite apart and stop the reaction. If you use a small amount of water, an explosion may result as the thermite may reduce the water and release hydrogen gas.
QUOTE
More Pope-ish statements from the Magic-Believer
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
Now, back to the tons of burning Diasite. NO ONE WOULD POSSIBLY MISS THE SMELL OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE. not only does it STINK, but its POISONOUS, and in the quantities that Foxx is suggesting no one could go NEAR that pile, certainly not operate a front loader on top of a pile with burning diasite under it.
They could easily mistake it if mixed with other obnoxious fumes.
Oh, it's POISONOUS now ALSO. It'll kill you.
No wonder people are offended by others farting in public (or private for that matter). Perhaps we should pass a law that farting is illegal and anyone doing so should be arrested for attempted murder...
One wiff of a rotting egg will kill you? ... amazing that anyone who knows what a rotting egg smells like has lived to report it to others.
Sure, it's 'poisonous' and 'sickening' but I highly doubt it's as instantaneously deadly as cyanide... get REAL!
I find it Amazing that NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS have been documented amongst ground-zero responders ... or wait a minute... maybe I'm misinformed there?
Your attempts to rebut this theory remind me of the song by Lenny Kravitz...
"Always on the RUN"
Sorry but you can't send attachments through the forum as far as I can figure.
The formulae are easy enough,
Velocity acceleration due to freefall, derived from g and the distance of freefall
v2^2 =v1^2 + 2dg
Velocity change due to mass change and velocity change, derived from mass change and velocities. m1*v1 = m2*v2
Velocity change due to deceleration due to force applied to lower section, derived from deformation and failure force. Failure force derived from safety factor and normal load above storey, altered to simulate thermal and collision damage
a = f/m = (mass above * safety factor) / falling mass. This gives a maximum, the average is given by half this figure. It will be a factor of g, after m is cancelled from both sides of equation.
Again velocity change given by v2^2 =v1^2 + 2da where d is the length of deformation.
Hope this is clearer
G
The formulae are easy enough,
Velocity acceleration due to freefall, derived from g and the distance of freefall
v2^2 =v1^2 + 2dg
Velocity change due to mass change and velocity change, derived from mass change and velocities. m1*v1 = m2*v2
Velocity change due to deceleration due to force applied to lower section, derived from deformation and failure force. Failure force derived from safety factor and normal load above storey, altered to simulate thermal and collision damage
a = f/m = (mass above * safety factor) / falling mass. This gives a maximum, the average is given by half this figure. It will be a factor of g, after m is cancelled from both sides of equation.
Again velocity change given by v2^2 =v1^2 + 2da where d is the length of deformation.
Hope this is clearer
G
In the quantities Foxx is describing it H2S is poisonous.
Which is enough Diamite to burn for weeks.
Which is TONS and TONS of the stuff.
http://www.swopnet.com/engr/Gayman/Gayman_H2S.html
Arthur
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Even IF TONS & TONS would be required, you still haven't addressed how MANY TONS of materials & supplies were shipped into the basement on a daily basis. Get a grip man... ANYONE who would have the balls to pull off this public demolition would not be short of abilities to import such required quantities.
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
And you haven't shown that ONE POUND of thermite was shipped into the basement within all the years that the WTC towers stood.
Typical FOOL'S argument.
You propose that I have to prove a NEGATIVE to show you are wrong.
Don't work that way.
YOU, FOXX, need to show EVIDENCE that there WAS thermite.
Couple of TONS of SLAG would do it.
Couple of TONS of melted IRON would do it.
Pictures of white smoke won't do it.
Pictures of steel, heated to ~600 to 700 d C won't do it.
All the ranting that "this was a military operation" won't do it.
Evidence will, BS won't.
Now if as your latest backpedaling indicates that you are also finding it hard to support the idiotic idea of tons of Thermite burning under the WTC towers, yet no physical evidence of its existance, such that NOW you say:
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
And you haven't shown that ONE POUND of thermite was shipped into the basement within all the years that the WTC towers stood.
Typical FOOL'S argument.
You propose that I have to prove a NEGATIVE to show you are wrong.
Don't work that way.
YOU, FOXX, need to show EVIDENCE that there WAS thermite.
Couple of TONS of SLAG would do it.
Couple of TONS of melted IRON would do it.
Pictures of white smoke won't do it.
Pictures of steel, heated to ~600 to 700 d C won't do it.
All the ranting that "this was a military operation" won't do it.
Evidence will, BS won't.
Now if as your latest backpedaling indicates that you are also finding it hard to support the idiotic idea of tons of Thermite burning under the WTC towers, yet no physical evidence of its existance, such that NOW you say:
QUOTE (Foxx+)
PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
Of course, not one suggestion of what this UNOBTANIUM material might be, except vague references to secret weapons.
Arthur
Of course, not one suggestion of what this UNOBTANIUM material might be, except vague references to secret weapons.
Arthur
QUOTE (gordon+Jan 7 2006, 07:46 PM)
Sorry but you can't send attachments through the forum as far as I can figure.
The formulae are easy enough,
Velocity acceleration due to freefall, derived from g and the distance of freefall
v2^2 =v1^2 + 2dg
Velocity change due to mass change and velocity change, derived from mass change and velocities. m1*v1 = m2*v2
Velocity change due to deceleration due to force applied to lower section, derived from deformation and failure force. Failure force derived from safety factor and normal load above storey, altered to simulate thermal and collision damage
a = f/m = (mass above * safety factor) / falling mass. This gives a maximum, the average is given by half this figure. It will be a factor of g, after m is cancelled from both sides of equation.
Again velocity change given by v2^2 =v1^2 + 2da where d is the length of deformation.
Hope this is clearer
G
What are you assuming is the 'safety factor'
why?
Arthur
The formulae are easy enough,
Velocity acceleration due to freefall, derived from g and the distance of freefall
v2^2 =v1^2 + 2dg
Velocity change due to mass change and velocity change, derived from mass change and velocities. m1*v1 = m2*v2
Velocity change due to deceleration due to force applied to lower section, derived from deformation and failure force. Failure force derived from safety factor and normal load above storey, altered to simulate thermal and collision damage
a = f/m = (mass above * safety factor) / falling mass. This gives a maximum, the average is given by half this figure. It will be a factor of g, after m is cancelled from both sides of equation.
Again velocity change given by v2^2 =v1^2 + 2da where d is the length of deformation.
Hope this is clearer
G
What are you assuming is the 'safety factor'
why?
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 07:48 PM)
In the quantities Foxx is describing it H2S is poisonous.
Which is enough Diamite to burn for weeks.
Which is TONS and TONS of the stuff.
http://www.swopnet.com/engr/Gayman/Gayman_H2S.html
Arthur
What quantities of H2S are you talking about? You appear to have some information that has not been shared with the rest of the forum.
Which is enough Diamite to burn for weeks.
Which is TONS and TONS of the stuff.
http://www.swopnet.com/engr/Gayman/Gayman_H2S.html
Arthur
What quantities of H2S are you talking about? You appear to have some information that has not been shared with the rest of the forum.
What are you assuming is the 'safety factor'
why?
Arthur
I've used 5 which would give a failure load of five times the maximum normal load. This is a general figure quite common throughout the literature. I have adjusted these to simulate the damage as detailed in my main post on the subject.
But they are adjustable in my model so if you want to suggest some other figures, I could run them through for you if you like.
G
why?
Arthur
I've used 5 which would give a failure load of five times the maximum normal load. This is a general figure quite common throughout the literature. I have adjusted these to simulate the damage as detailed in my main post on the subject.
But they are adjustable in my model so if you want to suggest some other figures, I could run them through for you if you like.
G
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 06:40 PM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Jan 7 2006, 06:28 PM)
And NIST forget the most important aspect explaining how global collapse ensued.
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
How global collapse ensued is the LEAST important aspect in WTC 1 and 2.
Arthur
Only to people or parties interested in covering up the truth.
Hiding Engineering History
NIST's Report gives the reader no clue of how unprecedented and unexpected the total collapses of these skyscrapers were. Rather, it suggests that total collapses of high-rise buildings are normal events, but usually happen less suddenly.
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
Indeed, buildings are normally evacuated and cordoned off before being taken down by controlled demolition, so the statement is literally true. But the Report doesn't contain the word demolition, so the statement seems crafted to mislead. In fact, there appear to be no examples of total collapse of skyscrapers anywhere in the world except through controlled demolition. There are examples of steel-framed buildings about 20 stories in height being knocked over by severe earthquakes, but large portions of earthquake-destroyed buildings remain intact. In contrast, the steel skeletons of the Twin Towers were shredded into thousands of pieces, and their non-metallic constituents and contents were pulverized into fine dust.
Severe earthquakes have caused collapses of steel-frame buildings but the buildings were not shredded into small pieces. The earthquake in Kobe, Japan, knocked buildings off their foundations (inset). In contrast the Twin Towers were thoroughly shredded, leaving a crater that smoked for over three months.
Keeping the reader in the dark about the history of steel-framed high-rise buildings is essential to passing off the notion that partial collapse automatically leads to total collapse.
Selling Progressive Collapse
The Report mentions "progressive collapse" 16 times, mostly in sections describing recommendations. It defines progressive collapse as when "a building or portion of a building collapses due to disproportionate spread of an initial local failure" but does not mention how rare the phenomenon is or that there are no examples of total progressive collapse of steel-framed buildings outside of 9/11/01.
By repeatedly invoking the specter of "progressive collapse" while concealing the phenomenon's lack of repeatability outside of "terrorist incidents," the Report surreptitiously bolsters its supposition that "global collapse" automatically follows from "collapse initiation."
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html
Metamars (and other resonable people)...
As an additional 'speculation' , the possibility of using 'thermite' compounds, MAY have been meant to dispose completely of any possible evidence left over AFTER the demolitions, of devices (possibly exotic / secret) USED in the demo's... and MAY have been a separate circumstance unrelated to the actual demo's ?
Just speculating out loud, although obviously I could not present any evidence for such speculation.
IIRC, Hoffman has spoken about a lot of the heating occurring AFTER the buildings collapsed. Don't quote me, though.
If there was some kind of further destruction of the rubble, it may have come from above, down to Ground Zero. Since the uber weird collapsing spire did so after the rest of the building, it's hard to imagine how a demolition agent directed from underneath all that rubble could do the trick. One expects that it would have gotten destroyed.
I know Hoffman pooh-poohs the notion of a space based weapon, but the reason he gives (IIRC) is difusion of the "beam" through the atmosphere. But what if that problem is solved? Soliton rays, anybody?
I remember reading many years ago that chemical powered lasers (i.e. powered via chemical reaction, not plugged into a power grid) were being developed, on a research basis, for Star Wars purposes. I have no idea about the chemistry, and how much heat may have been released by these systems, but I would guess that it'd be enormous.
Unfortunately, there's a lot that we'll never know. The key thing is, do we know enough to point a finger at the government, or not? (Even if we don't know WHO to point the finger at.)
I say "yes", without a doubt. Once we know the government version is a Fairy Tale, we don't really need to know every last detail. Our biggest problems aren't technical, they are spiritual. Where is the backbone of our Congress? Military? Intelligence? Did they, or did they not, take oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution, against all enemies foreign and domestic?
There is serious chatter about the US nuking Iran. While it may be fitting karma if the US disintegrates shortly aftwards, I'm not much more interested in my fellow citizens reaping what they sow than I am in the key 911 perps doing so. We will all get what we deserve, sooner or later. Such is my religious belief. But we are also risking a nuclear WW3, and I'm not so sure that the rest of Planet Earth deserves that. And even if they did, it's a sin to wish harm to come to anybody.
I find myself in the odd position, as an American citizen, of hoping that China drops a financial thermo-nuclear bomb by selling off it's dollars. That might knock some sense into us. I'm in an awful financial position and just recently unemployed. But I'd rather starve than see the world become radioactive.
Total BS.
What WAS unprecedented was large high speed passenger jets running into these steel skyscrapers.
It does not AT ALL suggest that collapse is a normal event, in fact stating that the buildings probably would have stood, even with the severe damage and fires, had they had decent fire proofing.
The last sentance is absolutely true. Of course, the fact is no other high rise steel building has been run into by a passenger jet at high speed either.
What a crock.
Arthur
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
For the last couple of years that I know of 'reports' have been circulated that there were pools of 'previously molten' metal found at the lowest levels of the 'dig'.
Official Gravity-Driven Collapse Supporters have consistently tried to rebut this FACT with the old J.Edgar Hoover tactic of 'Attack the Messenger' , claiming that the only reports of this anomaly depend upon a questionable report by Christopher Bollyn {sp ?}.
Other researchers have attempted to follow up on this information which (for some reason officialdom has been attempting to suppress or ignore). Bollyn may have been the first to bring this anomaly to light publicy on the internet... but here are some more examples (From non-conspiracy sites), who have reported... 'rivers' and/or 'pools' of 'molten metal' at ground zero...
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
For the last couple of years that I know of 'reports' have been circulated that there were pools of 'previously molten' metal found at the lowest levels of the 'dig'.
Official Gravity-Driven Collapse Supporters have consistently tried to rebut this FACT with the old J.Edgar Hoover tactic of 'Attack the Messenger' , claiming that the only reports of this anomaly depend upon a questionable report by Christopher Bollyn {sp ?}.
Other researchers have attempted to follow up on this information which (for some reason officialdom has been attempting to suppress or ignore). Bollyn may have been the first to bring this anomaly to light publicy on the internet... but here are some more examples (From non-conspiracy sites), who have reported... 'rivers' and/or 'pools' of 'molten metal' at ground zero...
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Why was there Molten Metal Under Ground Zero for Months after 9/11?
Molten metal flowed underneath ground zero for months after the Twin Towers collapsed:
An employee of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue witnessed "Fires burn[ing and molten steel flow[ing] in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet."
The head of a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reported, "Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."
A public health advisor who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that "feeling the heat" and "seeing the molten steel" there reminded him of a volcano.
New York firefighters recalled in a documentary film, "heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel."
According to a worker involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at ground zero, "Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6."
An expert stated about World Trade Center building 7, "A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view). Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.
A reporter with rare access to the debris at ground zero "descended deep below street level to areas where underground fires still burned and steel flowed in molten streams."
The same journalist also refers to "the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole." (pages 31-32)
An engineer stated in the September 3, 2002 issue of The Structural Engineer, "They showed us many fascinating slides ranging from molten metal, which was still red hot weeks after the event."
An Occupational Safety and Health Administration Officer at the Trade Center reported a fire truck 10 feet below the ground that was still burning two weeks after the Tower collapsed, "its metal so hot that it looked like a vat of molten steel."
The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.
According to a member of New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing, who was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, "One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots."
A fireman stated that there were "oven" like conditions at the trade centers six weeks after 9/11.
Firemen and hazardous materials experts also stated that, six weeks after 9/11, "There are pieces of steel being pulled out [from as far as six stories underground] that are still cherry red" and "the blaze is so 'far beyond a normal fire' that it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about it based on other fires." (pay-per-view)
A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said "for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal - everything from molten steel beams to human remains...."
As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O'Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, "was dripping from the molten steel."
Indeed, the trade center fire was[b] "the longest-burning structural fire in history",[/u] even though it rained heavily on September 14, 2001 and again on September 21, 2001, and the fires were sprayed with high tech fire-retardands, and "firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on" ground zero."
Indeed, "You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. "It was like you were creating a giant lake."
For one explanation of why there was molten metal under ground zero for months after 9/11, see this paper.
Gordon’s model for global collapse is consistent with reality when controlled demolition is analyzed.
How global collapse ensued is the LEAST important aspect in WTC 1 and 2.
Arthur
Only to people or parties interested in covering up the truth.
Hiding Engineering History
NIST's Report gives the reader no clue of how unprecedented and unexpected the total collapses of these skyscrapers were. Rather, it suggests that total collapses of high-rise buildings are normal events, but usually happen less suddenly.
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
Indeed, buildings are normally evacuated and cordoned off before being taken down by controlled demolition, so the statement is literally true. But the Report doesn't contain the word demolition, so the statement seems crafted to mislead. In fact, there appear to be no examples of total collapse of skyscrapers anywhere in the world except through controlled demolition. There are examples of steel-framed buildings about 20 stories in height being knocked over by severe earthquakes, but large portions of earthquake-destroyed buildings remain intact. In contrast, the steel skeletons of the Twin Towers were shredded into thousands of pieces, and their non-metallic constituents and contents were pulverized into fine dust.
Severe earthquakes have caused collapses of steel-frame buildings but the buildings were not shredded into small pieces. The earthquake in Kobe, Japan, knocked buildings off their foundations (inset). In contrast the Twin Towers were thoroughly shredded, leaving a crater that smoked for over three months.
Keeping the reader in the dark about the history of steel-framed high-rise buildings is essential to passing off the notion that partial collapse automatically leads to total collapse.
Selling Progressive Collapse
The Report mentions "progressive collapse" 16 times, mostly in sections describing recommendations. It defines progressive collapse as when "a building or portion of a building collapses due to disproportionate spread of an initial local failure" but does not mention how rare the phenomenon is or that there are no examples of total progressive collapse of steel-framed buildings outside of 9/11/01.
By repeatedly invoking the specter of "progressive collapse" while concealing the phenomenon's lack of repeatability outside of "terrorist incidents," the Report surreptitiously bolsters its supposition that "global collapse" automatically follows from "collapse initiation."
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 7 2006, 06:17 PM)
Metamars (and other resonable people)...
As an additional 'speculation' , the possibility of using 'thermite' compounds, MAY have been meant to dispose completely of any possible evidence left over AFTER the demolitions, of devices (possibly exotic / secret) USED in the demo's... and MAY have been a separate circumstance unrelated to the actual demo's ?
Just speculating out loud, although obviously I could not present any evidence for such speculation.
IIRC, Hoffman has spoken about a lot of the heating occurring AFTER the buildings collapsed. Don't quote me, though.
If there was some kind of further destruction of the rubble, it may have come from above, down to Ground Zero. Since the uber weird collapsing spire did so after the rest of the building, it's hard to imagine how a demolition agent directed from underneath all that rubble could do the trick. One expects that it would have gotten destroyed.
I know Hoffman pooh-poohs the notion of a space based weapon, but the reason he gives (IIRC) is difusion of the "beam" through the atmosphere. But what if that problem is solved? Soliton rays, anybody?
I remember reading many years ago that chemical powered lasers (i.e. powered via chemical reaction, not plugged into a power grid) were being developed, on a research basis, for Star Wars purposes. I have no idea about the chemistry, and how much heat may have been released by these systems, but I would guess that it'd be enormous.
Unfortunately, there's a lot that we'll never know. The key thing is, do we know enough to point a finger at the government, or not? (Even if we don't know WHO to point the finger at.)
I say "yes", without a doubt. Once we know the government version is a Fairy Tale, we don't really need to know every last detail. Our biggest problems aren't technical, they are spiritual. Where is the backbone of our Congress? Military? Intelligence? Did they, or did they not, take oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution, against all enemies foreign and domestic?
There is serious chatter about the US nuking Iran. While it may be fitting karma if the US disintegrates shortly aftwards, I'm not much more interested in my fellow citizens reaping what they sow than I am in the key 911 perps doing so. We will all get what we deserve, sooner or later. Such is my religious belief. But we are also risking a nuclear WW3, and I'm not so sure that the rest of Planet Earth deserves that. And even if they did, it's a sin to wish harm to come to anybody.
I find myself in the odd position, as an American citizen, of hoping that China drops a financial thermo-nuclear bomb by selling off it's dollars. That might knock some sense into us. I'm in an awful financial position and just recently unemployed. But I'd rather starve than see the world become radioactive.
Operation Northwoods
According to documents ordered declassified by the Assassination Records Review Board, the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 approved a plan --- code-named Operation Northwoods --- to create a pretext for an invasion of Cuba. The Joint Chiefs recommended developing a "terror campagn" in Miami, Washington, DC, and elsewhere, which would be blamed on Cuba. Ships would be bombed, planes hijacked, and innocent Americans killed, producing "Casualty lists" which "would cause a helpful wave of national indignation".
On March 13, 1962, the plan was sent to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who presented it to President John F. Kennedy...
See more at:
http://www.mackwhite.com/northwoods.html
Adoucette, I'm sorry this is all so upsetting to you.
The FACT that those who have actual power in the USofA have hi-jacked your constitution and are EVIL (by nature) is very troubling.
I recognize that the psychological factors of coming to terms with this FACT does represent the stripping away of all your pre-conceived notions about Reality. Everything you believe about the inherent 'goodness' of fellow Americans and your unalterable belief that your 'leaders' are 'good people' is based upon a LIE.
History... TRUE HISTORY... proves this.
This is NOT meant to say that ALL (or even the MAJORITY) of your fellow Americans are EVIL people... only that you have a hidden 'monster' in your midst; and unless the majority of you sleeping Americans wake up to reality (and quickly), we all may be facing harsher 'realities' than you can imagine.
The Chinese have an ancient proverb that...
You can NOT wake-up a man who pretends to be sleeping.
It is obvious to me that you are pretending to be asleep. You are too intelligent in some areas to NOT recognize TRUTH when it is so blantantly laid out before you.
There is Nothing more TRUE than... where Power is Concentrated, EVIL finds a way to subvert that power, and to try to hold onto it.
Although this post is 'addressed' to 'Arthur', It is not really meant for you personally (whoever 'you' may actually BE); but rather to those sleeping Americans who are NOT pretending to be asleep, and are willing to truly investigate this 9/11 atrocity, FACE the REAL FACTS, and be willing to stand up... recognize the EVIL... and rout it out from your midst.
Search your own Conscience and... have a NICE day.
Cheers
Foxx
According to documents ordered declassified by the Assassination Records Review Board, the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 approved a plan --- code-named Operation Northwoods --- to create a pretext for an invasion of Cuba. The Joint Chiefs recommended developing a "terror campagn" in Miami, Washington, DC, and elsewhere, which would be blamed on Cuba. Ships would be bombed, planes hijacked, and innocent Americans killed, producing "Casualty lists" which "would cause a helpful wave of national indignation".
On March 13, 1962, the plan was sent to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who presented it to President John F. Kennedy...
See more at:
http://www.mackwhite.com/northwoods.html
Adoucette, I'm sorry this is all so upsetting to you.
The FACT that those who have actual power in the USofA have hi-jacked your constitution and are EVIL (by nature) is very troubling.
I recognize that the psychological factors of coming to terms with this FACT does represent the stripping away of all your pre-conceived notions about Reality. Everything you believe about the inherent 'goodness' of fellow Americans and your unalterable belief that your 'leaders' are 'good people' is based upon a LIE.
History... TRUE HISTORY... proves this.
This is NOT meant to say that ALL (or even the MAJORITY) of your fellow Americans are EVIL people... only that you have a hidden 'monster' in your midst; and unless the majority of you sleeping Americans wake up to reality (and quickly), we all may be facing harsher 'realities' than you can imagine.
The Chinese have an ancient proverb that...
You can NOT wake-up a man who pretends to be sleeping.
It is obvious to me that you are pretending to be asleep. You are too intelligent in some areas to NOT recognize TRUTH when it is so blantantly laid out before you.
There is Nothing more TRUE than... where Power is Concentrated, EVIL finds a way to subvert that power, and to try to hold onto it.
Although this post is 'addressed' to 'Arthur', It is not really meant for you personally (whoever 'you' may actually BE); but rather to those sleeping Americans who are NOT pretending to be asleep, and are willing to truly investigate this 9/11 atrocity, FACE the REAL FACTS, and be willing to stand up... recognize the EVIL... and rout it out from your midst.
Search your own Conscience and... have a NICE day.
Cheers
Foxx
QUOTE
NIST's Report gives the reader no clue of how unprecedented and unexpected the total collapses of these skyscrapers were. Rather, it suggests that total collapses of high-rise buildings are normal events, but usually happen less suddenly.
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
Total BS.
What WAS unprecedented was large high speed passenger jets running into these steel skyscrapers.
It does not AT ALL suggest that collapse is a normal event, in fact stating that the buildings probably would have stood, even with the severe damage and fires, had they had decent fire proofing.
The last sentance is absolutely true. Of course, the fact is no other high rise steel building has been run into by a passenger jet at high speed either.
What a crock.
Arthur
FBI evidence of Mossad involvement in September 11 attacks on the U.S.?!
On the day of the September 11, 2001 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked how they could affect Israeli-U.S. relations. His quick reply was: "It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)".
An article by reporter Jim Galloway, published on The Austin American-Statesman on Nov. 25, 2001, stated that the FBI had evidence suggesting that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence, along with some rogue American and foreign spy agencies, may be deeply involved in or even entirely responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks as well as other acts of terrorism against the United States.
According to Galloway, 100 of the 1,100 foreigners arrested by the FBI for suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 attacks were Israeli Jews. In fact, a Mossad surveillance team made quite a public spectacle of themselves on the day of the attacks. Five of the Israelis were arrested after “angry witnesses had seen the five at a waterfront park in New Jersey apparently laughing and clowning, and photographing themselves in front of the burning towers." One witness told police at the time that the men “were like happy, you know … They didn't look shocked to me.”
According to ABC's 20/20, when police stopped the cheering Israelis, one of them told the officers: "We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”.
One of the five Israelis had a German passport in addition to his Israeli passport. Another had an international flight booked to Thailand on September 13, two days after the attacks. The FBI also found out that one of them was a former paratrooper, assigned to an elite Israeli defense forces unit.
Two more Israelis were caught in a truck on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania, near the site of the crash of American Airlines flight 93. Police became very suspicious when they found maps of the city with certain locations highlighted, box cutters (like the ones used by the hijackers), along with other incriminating evidence. Police also said that bomb sniffing dogs reacted as if they smelled explosives when they were brought to the Israelis’ truck.
The FBI believes that most of the arrested Israelis belong to an Israeli intelligence unit operating outside New Jersey, near where the Anthrax letters were mailed. They all worked for a U.S.-based company known as Urban Moving Systems.
An editorial on whatreallyhappened.com states that an FBI SWAT team raided the New Jersey warehouse of the Urban Moving Systems and confiscated a number of computer hard drives and files. It further adds that the Israeli owner of the company, Dominick Suter, closed his business days after the Sept. attacks and returned to Israel. He was in such a hurry that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities.
Behind closed doors, Israeli authorities were doing all what they can to get the men released and the FBI probe closed. Israeli lawmakers contacted their “friends” in the U.S. Congress, and the Mayor of Jerusalem, Ehud Ohmert personally called the New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and asked him to intervene.
An article on Power of Prophecy reported that a war brewed inside the FBI between the agents conducting the probe and their superiors, who warned that involving the Israelis in the attacks could be an "explosive political volcano." But the lower-level agents didn’t buy it. They believed that the arrested Israeli Jews might just hold the key to the whole 9/11 debacle. "These Israeli guys knew what was coming down," one FBI veteran was quoted as saying. "We would be fools if we let them just fade away into the sunset and pretend they weren't involved."
It was later confirmed that the five detained Israelis were in fact Mossad agents. However, FBI and Justice Department superiors succeeded in pushing aside the local FBI agents and the Israelis were released after spending just 71 days in U.S. custody. "Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information,” a U.S. official told Fox News at the time.
The compliant mainstream media completely ignored the Israeli connection. Rather it immediately blamed OSAMA BIN LADEN even though he had no record of doing anything on this scale. On the day of the attacks, CIA Director George Tenet said "You know, this has bin Laden's fingerprints all over it."
But a number of intelligence officials have raised questions about BIN LADEN's capabilities. "This guy sits in a cave in Afghanistan and he's running this operation?" one CIA official said at the time. "It's so huge. He couldn't have done it alone."
BIN LADEN himself denied any involvement in the attacks. The BBC published his denial in which he clearly stated: "I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself…” (Most of us never heard that quote on our nightly newscast).
To date, the only shred of "evidence" against bin Laden is a barely audible fuzzy amateur video that the Pentagon just happened to find "lying around" in Afghanistan.
U.S. intelligence analysts believe that Israel benefited most from the September 11 attacks. Israel has been widely criticized by the West for its aggression against the Palestinians. Israeli occupation soldiers were, and still are, shown on international TV news in heated exchanges with Palestinian youths armed with nothing more than stones. Israeli tanks bulldoze Palestinian farms and homes, and human rights groups complain that Palestinian detainees are tortured and abused in Israeli jails.
But after 9/11, things changed dramatically. Sympathy for the Palestinians vanished. The Arabs were universally portrayed as the "bad guys." Israeli Prime Minister ARIEL SHARON reportedly said: "Now we and the Americans are in the same fight."
An article by political analyst Richard Becker published on Jan. 9, 2003 on the Workers World newspaper states that “SHARON and other Israeli leaders aspire to fulfill what the goals of the political ZIONIST movement have been since its origin a century ago: to turn all of historic Palestine into an exclusively Jewish state. A central tenet of the ZIONIST ideology is expressed in the racist slogan, 'A land without people for a people without a land.'"
The implication of the Arabs in the 9/11 attacks provided the Israelis with a golden opportunity to achieve the above-stated goals because the world would view the Palestinians as terrorists.
Blaming the horrible attacks on the Arabs was the best thing that has even happened to Israel. Now Washington, once again, solidly stands in the pro-Israeli camp, and "Palestinians be damned!"
On the day of the September 11, 2001 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked how they could affect Israeli-U.S. relations. His quick reply was: "It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)".
An article by reporter Jim Galloway, published on The Austin American-Statesman on Nov. 25, 2001, stated that the FBI had evidence suggesting that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence, along with some rogue American and foreign spy agencies, may be deeply involved in or even entirely responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks as well as other acts of terrorism against the United States.
According to Galloway, 100 of the 1,100 foreigners arrested by the FBI for suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 attacks were Israeli Jews. In fact, a Mossad surveillance team made quite a public spectacle of themselves on the day of the attacks. Five of the Israelis were arrested after “angry witnesses had seen the five at a waterfront park in New Jersey apparently laughing and clowning, and photographing themselves in front of the burning towers." One witness told police at the time that the men “were like happy, you know … They didn't look shocked to me.”
According to ABC's 20/20, when police stopped the cheering Israelis, one of them told the officers: "We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”.
One of the five Israelis had a German passport in addition to his Israeli passport. Another had an international flight booked to Thailand on September 13, two days after the attacks. The FBI also found out that one of them was a former paratrooper, assigned to an elite Israeli defense forces unit.
Two more Israelis were caught in a truck on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania, near the site of the crash of American Airlines flight 93. Police became very suspicious when they found maps of the city with certain locations highlighted, box cutters (like the ones used by the hijackers), along with other incriminating evidence. Police also said that bomb sniffing dogs reacted as if they smelled explosives when they were brought to the Israelis’ truck.
The FBI believes that most of the arrested Israelis belong to an Israeli intelligence unit operating outside New Jersey, near where the Anthrax letters were mailed. They all worked for a U.S.-based company known as Urban Moving Systems.
An editorial on whatreallyhappened.com states that an FBI SWAT team raided the New Jersey warehouse of the Urban Moving Systems and confiscated a number of computer hard drives and files. It further adds that the Israeli owner of the company, Dominick Suter, closed his business days after the Sept. attacks and returned to Israel. He was in such a hurry that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities.
Behind closed doors, Israeli authorities were doing all what they can to get the men released and the FBI probe closed. Israeli lawmakers contacted their “friends” in the U.S. Congress, and the Mayor of Jerusalem, Ehud Ohmert personally called the New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and asked him to intervene.
An article on Power of Prophecy reported that a war brewed inside the FBI between the agents conducting the probe and their superiors, who warned that involving the Israelis in the attacks could be an "explosive political volcano." But the lower-level agents didn’t buy it. They believed that the arrested Israeli Jews might just hold the key to the whole 9/11 debacle. "These Israeli guys knew what was coming down," one FBI veteran was quoted as saying. "We would be fools if we let them just fade away into the sunset and pretend they weren't involved."
It was later confirmed that the five detained Israelis were in fact Mossad agents. However, FBI and Justice Department superiors succeeded in pushing aside the local FBI agents and the Israelis were released after spending just 71 days in U.S. custody. "Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information,” a U.S. official told Fox News at the time.
The compliant mainstream media completely ignored the Israeli connection. Rather it immediately blamed OSAMA BIN LADEN even though he had no record of doing anything on this scale. On the day of the attacks, CIA Director George Tenet said "You know, this has bin Laden's fingerprints all over it."
But a number of intelligence officials have raised questions about BIN LADEN's capabilities. "This guy sits in a cave in Afghanistan and he's running this operation?" one CIA official said at the time. "It's so huge. He couldn't have done it alone."
BIN LADEN himself denied any involvement in the attacks. The BBC published his denial in which he clearly stated: "I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself…” (Most of us never heard that quote on our nightly newscast).
To date, the only shred of "evidence" against bin Laden is a barely audible fuzzy amateur video that the Pentagon just happened to find "lying around" in Afghanistan.
U.S. intelligence analysts believe that Israel benefited most from the September 11 attacks. Israel has been widely criticized by the West for its aggression against the Palestinians. Israeli occupation soldiers were, and still are, shown on international TV news in heated exchanges with Palestinian youths armed with nothing more than stones. Israeli tanks bulldoze Palestinian farms and homes, and human rights groups complain that Palestinian detainees are tortured and abused in Israeli jails.
But after 9/11, things changed dramatically. Sympathy for the Palestinians vanished. The Arabs were universally portrayed as the "bad guys." Israeli Prime Minister ARIEL SHARON reportedly said: "Now we and the Americans are in the same fight."
An article by political analyst Richard Becker published on Jan. 9, 2003 on the Workers World newspaper states that “SHARON and other Israeli leaders aspire to fulfill what the goals of the political ZIONIST movement have been since its origin a century ago: to turn all of historic Palestine into an exclusively Jewish state. A central tenet of the ZIONIST ideology is expressed in the racist slogan, 'A land without people for a people without a land.'"
The implication of the Arabs in the 9/11 attacks provided the Israelis with a golden opportunity to achieve the above-stated goals because the world would view the Palestinians as terrorists.
Blaming the horrible attacks on the Arabs was the best thing that has even happened to Israel. Now Washington, once again, solidly stands in the pro-Israeli camp, and "Palestinians be damned!"
QUOTE
Originally posted by Arthurian Legends
Now they haul all this off and there is NOT ONE picture of a MOLTEN (meaning MELTED) pool of Iron, nor one picture of a SOLIDIFIED hunk of SLAG.
Now they haul all this off and there is NOT ONE picture of a MOLTEN (meaning MELTED) pool of Iron, nor one picture of a SOLIDIFIED hunk of SLAG.
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
For the last couple of years that I know of 'reports' have been circulated that there were pools of 'previously molten' metal found at the lowest levels of the 'dig'.
Official Gravity-Driven Collapse Supporters have consistently tried to rebut this FACT with the old J.Edgar Hoover tactic of 'Attack the Messenger' , claiming that the only reports of this anomaly depend upon a questionable report by Christopher Bollyn {sp ?}.
Other researchers have attempted to follow up on this information which (for some reason officialdom has been attempting to suppress or ignore). Bollyn may have been the first to bring this anomaly to light publicy on the internet... but here are some more examples (From non-conspiracy sites), who have reported... 'rivers' and/or 'pools' of 'molten metal' at ground zero...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by Arthurian Legends Now they haul all this off and there is NOT ONE picture of a MOLTEN (meaning MELTED) pool of Iron, nor one picture of a SOLIDIFIED hunk of SLAG. |
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
For the last couple of years that I know of 'reports' have been circulated that there were pools of 'previously molten' metal found at the lowest levels of the 'dig'.
Official Gravity-Driven Collapse Supporters have consistently tried to rebut this FACT with the old J.Edgar Hoover tactic of 'Attack the Messenger' , claiming that the only reports of this anomaly depend upon a questionable report by Christopher Bollyn {sp ?}.
Other researchers have attempted to follow up on this information which (for some reason officialdom has been attempting to suppress or ignore). Bollyn may have been the first to bring this anomaly to light publicy on the internet... but here are some more examples (From non-conspiracy sites), who have reported... 'rivers' and/or 'pools' of 'molten metal' at ground zero...
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Why was there Molten Metal Under Ground Zero for Months after 9/11?
Molten metal flowed underneath ground zero for months after the Twin Towers collapsed:
An employee of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue witnessed "Fires burn[ing and molten steel flow[ing] in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet."
The head of a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reported, "Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."
A public health advisor who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that "feeling the heat" and "seeing the molten steel" there reminded him of a volcano.
New York firefighters recalled in a documentary film, "heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel."
According to a worker involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at ground zero, "Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6."
An expert stated about World Trade Center building 7, "A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view). Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.
A reporter with rare access to the debris at ground zero "descended deep below street level to areas where underground fires still burned and steel flowed in molten streams."
The same journalist also refers to "the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole." (pages 31-32)
An engineer stated in the September 3, 2002 issue of The Structural Engineer, "They showed us many fascinating slides ranging from molten metal, which was still red hot weeks after the event."
An Occupational Safety and Health Administration Officer at the Trade Center reported a fire truck 10 feet below the ground that was still burning two weeks after the Tower collapsed, "its metal so hot that it looked like a vat of molten steel."
The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.
According to a member of New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing, who was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, "One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots."
A fireman stated that there were "oven" like conditions at the trade centers six weeks after 9/11.
Firemen and hazardous materials experts also stated that, six weeks after 9/11, "There are pieces of steel being pulled out [from as far as six stories underground] that are still cherry red" and "the blaze is so 'far beyond a normal fire' that it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about it based on other fires." (pay-per-view)
A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said "for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal - everything from molten steel beams to human remains...."
As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O'Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, "was dripping from the molten steel."
Indeed, the trade center fire was[b] "the longest-burning structural fire in history",[/u] even though it rained heavily on September 14, 2001 and again on September 21, 2001, and the fires were sprayed with high tech fire-retardands, and "firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on" ground zero."
Indeed, "You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. "It was like you were creating a giant lake."
For one explanation of why there was molten metal under ground zero for months after 9/11, see this paper.
There was a report on the news today that Israel will, not maybe but will do a military strike on Iran. Also the new prime minister announced on the news, concerning president bush "I won't let him down"
The media has also aired many statements made by Iran's president saying he hopes Sharon dies, and other comments that piss of Israel to no end.
On Fox News, Sean Hamnity said repeatedly that we should wipe Iran out for making those statements. Another words, because one man said some negative things about Sharon, Fox News believes it is justified to wipe out all of Iran.
The Russians have been trying to neutralize the situation by getting Iran to forgo their plans to re-open their nuclear program, but so far to no avail, Iran doesn't want to end up like Iraq, so they've decided not to trust the Americans.
After all when Saddam trusted little bush and opened up his country for the inspectors the US only used that information to gather more strategic information for military strikes.
So it's doubtful that Iran will trust little bush by letting inspectors into his country.
There is also much information that America/Israel will be LAUNCHING STRIKES against Iran very soon.
The question is, what will Iran do? Remember Iran can fight back, unlike Iraq, who had been disabled after 12 years of the-no-fly zone, Iran might be able to actually fight back.
One of the things Iran has been using as a deterrence is a warning that they will take out Israel if they are attacked. Yes Israel can certainly dish it out, but if Iran launches against them, it may get pretty bloody.
Now if Iran starts wiping out Israel, and since Israel has nukes, guess what folks, this could get nuclear real quick, and if people start throwing nukes around the Mideast, then China and Russia might get involved and you know how one thing leads to the next.
Some of you more mature audiences can remember back in 1990 and 91 when Iraq threw 39 small missiles at Israel, but because the situation-is so volatile Bush senior pleaded with Israel not to fight back, as that could erupt into a major middle east conflict, etc. etc.
But things have changed, now the US is provoking and encouraging Israel to start a war with Iran, which may lead into something that most of you people on this board are not able to accept.
So let's put on the Jerry Springer show and pretend little bush has it all under control and we have nothing to worry about.
The media has also aired many statements made by Iran's president saying he hopes Sharon dies, and other comments that piss of Israel to no end.
On Fox News, Sean Hamnity said repeatedly that we should wipe Iran out for making those statements. Another words, because one man said some negative things about Sharon, Fox News believes it is justified to wipe out all of Iran.
The Russians have been trying to neutralize the situation by getting Iran to forgo their plans to re-open their nuclear program, but so far to no avail, Iran doesn't want to end up like Iraq, so they've decided not to trust the Americans.
After all when Saddam trusted little bush and opened up his country for the inspectors the US only used that information to gather more strategic information for military strikes.
So it's doubtful that Iran will trust little bush by letting inspectors into his country.
There is also much information that America/Israel will be LAUNCHING STRIKES against Iran very soon.
The question is, what will Iran do? Remember Iran can fight back, unlike Iraq, who had been disabled after 12 years of the-no-fly zone, Iran might be able to actually fight back.
One of the things Iran has been using as a deterrence is a warning that they will take out Israel if they are attacked. Yes Israel can certainly dish it out, but if Iran launches against them, it may get pretty bloody.
Now if Iran starts wiping out Israel, and since Israel has nukes, guess what folks, this could get nuclear real quick, and if people start throwing nukes around the Mideast, then China and Russia might get involved and you know how one thing leads to the next.
Some of you more mature audiences can remember back in 1990 and 91 when Iraq threw 39 small missiles at Israel, but because the situation-is so volatile Bush senior pleaded with Israel not to fight back, as that could erupt into a major middle east conflict, etc. etc.
But things have changed, now the US is provoking and encouraging Israel to start a war with Iran, which may lead into something that most of you people on this board are not able to accept.
So let's put on the Jerry Springer show and pretend little bush has it all under control and we have nothing to worry about.
I haven't challenged you on this before, but after having done some research your frequent statement:
Steve1957... what do you mean by "most of you people on this board" ?
As far as I can determine from posted comments MOST people on THIS board (as well as every other one related to 9/11 events) are supportive of re-opening a valid independant investigation into the anomalies of 9/11.
The 'official' [i]Gravity-Driven Collapse supporters on ALL these forums are definately in the MINORITY.
Why do you think THAT IS ???
And I wouldn't worry or get too paranoid about nuclear. I suspect that that the US tested it's latest STAR WARS project on home-ground. Weapons capable of taking out the towers in such fashion are quite capable of taking out nuclear abilities (IMHO). We shall see what we shall see. 'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
Theoretically...
...yet the 'best laid plans of mice & men gang aft aglay'.
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
Is UTTER BULLSHEET
And I think you've known it all along.
NIST can't require ANYONE to sign ANYTHING.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Arthur
Is UTTER BULLSHEET
And I think you've known it all along.
NIST can't require ANYONE to sign ANYTHING.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Arthur
QUOTE
Originally posted by Steve 1957
But things have changed, now the US is provoking and encouraging Israel to start a war with Iran, which may lead into something that most of you people on this board are not able to accept.
But things have changed, now the US is provoking and encouraging Israel to start a war with Iran, which may lead into something that most of you people on this board are not able to accept.
Steve1957... what do you mean by "most of you people on this board" ?
As far as I can determine from posted comments MOST people on THIS board (as well as every other one related to 9/11 events) are supportive of re-opening a valid independant investigation into the anomalies of 9/11.
The 'official' [i]Gravity-Driven Collapse supporters on ALL these forums are definately in the MINORITY.
Why do you think THAT IS ???
And I wouldn't worry or get too paranoid about nuclear. I suspect that that the US tested it's latest STAR WARS project on home-ground. Weapons capable of taking out the towers in such fashion are quite capable of taking out nuclear abilities (IMHO). We shall see what we shall see. 'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
Theoretically...
...yet the 'best laid plans of mice & men gang aft aglay'.
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 11:09 PM)
I haven't challenged you on this before, but after having done some research your frequent statement:
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Really? How would you know? NIST has THOUSANDS of photos related to 9/11 that they are NOT releasing for public consumption (after requiring the original owners of such photos to sign non-disclosure agreements). WHY should this information be with-held... "National Secrecy" perhaps.
Is UTTER BULLSHEET
And I think you've known it all along.
NIST can't require ANYONE to sign ANYTHING.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Arthur
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
The question should be why are they charging $13,278?
Why are you here Arthur you defiantly are not looking for the truth and like you said it is a waste of time.
Your red herrings about political agendas mean NOTHING to me (as a Canadian).
But your 'other point' of WHY people like yourself would waste inordinate amounts of your time & resources discussing 'issues' with THOSE YOU CLAIM are IDIOTS is very interesting.
Tell us the REAL REASON you waste SO MUCH of YOUR TIME talking to 'idiots' "Arthur"... ???
IF MOST PEOPLE 'aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue'... Why are YOU?
I can't tell you how much I appreciate you 'wasting your time' with us...
Good-bye 'Arthur'... pick up your paystub on the way out and please don't slam the door...
NEXT !!!
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
I'm living in a fantasy world?
That's rich.
You and your bunch believe if DAMN NEAR ANYTHING as long as it fits your POLITICAL AGENDA.
Mini-Nukes
Tons of Thermite
Pyroclastic Clouds
High Explosives planted weeks before the hijacking.
Barbara Olsen alive on the non-existent border with Itatlian lira
Atta alive and well
NORAD out to lunch
FAA in on the conspiracy
Global Hawk missles
Remote Control Jets
Flyovers/holographic deception
cool smoky almost burned out fires
Faster than Free Fall, well Virtually as Fast as Free Fall, well Nearly as fast as Free fall
All BS
All obviously to push an agenda or to make money.
Virtually all of the people who have argued with you were posting before you showed up and continue to post in other forums.
You SHILLS are ONLY here for this one topic and ONLY with ONE POINT OF VIEW, which curiously, has nothing to do with the facts.
AMF
Arthur
Virtually all of the people who have argued with you were posting before you showed up and continue to post in other forums.
Arthur
Is this a shill requirement? It is the same way the corporate shills work to stop costly rumors.
Total BS.
What WAS unprecedented was large high speed passenger jets running into these steel skyscrapers.
It does not AT ALL suggest that collapse is a normal event, in fact stating that the buildings probably would have stood, even with the severe damage and fires, had they had decent fire proofing.
The last sentance is absolutely true. Of course, the fact is no other high rise steel building has been run into by a passenger jet at high speed either.
What a crock.
Arthur
Hmmmm... now he claims the NIST statement is a crock
Amazing...
Simply Amazing...
Ignorance is bliss, out of site, out of mind.
I agree that it won't help anything by worrying about a nuclear war breaking out in the middle east, but I don't think it helps anything by remaining ignorant either.
But as I said before, everyone has a right to their belief's. And your also correct that just because I happen to believe it's wrong to slaughter innocent people, doesn't mean everybody else has to agree with me. After all, that's just my personal beliefs.
One thing I will say though, that it must be great when you don't believe in God, because then there is no right or wrong, truth or lies, good or evil, it's all about survival of the fittest. Whoever has the strongest military is the winner and whoever has the weaker one is the loser, plain and simple.
And there is no need to feel guilt about murdering people, let alone lying, because since as most people say "There is no God" therefore there is no accountability. We are free to lie, cheat, steal, and murder whomever we want without any fear of recompense, seeings how we're just a bunch of molecules banging around in the cosmos.
Isn't it great when you don't have to be concerned with all those tens of thousands of "collateral damaged Iranians", after all might makes right.
Foxx, at least now I understand why you made such a big deal about the free-fall speed, versus virtual free-fall speed.
Thanks for letting us know where you're really coming from regarding the slaughter of innocent children in Iran, not to mention who knows how many other US soldiers and others will die. "collateral damage" Good job foxx, keep up the good work, at least you can feel great about doing something important here on this message board, participating in the circle jerking of irrelevant facts about 9/11, that have no baring whatsoever on what really happened, who caused it, and where it's leading.
I think I've had about enough of this exercise in futility, as it seems there is really no interest in the truth whatsoever. Jerking each other off is not my idea of an interesting message board, at first I thought there was some interesting meaning and exchange of ideas, but it's nothing more than an orgy of people trying to pretend they are intelligent.
Yeah, there are some people on this board that I like and feel are trying to be honest, but for now, I can't really include you in the pile.
Have fun.
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
The question should be why are they charging $13,278?
Why are you here Arthur you defiantly are not looking for the truth and like you said it is a waste of time.
That's not my question. My question is, why the heck did they hold on to this evidence for so long? What excuse can they possibly have? 13K is chump change for a news bureau, and possibly even an author who has a successful career. But this is less newsworthy, or "bookworthy", now.
As for adoucette's "logic", that somebody should have passed around a hat to New Yorkers until they came up with 13K:
First of all, AFAIK, this evidence has only been offered for about 7 days.
Secondly, society as a whole isn't organized this way (not yet). Part of the reason for sham investigations is to put people in a "let's wait and see" frame of mind. By the time these investigations reach their ignoble conclusions, much of the passion and interest are dissipated. How many people would pay 13K for sealed documents relating to the JFK assassination now, as opposed to 1963-1964.
Thirdly, you can bet your bippy that somebody will fork over 13K.
Ignorance is bliss, out of site, out of mind.
I agree that it won't help anything by worrying about a nuclear war breaking out in the middle east, but I don't think it helps anything by remaining ignorant either.
But as I said before, everyone has a right to their belief's. And your also correct that just because I happen to believe it's wrong to slaughter innocent people, doesn't mean everybody else has to agree with me. After all, that's just my personal beliefs.
One thing I will say though, that it must be great when you don't believe in God, because then there is no right or wrong, truth or lies, good or evil, it's all about survival of the fittest. Whoever has the strongest military is the winner and whoever has the weaker one is the loser, plain and simple.
And there is no need to feel guilt about murdering people, let alone lying, because since as most people say "There is no God" therefore there is no accountability. We are free to lie, cheat, steal, and murder whomever we want without any fear of recompense, seeings how we're just a bunch of molecules banging around in the cosmos.
Isn't it great when you don't have to be concerned with all those tens of thousands of "collateral damaged Iranians", after all might makes right.
Foxx, at least now I understand why you made such a big deal about the free-fall speed, versus virtual free-fall speed.
Thanks for letting us know where you're really coming from regarding the slaughter of innocent children in Iran, "collateral damage"
Heh...
Steve1957... I think you missed my point.
Sorry... My fault actually.
'Collateral Damage' in Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq (or Canada for that matter) is a BIG concern to me.
The 'point' I was trying to convey is this (think about it)...
IF the US HAS Star-Wars Weaponry available within their secret bag of tricks, (which I fully believe they do)... the 'deployers' of such technology will have no qualms against using it.
Their 'reasoning' would be...
" 'we' are able to LIMIT collateral damage with the use of such a weapon... we 'proved THAT in Manhatten... we can 'control' the damage within a limited area without massive 'collateral damage' to either LIVES or PROPERTY... (Of course there will ALWAYS be 'collateral loss of life', but those 'losses' are just 'statistics'... so NO NEED to WORRY about those). 'We' are ABLE to 'limit' the 'losses' to an ACCEPTABLE NUMBER... hey a few thousand 'losses' is better than a few hundred thousand 'losses'."
(or maybe a few hundred thousand is 'better' than a million)
I totally AGREE with you that such 'reasoning' is perverse and errant, nevertheless, I believe THAT is THE 'WAY' these people think.
'They' disregard 'Murphy's Law' and counsel 'leaders' that they can 'get away with' such aberrant philosophies.
SO FAR, they have 'gotten-away' with the 9/11 events, haven't they?
Yet, NOT WITHOUT NOTICE by astute observers.
NUCLEAR IS THE END, I agree... but personally I think these idiots believe their newest Star Wars Technology can 'end' that threat... (You Can't put Pandora back in the box, but I personally feel that 'these spooks' somehow believe that they CAN.
THAT is the 'Danger'.
The Military-Industrial Complex has become Arrogant like unto Pure Evil.
They have become 'loose cannons'... thinking that they MAY be able to control issues (spiritual issues) FAR BEYOND what their 'Magical Weapons' are capable of, and are miscalculating the effects of 'WHAT' they are putting in motion. I don't expect the 'gravity-driven collapse supporters & obfuscators' to understand what I am saying, but I hope you are able to.
Cheers
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
If they could get $1 from 14,000 people I am sure that would cover the S&H too.
Perhaps a French magazine might also contribute or a composites manufacturing company.
Is UTTER BULLSHEET
And I think you've known it all along.
NIST can't require ANYONE to sign ANYTHING.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Arthur
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
QUOTE (Foxx+)
The 'official' [i]Gravity-Driven Collapse supporters on ALL these forums are definately in the MINORITY.
Why do you think THAT IS ???
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Arthur
Why do you think THAT IS ???
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Arthur
QUOTE
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
QUOTE
Originally posted by Adoucette
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 11:36 PM)
QUOTE
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
The question should be why are they charging $13,278?
Why are you here Arthur you defiantly are not looking for the truth and like you said it is a waste of time.
QUOTE
Originally posted by adoucette
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Your red herrings about political agendas mean NOTHING to me (as a Canadian).
But your 'other point' of WHY people like yourself would waste inordinate amounts of your time & resources discussing 'issues' with THOSE YOU CLAIM are IDIOTS is very interesting.
Tell us the REAL REASON you waste SO MUCH of YOUR TIME talking to 'idiots' "Arthur"... ???
IF MOST PEOPLE 'aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue'... Why are YOU?
I can't tell you how much I appreciate you 'wasting your time' with us...
Good-bye 'Arthur'... pick up your paystub on the way out and please don't slam the door...
NEXT !!!
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 7 2006, 11:37 PM)
QUOTE
Originally posted by Adoucette
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
I'm living in a fantasy world?
That's rich.
You and your bunch believe if DAMN NEAR ANYTHING as long as it fits your POLITICAL AGENDA.
Mini-Nukes
Tons of Thermite
Pyroclastic Clouds
High Explosives planted weeks before the hijacking.
Barbara Olsen alive on the non-existent border with Itatlian lira
Atta alive and well
NORAD out to lunch
FAA in on the conspiracy
Global Hawk missles
Remote Control Jets
Flyovers/holographic deception
cool smoky almost burned out fires
Faster than Free Fall, well Virtually as Fast as Free Fall, well Nearly as fast as Free fall
All BS
All obviously to push an agenda or to make money.
Virtually all of the people who have argued with you were posting before you showed up and continue to post in other forums.
You SHILLS are ONLY here for this one topic and ONLY with ONE POINT OF VIEW, which curiously, has nothing to do with the facts.
AMF
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 11:53 PM)
Virtually all of the people who have argued with you were posting before you showed up and continue to post in other forums.
Arthur
Is this a shill requirement? It is the same way the corporate shills work to stop costly rumors.
It doesn't matter so much what my theory of 9/11 is. The most important point is that the government's theory (and yours?) is impossible!
-- anonymous, found at 911blimp.net (http://911blimp.net/welcome.htm)
-- anonymous, found at 911blimp.net (http://911blimp.net/welcome.htm)
Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression
by David Martin
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors."
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and of course, "rumor monger." You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hang-out route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report it.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.
by David Martin
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors."
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and of course, "rumor monger." You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hang-out route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report it.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 09:54 PM)
QUOTE
NIST's Report gives the reader no clue of how unprecedented and unexpected the total collapses of these skyscrapers were. Rather, it suggests that total collapses of high-rise buildings are normal events, but usually happen less suddenly.
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43)
Total BS.
What WAS unprecedented was large high speed passenger jets running into these steel skyscrapers.
It does not AT ALL suggest that collapse is a normal event, in fact stating that the buildings probably would have stood, even with the severe damage and fires, had they had decent fire proofing.
The last sentance is absolutely true. Of course, the fact is no other high rise steel building has been run into by a passenger jet at high speed either.
What a crock.
Arthur
Hmmmm... now he claims the NIST statement is a crock
Amazing...
Simply Amazing...
QUOTE
Fox,
'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
Ignorance is bliss, out of site, out of mind.
I agree that it won't help anything by worrying about a nuclear war breaking out in the middle east, but I don't think it helps anything by remaining ignorant either.
But as I said before, everyone has a right to their belief's. And your also correct that just because I happen to believe it's wrong to slaughter innocent people, doesn't mean everybody else has to agree with me. After all, that's just my personal beliefs.
One thing I will say though, that it must be great when you don't believe in God, because then there is no right or wrong, truth or lies, good or evil, it's all about survival of the fittest. Whoever has the strongest military is the winner and whoever has the weaker one is the loser, plain and simple.
And there is no need to feel guilt about murdering people, let alone lying, because since as most people say "There is no God" therefore there is no accountability. We are free to lie, cheat, steal, and murder whomever we want without any fear of recompense, seeings how we're just a bunch of molecules banging around in the cosmos.
Isn't it great when you don't have to be concerned with all those tens of thousands of "collateral damaged Iranians", after all might makes right.
Foxx, at least now I understand why you made such a big deal about the free-fall speed, versus virtual free-fall speed.
Thanks for letting us know where you're really coming from regarding the slaughter of innocent children in Iran, not to mention who knows how many other US soldiers and others will die. "collateral damage" Good job foxx, keep up the good work, at least you can feel great about doing something important here on this message board, participating in the circle jerking of irrelevant facts about 9/11, that have no baring whatsoever on what really happened, who caused it, and where it's leading.
I think I've had about enough of this exercise in futility, as it seems there is really no interest in the truth whatsoever. Jerking each other off is not my idea of an interesting message board, at first I thought there was some interesting meaning and exchange of ideas, but it's nothing more than an orgy of people trying to pretend they are intelligent.
Yeah, there are some people on this board that I like and feel are trying to be honest, but for now, I can't really include you in the pile.
Have fun.
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Jan 7 2006, 11:42 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 11:36 PM)
QUOTE
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
The question should be why are they charging $13,278?
Why are you here Arthur you defiantly are not looking for the truth and like you said it is a waste of time.
That's not my question. My question is, why the heck did they hold on to this evidence for so long? What excuse can they possibly have? 13K is chump change for a news bureau, and possibly even an author who has a successful career. But this is less newsworthy, or "bookworthy", now.
As for adoucette's "logic", that somebody should have passed around a hat to New Yorkers until they came up with 13K:
First of all, AFAIK, this evidence has only been offered for about 7 days.
Secondly, society as a whole isn't organized this way (not yet). Part of the reason for sham investigations is to put people in a "let's wait and see" frame of mind. By the time these investigations reach their ignoble conclusions, much of the passion and interest are dissipated. How many people would pay 13K for sealed documents relating to the JFK assassination now, as opposed to 1963-1964.
Thirdly, you can bet your bippy that somebody will fork over 13K.
QUOTE (steve1957+Jan 8 2006, 12:29 AM)
QUOTE
Fox,
'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
'They' could take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran with such a weapon with very little other 'collateral damage'...
Ignorance is bliss, out of site, out of mind.
I agree that it won't help anything by worrying about a nuclear war breaking out in the middle east, but I don't think it helps anything by remaining ignorant either.
But as I said before, everyone has a right to their belief's. And your also correct that just because I happen to believe it's wrong to slaughter innocent people, doesn't mean everybody else has to agree with me. After all, that's just my personal beliefs.
One thing I will say though, that it must be great when you don't believe in God, because then there is no right or wrong, truth or lies, good or evil, it's all about survival of the fittest. Whoever has the strongest military is the winner and whoever has the weaker one is the loser, plain and simple.
And there is no need to feel guilt about murdering people, let alone lying, because since as most people say "There is no God" therefore there is no accountability. We are free to lie, cheat, steal, and murder whomever we want without any fear of recompense, seeings how we're just a bunch of molecules banging around in the cosmos.
Isn't it great when you don't have to be concerned with all those tens of thousands of "collateral damaged Iranians", after all might makes right.
Foxx, at least now I understand why you made such a big deal about the free-fall speed, versus virtual free-fall speed.
Thanks for letting us know where you're really coming from regarding the slaughter of innocent children in Iran, "collateral damage"
Heh...
Steve1957... I think you missed my point.
Sorry... My fault actually.
'Collateral Damage' in Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq (or Canada for that matter) is a BIG concern to me.
The 'point' I was trying to convey is this (think about it)...
IF the US HAS Star-Wars Weaponry available within their secret bag of tricks, (which I fully believe they do)... the 'deployers' of such technology will have no qualms against using it.
Their 'reasoning' would be...
" 'we' are able to LIMIT collateral damage with the use of such a weapon... we 'proved THAT in Manhatten... we can 'control' the damage within a limited area without massive 'collateral damage' to either LIVES or PROPERTY... (Of course there will ALWAYS be 'collateral loss of life', but those 'losses' are just 'statistics'... so NO NEED to WORRY about those). 'We' are ABLE to 'limit' the 'losses' to an ACCEPTABLE NUMBER... hey a few thousand 'losses' is better than a few hundred thousand 'losses'."
(or maybe a few hundred thousand is 'better' than a million)
I totally AGREE with you that such 'reasoning' is perverse and errant, nevertheless, I believe THAT is THE 'WAY' these people think.
'They' disregard 'Murphy's Law' and counsel 'leaders' that they can 'get away with' such aberrant philosophies.
SO FAR, they have 'gotten-away' with the 9/11 events, haven't they?
Yet, NOT WITHOUT NOTICE by astute observers.
NUCLEAR IS THE END, I agree... but personally I think these idiots believe their newest Star Wars Technology can 'end' that threat... (You Can't put Pandora back in the box, but I personally feel that 'these spooks' somehow believe that they CAN.
THAT is the 'Danger'.
The Military-Industrial Complex has become Arrogant like unto Pure Evil.
They have become 'loose cannons'... thinking that they MAY be able to control issues (spiritual issues) FAR BEYOND what their 'Magical Weapons' are capable of, and are miscalculating the effects of 'WHAT' they are putting in motion. I don't expect the 'gravity-driven collapse supporters & obfuscators' to understand what I am saying, but I hope you are able to.
Cheers
Hope springs eternal - three cheers for the physicists
1500 physicists oppose nuclear attack on Iran
The scientific community in the USA is stirring. Physicists are worried by the projected nuclear bombardment of Iran, as justified by the new Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations drawn up by the Pentagon in March 2005.
A petition against these "preemptive nuclear assaults" has been drawn up by physicists at The University of San Diego in California. It has gathered, so far, the signatures of nearly 1500 US physicists, including 9 Nobel Prize winners.
These scientists reject the hold-all notion of "weapons of mass-destruction" as well as the use of mini-nukes..They see no fundamental difference between this new technology and the old nuclear bombs regardless of whether they are targetting underground bunkers or cities and armies.
They call on all citizens to participate in a national debate on the issue before its too late.
Remember that the office of vice-president Cheney called for a study of scenarios involving a nuclear attack on Iran in August 2005
From VOLTAIRE. NET
Link to petition - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/
Sign - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/signup.php
1500 physicists oppose nuclear attack on Iran
The scientific community in the USA is stirring. Physicists are worried by the projected nuclear bombardment of Iran, as justified by the new Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations drawn up by the Pentagon in March 2005.
A petition against these "preemptive nuclear assaults" has been drawn up by physicists at The University of San Diego in California. It has gathered, so far, the signatures of nearly 1500 US physicists, including 9 Nobel Prize winners.
These scientists reject the hold-all notion of "weapons of mass-destruction" as well as the use of mini-nukes..They see no fundamental difference between this new technology and the old nuclear bombs regardless of whether they are targetting underground bunkers or cities and armies.
They call on all citizens to participate in a national debate on the issue before its too late.
Remember that the office of vice-president Cheney called for a study of scenarios involving a nuclear attack on Iran in August 2005
From VOLTAIRE. NET
Link to petition - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/
Sign - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/signup.php
QUOTE (brian+Jan 8 2006, 01:30 AM)
Hope springs eternal - three cheers for the physicists
1500 physicists oppose nuclear attack on Iran
The scientific community in the USA is stirring. Physicists are worried by the projected nuclear bombardment of Iran, as justified by the new Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations drawn up by the Pentagon in March 2005.
A petition against these "preemptive nuclear assaults" has been drawn up by physicists at The University of San Diego in California. It has gathered, so far, the signatures of nearly 1500 US physicists, including 9 Nobel Prize winners.
These scientists reject the hold-all notion of "weapons of mass-destruction" as well as the use of mini-nukes..They see no fundamental difference between this new technology and the old nuclear bombs regardless of whether they are targetting underground bunkers or cities and armies.
They call on all citizens to participate in a national debate on the issue before its too late.
Remember that the office of vice-president Cheney called for a study of scenarios involving a nuclear attack on Iran in August 2005
From VOLTAIRE. NET
Link to petition - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/
Sign - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/signup.php
Hey Brian... Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
These neo-con wack-jobs MUST be stopped.
I Hope that all the REAL entities (posting as shills here) will add their names to this petition also, and wake-up from their 'pretending sleep'.
Even 'paid shills' MUST have some form of conscience, and recognize the need for signing this petition.
Cheers
1500 physicists oppose nuclear attack on Iran
The scientific community in the USA is stirring. Physicists are worried by the projected nuclear bombardment of Iran, as justified by the new Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations drawn up by the Pentagon in March 2005.
A petition against these "preemptive nuclear assaults" has been drawn up by physicists at The University of San Diego in California. It has gathered, so far, the signatures of nearly 1500 US physicists, including 9 Nobel Prize winners.
These scientists reject the hold-all notion of "weapons of mass-destruction" as well as the use of mini-nukes..They see no fundamental difference between this new technology and the old nuclear bombs regardless of whether they are targetting underground bunkers or cities and armies.
They call on all citizens to participate in a national debate on the issue before its too late.
Remember that the office of vice-president Cheney called for a study of scenarios involving a nuclear attack on Iran in August 2005
From VOLTAIRE. NET
Link to petition - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/
Sign - http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/signup.php
Hey Brian... Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
These neo-con wack-jobs MUST be stopped.
I Hope that all the REAL entities (posting as shills here) will add their names to this petition also, and wake-up from their 'pretending sleep'.
Even 'paid shills' MUST have some form of conscience, and recognize the need for signing this petition.
Cheers
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 7 2006, 11:36 PM)
QUOTE
They are avalible for $13,278.I don’t think anyone has paid this yet to find out what is missing for national security reasons.
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
http://zirkonyx.gnn.tv/articles/2009/_13K_for_911_truth
So the 9/11 truth movement is "so large", and includes 60% of New Yorkers, but can't come up with a measly $13k for a copy of these photos and videos.
What a crock.
Arthur
If they could get $1 from 14,000 people I am sure that would cover the S&H too.
Perhaps a French magazine might also contribute or a composites manufacturing company.
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Yes, Foxx there are 'wack-jobs' in the world.
Foxx sometimes has trouble with reading comprehension. Allow me to make it easier for Foxx(or at least try).
The 'crock' and 'B.S.' that Arthur refers to (perhaps indelicately) is the statement that NIST has characterized the collapses as a normal event. NIST certainly never states such a thing. Unprecedented IS the fact that never before have two large, fast aircraft been plowed into buildings deliberately and eventually resulting in their collapse. Also unprecedented is the scale of the disaster which is a direct consequence of the size of the buildings(specifically their height).
Your red herrings about political agendas mean NOTHING to me (as a Canadian).
But your 'other point' of WHY people like yourself would waste inordinate amounts of your time & resources discussing 'issues' with THOSE YOU CLAIM are IDIOTS is very interesting.
Tell us the REAL REASON you waste SO MUCH of YOUR TIME talking to 'idiots' "Arthur"... ???
IF MOST PEOPLE 'aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue'... Why are YOU?
I can't tell you how much I appreciate you 'wasting your time' with us...
Good-bye 'Arthur'... pick up your paystub on the way out and please don't slam the door...
NEXT !!!
Come on Foxx, you post enough too. What is the name of the 'charitable organization' that pays you? Do they pay you by the word or by the post?
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
The reason they will not release the videos is the Zacarias Moussaoui case. I thought he pleaded guilty?
http://www.flight77.info/govtreply/govermentsreply03.jpg
http://www.flight77.info/
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEMA Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. You folks have basically explained nothing significant with respect to the collapse. Never mind the anomalous features that clearly point to demolition, or at least away from the gravity driven Fairy Tales. You have not even, (no doubt because you cannot), explained how a local collapse would not be quickly arrested.
You all do an OK job of explaining the downward direction of the collapse, but that's about it.
Woo-hoo. We all knew that, anyway.
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this. Had Einstein insisted on denying the evidence and implication of the constancy of c in all frames of reference, we might have had to wait 10 more years for special relativity, and 25 more years for general relativity.
If I was a physics professor at a university, I would never want you as a graduate student. While you might make a competent physicist in an area where you have no emotional or other blindness, apparently your total inability or unwillingness to think outside of the box means that you would likely never make a great one.
As far as contributions to this thread, FEMA Fairy Tale believers have done some worthy debunking (yes, SOME of your arguments are worthwhile) and presented some valuable facts and evidence. I note with amusement, though, that some of the evidence presented to buttress the FEMA Fairy Tale viewpoint has done just the opposite.
Then too, some "explanations" are so outlandish, that their entertainment value must be appreciated even by their opponents. adoucette's Magical Bellows Theory certainly is a gold medal contender, here.
As for any convincing arguments for your Fairy Tales - forget about it.
================================================
Note to Activists:
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios. Not even a physicist will do. All the hours we spend looking up info and then posting, only to have "popes" repeat so much of the same nonsense, ad nauseum, should be teaching us a lesson. If we had worked at minimum wage jobs, we could have pooled our $$ and paid a Ph.D. construction engineer $100/hr for a day or two's work, and then have something we could present to the larger technical community.
That bothers me, and I hope it bothers other folks, too. If nothing else, to persist in this fashion is stupid.
Up until recently, I didn't mind listening to pope-ish pronouncements too much because a ) I had more unanswered question before than I do now and b ) the popes' challenges were eliciting some valuable research, in response. (E.g., we have the popes to thank, in part, for Gordon finally making his dramatic appearance. )
At this point, the popes have been roundly defeated here, but the real battle has hardly begun in academia, and I'm not sanguine about a real debate taking place. While it may have been virtuous to expend a lot of energy groping around, trying to get a handle on what FEMA and NIST should have done, I don't think that's the case any longer.
So, let's think outside the box about a non-physics problem. What is the optimal way to pool our resources to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer?
My own suggestion is to put Professor James Fetzer in charge of such an effort. He has a podium, which he can use to solicit funds, and he strikes me as extremely ethical. I note, with some dismay, that he holds certain beliefs in the 911 arena which I find implausible or just plain wrong (I'm pretty sure that he has spoken about a "free fall" time of collapse, rather than "near free fall", e.g.), however that is secondary. My idea is not to ask HIM to do a technical analysis, but to have him take the lead in making this happen.
(No, I haven't run this by him, and I apologize in advance if I embarrass him.
)
Finally, I also note that we may likely have to go outside the US to find a suitable construction engineering candidate. Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org had to go outside the US to hire a suitable "scientist" who was willing to go on record with respect to the fraudulent electronic voting systems here in the US. US scientists would tell her privately what she already suspected, but not publicly.
I'm ashamed to say that the US is home to an awful lot of wusses....
8.2.8 Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination
Two structural steel samples from the WTC site were observed to have unusual erosion patterns. One sample is believed to be from WTC 7 and the other from either WTC 1 or WTC 2
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch8.pdf
It's easier to believe what the government says, buy a six pack and fall asleep in front of American Idol
Joe Six Pack also highlights the Bush connection to John W. Hinckley Jnr., Reagan's would be assassin, as being another one of our fantasies.
Is it a fantasy that the Associated Press reported on March 31st 1981 that the Hinckley family were scheduled to have dinner with the Bush family?
Is this another urban legend?
On the subject of 9/11, anyone who still believes that the attack was perpetrated by nineteen 'fundamental jihadists hell bent on destroying America' who, the night before the grandest terror attack of all time, were getting shitfaced drunk in a tit bar, at the behest of a dying man spending his time equally between being on a kidney dialysis machine and in a cave, would have been sorely disappointed recently when Santa Claus didn't drop down their chimney and leave bundles of gifts.
Anyone who still believes the 'official' fairytale of 9/11, a yarn that we are told vaporized the bodies of two thirds of the victims yet produced photo ID's within hours at two of the different crash sites identifying the hijackers, would do well to remove their baby teeth from under the pillow.
The lies promulgated about 9/11 are so legion that the deceivers are starting to trip over their own twisted tongues. Larry Silverstein claims his "pull it" comment meant to evacuate firefighters from WTC Building 7 and yet Popular Mechanics' own 9/11 debunking special stated that there were no firefighters in the building whatsoever.
The tooth fairy doesn't exist. It's time to grow up and face reality. We have a government criminally hell bent on destroying America, a government that openly and brazenly lied a country into a war that cost the lives of thousands of US soldiers and countless hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, 'liberated' out of their very existence.
Judging from recent history alone, we should automatically disbelieve anything government tells us and let them do the work to prove otherwise. Their track record on telling the truth would put a used car salesman to shame.
The catalyst of the blossoming rise of the alternative media was the fact that the mainstream media deliberately engaged in spin and deception by regurgitating state mantra as gospel. This became abundantly clear and people started to search for sources of information that at least tried to tell the truth.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEM Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. [
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this.
metamars, I have absolutely no emotional attachment to the official record and certainly not to the present US administration.
Why is it so common among those who believe as you do that anyone who does not believe that the towers were blown by explosives or that a plane hit the Pentagon, are somehow lovers of the neo-con agenda or the Republicans in power?
Talk about emotion! Emotion is the only reason that I can think of that would have you or Foxx or steve1957stating that.
As far as fairy tales go I consider your "out of the box" solutions to be exactly that. A fairy tale at worst, I suppose, a too vivid an imagination more likely.
Mini-nukes may exist but ones that do not require a fusion trigger? I do not know about that. Even if it does exist you have no evidence whatsoever that one was installed in the towers. The mini-nuke is the best of the bunch of exotic solutions to the supposed puzzle that you have proposed. There is no evidence that a space based beam weapon is in orbit nor is there any evidence that one was employed on 9/11. If you have anything other than 'well it could be" then please show it.
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEMA Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. You folks have basically explained nothing significant with respect to the collapse. Never mind the anomalous features that clearly point to demolition, or at least away from the gravity driven Fairy Tales. You have not even, (no doubt because you cannot), explained how a local collapse would not be quickly arrested.
You all do an OK job of explaining the downward direction of the collapse, but that's about it.
Woo-hoo. We all knew that, anyway.
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this. Had Einstein insisted on denying the evidence and implication of the constancy of c in all frames of reference, we might have had to wait 10 more years for special relativity, and 25 more years for general relativity.
If I was a physics professor at a university, I would never want you as a graduate student. While you might make a competent physicist in an area where you have no emotional or other blindness, apparently your total inability or unwillingness to think outside of the box means that you would likely never make a great one.
As far as contributions to this thread, FEMA Fairy Tale believers have done some worthy debunking (yes, SOME of your arguments are worthwhile) and presented some valuable facts and evidence. I note with amusement, though, that some of the evidence presented to buttress the FEMA Fairy Tale viewpoint has done just the opposite.
Then too, some "explanations" are so outlandish, that their entertainment value must be appreciated even by their opponents. adoucette's Magical Bellows Theory certainly is a gold medal contender, here.
As for any convincing arguments for your Fairy Tales - forget about it.
================================================
Note to Activists:
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios. Not even a physicist will do. All the hours we spend looking up info and then posting, only to have "popes" repeat so much of the same nonsense, ad nauseum, should be teaching us a lesson. If we had worked at minimum wage jobs, we could have pooled our $$ and paid a Ph.D. construction engineer $100/hr for a day or two's work, and then have something we could present to the larger technical community.
That bothers me, and I hope it bothers other folks, too. If nothing else, to persist in this fashion is stupid.
Up until recently, I didn't mind listening to pope-ish pronouncements too much because a ) I had more unanswered question before than I do now and b ) the popes' challenges were eliciting some valuable research, in response. (E.g., we have the popes to thank, in part, for Gordon finally making his dramatic appearance. )
At this point, the popes have been roundly defeated here, but the real battle has hardly begun in academia, and I'm not sanguine about a real debate taking place. While it may have been virtuous to expend a lot of energy groping around, trying to get a handle on what FEMA and NIST should have done, I don't think that's the case any longer.
So, let's think outside the box about a non-physics problem. What is the optimal way to pool our resources to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer?
My own suggestion is to put Professor James Fetzer in charge of such an effort. He has a podium, which he can use to solicit funds, and he strikes me as extremely ethical. I note, with some dismay, that he holds certain beliefs in the 911 arena which I find implausible or just plain wrong (I'm pretty sure that he has spoken about a "free fall" time of collapse, rather than "near free fall", e.g.), however that is secondary. My idea is not to ask HIM to do a technical analysis, but to have him take the lead in making this happen.
(No, I haven't run this by him, and I apologize in advance if I embarrass him. )
Finally, I also note that we may likely have to go outside the US to find a suitable construction engineering candidate. Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org had to go outside the US to hire a suitable "scientist" who was willing to go on record with respect to the fraudulent electronic voting systems here in the US. US scientists would tell her privately what she already suspected, but not publicly.
I'm ashamed to say that the US is home to an awful lot of wusses....
Metamar,
I appreciate your contributions to the thread. You do not need permission or a consensus from the forum members to pursue your ideas. My suggestion would be email Gordon’s spreadsheet with his explanation to Professor James Fetzer and all 9/11 truth movement websites and see what response is generates( if that is OK with Gordon). Gordon has provided this free and their would be know cost involved. This opens the door for engineers to prove the analysis false or agree with it and do further analysis to support it. Gordon’s spreadsheet and analysis are so simple it should open the eyes of engineers that normally would not question the official theory. Another idea would be to start a new thread with all of Gordon’s and Andrews’s initial post then go to other forums asking people to debunk it.
This thread is becoming useless and nearly impossible to find relevant information as Lon Waters pointed out. In addition, arguing about free fall speed if explosives are used puzzles me. You are saying extra energy is being introduced from explosive but the forces are only directed horizontally and in a vertical upward direction. For obvious reasons this would be desired but almost impossible to achieve. Good luck and I would support a plan of action that has a reasonable chance of success.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEM Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. [
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this.
metamars, I have absolutely no emotional attachment to the official record and certainly not to the present US administration.
Why is it so common among those who believe as you do that anyone who does not believe that the towers were blown by explosives or that a plane hit the Pentagon, are somehow lovers of the neo-con agenda or the Republicans in power?
Talk about emotion! Emotion is the only reason that I can think of that would have you or Foxx or steve1957stating that.
As far as fairy tales go I consider your "out of the box" solutions to be exactly that. A fairy tale at worst, I suppose, a too vivid an imagination more likely.
Mini-nukes may exist but ones that do not require a fusion trigger? I do not know about that. Even if it does exist you have no evidence whatsoever that one was installed in the towers. The mini-nuke is the best of the bunch of exotic solutions to the supposed puzzle that you have proposed. There is no evidence that a space based beam weapon is in orbit nor is there any evidence that one was employed on 9/11. If you have anything other than 'well it could be" then please show it.
Your side has stated many accusations wrt motives, as has "my" side. I nomally avoid and even discourage this, and even with the post you quote, I say "I DOUBT your sincerity".
Perhaps you would like me to lie, but I won't. I will, though, stick with my policy of not commenting, in general, on motivation of somebody else, since it's ultimately unknowable.
Most everybody in my family, as well as most all my friends, that I have discussed this with, believe in FEMA Fairy Tale collapse scenarios. This includes a friend who has a Ph.D. in civil engineering, who I discussed it with for about 10 or 15 minutes.
Just before my Ph.D friend left for vacation over 4 months ago, I emailed him a link or two to 911 info, with a request that he consider it and get back to me. He still hasn't done so, and with 2 infant twins, I don't begrudge him his inability to prioritize my request.
I don't have a problem with people who believe in the FEMA Fairy Tale. But with so much evidence and basic physics pointing to something much more nefarious, if a person, such as yourself, keeps turning a blind eye to it or pretends that it's something that it isn't, I become, well, DUBIOUS.
If my Ph.D. friend ever gets around to looking at all the evidence that should have been headline news, I have little doubt that he'll change his mind OR, if by some chance he doesn't, I'm quite sure that he won't keep blabbering about "no evidence" for a demolition. He will say something like "I see what you mean, and though I haven't changed my mind, I must admit that I can't explain either the collapse itself, nor any of the anomalous phenomena you have pointed out."
Your pope-ishness gives you away as something other than a truth-teller.
The pope-ish pronouncements about "no evidence", when there is so much of it, reveal a mindset that doesn't seek the truth. And the pope-ish pronouncements which dismiss alternative hypotheses in favor of inferior ones, and furthermore present their inferior hypotheses as something more, reveal a mind actively seeking to construct a pseudo-reality. It would be one thing if you kept this pseudo-reality to yourself. But you are trying to convince others of it, and thus you are fulfilling a propagandistic function.
So yes, I do doubt your sincerity.
I don't really CARE what your agenda is, or even if you are consciously pursuing one at all. I also don't care if you're political or not, in an emotional way or not.
It's the observable gross distortions of your writing that is important, and all the blindness it implies.
Think of what a normal person who knew high school physics thinks of somebody else who maintains a free fall collapse time fiction, even AFTER seeing the photographic evidence presented IN THIS THREAD, and you should understand why I find you being insincere to be more likely than finding you merely mistaken.
Since you will doubtless maintiain your untenatble position, do you wish us well in combining resources in order to hire the mental muscle we need to obtain a more authoritative analysis, as I mentioned just recently? Since we have no intention of dropping the subject, you should be happy to have us disabuse ourselves from our "fantasy"......
Even Abraham Lincoln said, as great as this constitution may be, when the people depart from the Lord this country will be destroyed.
And it may be the christians who are the most guilty of departing from the Lord, as they profess to be ambassadors of Christ on one hand, while they support murder, deception, and every other abomination under the sun.
But let us not put all the blame on the christians alone, we're all guilty to some degree, maybe some more than others.
But as I was flicking through the channels I stopped at one of the false prophet, anti-christ, satan worshiping shows, IE; Jerry Falwell.
Not that anything is new, as the bible BOLDLY PROCLAIMS the things these evangelical, used car salesman, HALF-WITTED PREACHERS are doing is of the devil, meaning (the evil part of man, not a cartoon character)
And so as I was watching to see what the latest abomination of a message would be, (all the while making sure I was wearing my long boots symbolically speaking, as the dung gets very deep)
And lo and behold Jerry is CHANTING his typical bow down and worship bush speech and praise god for all the wonderful murders that we're accomplishing in Iraq, confirming how the bible says "Thou shalt steal, and thou shalt murder, and thou shalt worship little bush, and of course, thou shalt dig deep in your pockets and give Jerry Falwell lots of money" He also addressed some of the concerns his congregation has about the troops in Iraq and the war we're involved with.
Even though I've read the scriptures old and new hundreds of times, and it's embedded in my memory, I still have to re-read books and chapters and verses much of the time, for my own pleasure and also to re-confirm that these guys really are wolves in sheep's clothing, and that I haven't completely lost my mind.
And sure enough, IT'S WRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, & NOT CONFUSING. They are lying and what they say is completely the opposite of what is written in the scriptures, REALLY.
Because the scriptures really do say "Thou shall not murder" & and "Thou shall not steal" and "Thou shall not trespass" and contrary to the lie told by the evangelists, the bible does not say, "thou shall worship little bush, or even a false prophet or a wolf in sheep's clothing. Yes the bible says to worship God in spirit and in truth. The bible says "To love thy neighbor as thyself is the fulfillment of all the law and the prophets"
But back to the point, (AS IF ANY OF YOU GOD HATERS WILL EVEN BOTHER TO READ THIS) as I mention God, which is a complete abomination in the minds of most of you on this board, never the less, there may be a person or to that does drop by and read this, but here is what the respected reverend had to say, when asked by one of his flocks if they could pray to God to bring the troops home safely...
And Jerry said, "Absolutely not. I would never pray that God brings the troops home, until they are finished KILLING EVERY LAST TERRORIST IN THE MIDDLE EAST, or converting them"
Jerry then went on to praise bush about doing such a wonderful job in Iraq, and that THOSE PEOPLE, (in Iraq) did 9/11 (paraphrasing) and then Jerry went on to talk about how evil the LEFT, LIBERAL, ANTI-WAR people are in this country are because they FORGOT ABOUT 9/11. They forgot about what those evil people in Iraq did to us on 9/11.
All the while SELLING HIS MESSAGE that the people in Iraq did 9/11 and little bush is a great president for protecting us from those terrorists.
Needless to say, I already know the truth and know where his message is coming from and what the intended effect is. I also know that the word of the Lord is forever, which is why the verses are relevant for today...
2Thessalonians 2:11-12 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Now it seems to be very clear that Arthur for example does not see any resemblance between the collapse of the WTC buildings to that of a control demolition.
So it's one of two things.
1) Either Arthur is lying, and he knows they resembled the control demolition.
or
2) Arthur is blind and really can't see it.
Yes, it is possible that because little Arthur takes so much much pleasure in unrighteousness, including the slaughter of innocent babies in Iraq, that he is blinded and can't even see the resemblance.
And that's why talking with Arthur, yesdidit and other people who love the lie and hate the truth is usually fruitless, and a waste of time, because I can't say for sure whether their distorted visions are just lies they're trying to pass off to aid and abet in the murder of Innocent people, or if they are legitimately BLINDED by their pleasure in unrighteousness.
So, while I sometimes put these people in their rightful place, IE liars, I also understand that their lying may be for other underlying reasons that I'm not aware of. It could be that they share in most Americans desire to slaughter innocent people, or it could be for other reasons not known to me.
And so I place more responsibility at the feet of people who should know better. Another words, I understand the fairy tale supporters are nothing more than sick demented serial child killers, who lie, cheat and steal to justify their cause, while more responsibility is placed on people who do have enough intelligence to know that explosives were used.
It's not just about understanding the physics involved in 9/11 and being honest enough to proclaim that explosives were in fact used, based on all the evidence, BECAUSE THIS IS UNDEBATABLE. ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE FAIRY TALE IS LYING, and you can't legitimately debate with them about the facts, because it has nothing to do with the facts, it's about supporting their murderous heart, IE; their justification for slaughtering all those innocent children in Iraq.
Having fun on this board with physical evidence that PROVES BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT EXPLOSIVES WERE IN FACT USED might be fun for a while, but if any of you actually think these people like Arthur, yesdidit and other fairy tale supporters have one iota of interest in the truth or discovering what really happened, then your lying to yourself, because for the time present, facts and evidence have nothing to do with.
THEY ARE ADVOCATES FOR THE DEFENSE. Like OJ's lawyers mustering up any thing they can to defend their client, that is their mission. You might be better off trying to convince Johnnie Cocroach of OJ's guilt based on scientific evidence, Johnnie probably knew OJ was guilty more than most of us, but the last thing he wanted was the truth. Just like Arthur, yesdidit and other people who want to kill as many Muslims as they can, no matter how old or young. Not that killing all the Musilms is their end goal, as their end goal may be to prove that we are gods in our own eyes, and will rule the world. However, in order to rule the world and convince everyone that we are gods, there are many more Arabs that have to be killed.
And this is the final solution
And if you disagree, you probably share the same desire to kill all the terrorists, because remember, the goal of the Americans, republicans and democrats is to destroy EVERY LAST TERRORIST ON THE PLANET. And remember this, ANYONE WHO OPPOSES THE POLICIES OR THE WAYS OF THE US IS A TERRORIST, SO THAT MEANS YOU GOTTA KILL A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
You might as well learn to enjoy killing people who disagree with the American way of life, because if you're gonna be a proud patriotic American, then you gotta kill every last one of them, no matter how many there are.
What else can any of us expect from Arthur, yesdidit, etc. AT LEAST YOU KNOW WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM. At least we know they are liars and murderers in their heart. When I say "We know" I'm talking directly to people who love the truth, which probably excludes 90% of the people on this board, because Murder begins in the heart, even if you don't carry out the plan, if you think it in your heart, then according to Jesus (which is the truth) YOU'VE DONE IT.
yesdidit said I was emotional, and yes, he got that right, I do have feelings about innocent people getting slaughtered, yes it bother me a lot. Maybe if I was more like some of the people on this board it wouldn't bother me and I'd even enjoy watching all those people getting slaughtered.
In fact if I didn't have any emotions it wouldn't upset me that ANOTHER 17 AMERICANS WERE KILLED IN THE LAST 24 HOURS.
If I were only like Arthur and yesdidit I could feel good that more people are getting killed, including innocent Iraqi's and US soldiers, but as sick and disgusting as I am, it does bother me.
So either delete, throw this in the trash, avoid or maybe talk with monitor about my posts and see if you can get me kicked out of hear since I've gone way over board and broke the rules. I mentioned God in a good way.
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
Thanks. The point of my question was moreso to spread the meme of "it's time to take this to the next level", than just intellectual curiosity about what other people think (though I am interested, and hope to be surprised with some good ideas.)
I'm pretty sure that I have not gotten a spreadsheet yet from Gordon, though I sent him a request through this system, asking for one. When I did so, I was warned that Gordon would know my email address, so I presume he has not gotten around to emailing one, yet.
Gordon, please don't forget me.
I am thinking of calling Fetzer. He has guts, and was a Marine, one of the few subsets of Americans that have any guts at all. And this is coming from a near pacifist....
Another complication wrt explosives is: at least some explosives can be made in such a way as to direct their energy, and, in fact, shaped charges are killing many of our soldiers in Iraq.
Also, as I have stated many times, demolition is not identically equal to explosives, and the full story has not been told.... Anybody who can look at the mysterious collapsing spire and call it's disintegration into powder in the space of 3 seconds either a free fall collapse or an explosion needs to get their eyesight checked. Frankly, I find the hypothesis of massive fraud more plausible than either of these 2 non-starters. Is it possible that all the videos and stills, from different angles, were all faked? I wish somebody would look into this hypothesis - I certainly can't.
This forum needs a better search capability....
2Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:"
I rest my point
You forgot to say, "No punt intended"
Fascinating how different people's emotions are. Some feel sorry for prideful airheads, while others feel sorry for innocent people in Iraq.
QUESTION: Which one of these children blew up the twin towers?
ANSWER: NONE! We need to check our own backyard
Uhhhh, I don't think I said (or implied) that thermite burning for days & weeks would produce no more than a wiff of H2S. Go back and read it again properly YID (without bias), and I think you'll find that I said, ... if it wasn't the diasite formula burning in the basement, and just regular thermite (or formulations that don't use sulphur as the binder), then it would not produce H2S AT ALL). Don't you see how the sophism and semantics you use detracts from your credibility? Your statement above simply sets up a 'straw-man' by misquoting me, which you then proceed to gleefully attack. People who use such tactics quickly lose their objectivitiy and credibilty in these types of debates.
Im not going to waste bandwidth, by again quoting metamars chastisement, but as far as I am concerned he has you nailed to a T.
If you were honestly debating this issue you would take the list of factors which I presented regarding the underground fires and show point by point how normal gravity-driven collapse scenarios can account for all those factors. As I don't believe this CAN be done (and you certainly have NOT attempted to address that list in an honest rational debating style), you demonstrate again your unflinching bias with regard to the questions we are attempting to dicuss in a rational and un-emotional way... well, at least some of us.
As far as the implied 'ridiculousness' of hearing theories & speculations regarding mini-nukes & space based weapons, I honestly don't see what you find so outrageous about those things. Are you claiming that 'YOU' (or the public) is fully aware of all top secret weaponry projects the US HAS in it's arsenal. Now THERE's a TOTALLY Ridiculous statement ranking right up there with the Amazing Bowling Ball Experiment, the Amazing Billiard Ball Theory, and the Amazing Basement Bellows theory.
According to your implied proposition anyone who thinks the US has Secret Weaponry is an 'idiot' --- the average man-on-the-street knows everything about what's going on in the Ultra-Secret Star Wars (and other Black Projects) military programs... (I saw it all explained on NOVA and Popular Mechanics --- Right?)
Ask your father (I assume he was around during the last World War), If he had ANY INKLING that Nuclear Bombs were in development and operational PRIOR to their USE in Japan.
I cannot recall metamars (or anyone else for that matter on this thread) stating boldly with strong convictions that it WAS or MUST HAVE BEEN a mini-nuke. Like-wise with 'space-beams'. but, you seem to think that 'possibilities' are IMPOSSIBLE just because it hasn't been proven with some kind of confession or signed work-order from 'the perps'. They are certainly NOT IMPOSSIBLE, (even though they may be unlikely according to the actual facts we have at our disposal today), nevertheless these 'far-out' things are Certainly MORE LIKELY than EVER finding a work-order (or signed confession) from black opts 'spooks' capable of carrying out such seemingly physics defying acts.
Sounds like you've got a pretty impressive background in witchcraft.
To tell you the truth, I don't really care about there stupid finger signs, it's just all the murders that I take issue with.
But regarding another one of bush's famous finger signs, I think most of us understand this one...
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
I'll assume your just being SARCASTIC, because anyone with intelligence understands the elementary rules in expert witnesses.
If the prosecution pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the prosecution.
If the defense pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the defense.
I know this is just a hypothetical joke, because who would be the one hiring the guy/girl?
If you payed the guy, and his report was true, which concluded control demolition, do you honestly think the pancake people would believe it?
And if a fairy tale person payed for the report, would you be surprised that he concluded the towers came down as a result of pancakes???
Of course in our make believe fantasy world everyone with a PHD is honest and trustworthy and would never be influenced by financial gain.
Is this really the physics board or did I accidentally wind up in teletubby land
In fact, metemars, I've been watching you for a little while and have had a few puzzling questions in my mind as to why you seem to feel that the evidence is not clear enough to make a reasonable conclusion about what happened.
Are you a PLANT? A plant is normally someone you least expect. Someone that APPEARS to be for the truth in order to win people's confidence, such as in your case, you already know it was control demolition, as ANYBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND KNOWS THAT, so you have to come off as a person who seems to support the CD view, just enough to win people's confidence in you and gordon.
And then when people least expect it, you subtly introduce ridiculous and highly IRRELEVANT STATEMENTS in your analysis, which have absolutely nothing to do with reality, but they are very subtle bits of information.
And these tiny little bits of twisted information stack up and then are manipulated in such a way so as to lead people away from the truth. And of course most of the people on this board are ignorant as the heathen and don't have enough common sense to see what your doing.
I mean the fairy tale supporters are no surprise, their foolishness is out in the open, but you're more cleaver and are able to hide your true intentions so that you can subtly sway people away from the truth, and because most of the people have weak minds they're not able to resist.
But I've been watching you enough to see what your doing. I've been patient and have held my judgment for a while, as I didn't want to prematurely judge the situation. In fact I introduced a few posts to watch your reaction, and although you've tried to avoid these things as much as you can, the truth has a way of exposing people.
Don't feel too bad, we've all messed up in our lives and have all played the harlot, and I'm sure it must be embarrassing to be exposed, but I'm sure you'll get over it. And of course, since most of the people are far too ignorant to see past their own facades, it's doubtful that they'll be able to see past yours.
But here's some of the clues that really give you away.
#1. Leading people to believe we need more evidence before we can reach any conclusions about what happened.
That's the first give away, in fact people with true intelligence know that this statement is fraudulent and insincere on it's face.
#2. Making a big issue out of the free-fall speed, when that is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, because in truth it is the buildings fell at virtual free-fall speed enough TO PROVE NO RESISTANCE, and because of your lack of knowledge and/or dishonesty you attempt to persuade people that they didn't fall at free fall speed, which is ridiculous.
First of all, what are you basing your incorrect theories on? The governments information? Intelligent people know that's like asking the wolf for unbiased info about who really stole the chicken. Or my other analogy. It's like watching you ask OJ Simpson if he killed those people, and then coming back saying you have proof, OJ's own testimony.
#3 Trying to convince people not to believe their own eyes, but rather to put their trust in people. Another words "Don't think for yourself", but rather put your confidence in someone with a PhD.
This is one of the biggest give aways, that you are just a typical plant, trying to sway people away from the truth, as you're trying to convince people to disregard any evidence they have, throw it in the trash, and then wait until some bought off prostitute issues some kind of report.
#4 Implying that we need more evidence to reach a conclusion.
That's another dead give away as to your insincerity. As if legitimate people need more proof. This type of obvious misleading advise goes right along with what the deceivers try to do, which is to persuade people not to form an opinion about what they've seen.
As I said, the fairy tale, pancake heads on this board, such as Arthur, yedidit, and etc. etc. are obvious, admitted child killers, who openly support the killings in Afghanistan and Iraq, and of course the possibility of Iran on the horizon. They are queens out of the closet.
But you sir have been hiding your true intentions for far too long. Consider yourself EXPOSED.
I'll assume your just being SARCASTIC, because anyone with intelligence understands the elementary rules in expert witnesses.
If the prosecution pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the prosecution.
If the defense pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the defense.
I know this is just a hypothetical joke, because who would be the one hiring the guy/girl?
If you payed the guy, and his report was true, which concluded control demolition, do you honestly think the pancake people would believe it?
And if a fairy tale person payed for the report, would you be surprised that he concluded the towers came down as a result of pancakes???
Of course in our make believe fantasy world everyone with a PHD is honest and trustworthy and would never be influenced by financial gain.
Is this really the physics board or did I accidentally wind up in teletubby land
Your assumption is completely wrong. I am dead serious.
The goal is to hire somebody honest and impartial, not to mention unafraid. Bev Harris hired a scientist, but you are assuming that we cannot successfully do so.
I say you're wrong, and in any event, you'll recall that the reason I gave for doing so is to create a document that activists can then distribute to academics, which essentially constitutes a peer review (of sorts). Hopefully it will spark an honest debate, and the results of which will stand on it's own.
I am not interested in hiring a scientist who states, "In view of my many years of experience, the government version of collapse is a Fairy Tale" or "In view of my many years of experience, the government version of collapse is not a Fairy Tale".
I AM interested in hiring a scientists who has a good reputation, and analyzes the buildings' collapses in a quantitative way, with assumptions and methodology CLEARLY laid out, in a manner consistent with the best his/her discipline has to offer. No matter what the scientist concludes, the paper should be solid enough to be able to present to peers in the construction engineering community.
I forgot to mention this, but another aspect of the desired paper is a thorough analysis of the applicability of Bazant Zhou. My expectation is that the paper will be thoroughly rebutted as essentially useless.
I find it a bit odd that you are a nay-sayer. Did you not know that science is a consensual affair, and that there are no "popes" in science, even if, unfortunately, there are cliques and yes, whores? Do you avoid going to major cities because you know that somewhere there are whores there, or do you simply go and stay out of the red light districts? (It's a rhetorical question - I'm NOT asking you about your personal morality.)
I know little about expert witnesses. I do know a bit about academia, and my hope is to spark a serious debate there, not win a lawsuit. With such a corrupt and cowardly government, winning lawsuits hardly seems likely, though, of course, I wish anybody luck attempting that. NY State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer was handed lots of evidence, sits on it until this day, and will probably sit on it for all eternity.
We should be so lucky. Why don't you ask your handlers? I think it's rather obvious why you find the notion of hiring a Ph.D. Construction Engineer to analyse the WTC collapse to be so, hmmmm, what's the word, unnecessary. This is, after all, the most relevant discipline, all your blathering nonsense notwithstanding. This is a no-brainer, if there ever was one, and even people with half a brain should immediately understand it's desirability.
Since Steven Jones has called for a large, international investigation, including engineers, your "position" is not only wrong, it's not even consistent.
FWIW, I had you sized up correctly from the first few few of your ludicrous posts.
Too bad there's not an Ignore feature on this forum....
A Note to Activists
Please take careful note of the following:
1) The lack of encouragement of the popes for my call to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer. Obviously, if they believed their tripe, one expects that they would welcome such an event, as it would work to definitively support their position. They should be happy to have us disabuse ourselves of our "fantasy", at our own nickel, no less.
2) The "coming out" of steve1957, who has claimed to "expose" me, but who should have, if he was sincere, WELCOMED the opportunity to substantiate "our" position.
I interpret both of these observations as pointing to the desirability of my suggestion.
originally posted by Foxx
Uhhhh, I don't think I said (or implied) that thermite burning for days & weeks would produce no more than a wiff of H2S
Go back and read it again properly YID (without bias), and I think you'll find that I said, ... if it wasn't the diasite formula burning in the basement, and just regular thermite (or formulations that don't use sulphur as the binder), then it would not produce H2S AT ALL)..
No diasite begs the question, what was it?
Burning for days or weeks
Begs the question, how could that much be installed in the towers without anyone noticing?
There would be NO rotting bodies at the WTC on the morning of 9/11. They have to be dead first. Did this chemical compound(which in your mind either is or isn't thermite and is or isn't diasite if it is thermite) have some type of delay on it that would cause it not to start reacting until those bodies staarted rotting?
If so this begs the question of how sucha device could survive the collapse of two 110 story buildings?
There would be NO rotting bodies at the WTC on the morning of 9/11. They have to be dead first. Did this chemical compound(which in your mind either is or isn't thermite and is or isn't diasite if it is thermite) have some type of delay on it that would cause it not to start reacting until those bodies staarted rotting?
If so this begs the question of how sucha device could survive the collapse of two 110 story buildings?
Don't you see how the sophism and semantics you use detracts from your credibility? Your statement above simply sets up a 'straw-man' by misquoting me, which you then proceed to gleefully attack. People who use such tactics quickly lose their objectivitiy and credibilty in these types of debates.
Your sophistry is invoking some type of explanation and when confronted with facts that contradict your theory, you simply change the theory.
First it was diasite, then just powder thermite now it is an unknown thermite like chemical that burns more slowly.
Which factors? The underground heat? I don't knwo but simply picking something out of the air seems to be your process in 'explaining' such things. If thermite or some now unknown chemical incindiary was used then show some sort of evidence that it was used. I do recall that your previous foray into such was to show the sulfur concentrations in the samples from the river. Well you have now abandoned the diasite thus no sulfur to react with that 'lake of water' thus no H2S. So what is your evidence now other than the underground heat itself?
Answer: you don't have any(least not that you have shown.
Yet despite this you contend that it is now up to mme to prove that gravity collapse and available fuels could account for the underground fires.
That sir is hypocrisy, a close relative of sophistry.
Which factors? The underground heat? I don't knwo but simply picking something out of the air seems to be your process in 'explaining' such things. If thermite or some now unknown chemical incindiary was used then show some sort of evidence that it was used. I do recall that your previous foray into such was to show the sulfur concentrations in the samples from the river. Well you have now abandoned the diasite thus no sulfur to react with that 'lake of water' thus no H2S. So what is your evidence now other than the underground heat itself?
Answer: you don't have any(least not that you have shown.
Yet despite this you contend that it is now up to mme to prove that gravity collapse and available fuels could account for the underground fires.
That sir is hypocrisy, a close relative of sophistry.
As I don't believe this CAN be done (and you certainly have NOT attempted to address that list in an honest rational debating style), you demonstrate again your unflinching bias with regard to the questions we are attempting to dicuss in a rational and un-emotional way... well, at least some of us.
Your 'emotion' shines through just fine Foxx. You post and post about JFK, JFK jr., and Pearl Harbor, Kent State and your hate of the Bush administration and the neo-cons, here and at other forums yet you wish to have me believe that you are unemotional in your theorizing about the events of 9/11?
Once again, I hate Geo.W.Bush and his administration. I believe that at best the man is out of his league being the POTUS. He is an idiot. Despite all of that I cannot see that there is any evidence that he or any of his administration actually planned and caused to happen the events of 9/11 much less enhanced it by planting bombs or utilizing exotic weaponry.
Therein lies the problem. You see no problem in invoking such exotic devices even with no evidence that they actually exist or that the existed in Manhattan on 9/11.
I require something more than a 'could'a been'.
Therein lies the problem. You see no problem in invoking such exotic devices even with no evidence that they actually exist or that the existed in Manhattan on 9/11.
I require something more than a 'could'a been'.
According to your implied proposition anyone who thinks the US has Secret Weaponry is an 'idiot' --- the average man-on-the-street knows everything about what's going on in the Ultra-Secret Star Wars (and other Black Projects) military programs... (
Se above. No, I do not claim that I know all about the military's secret weaponry nor that such things may exist. However invoking such things is tantamount to invoking magic.
He was 13 when the war ended. He may or may not have any inkling that it existed or not. Irrelevent though. No one is stating that the military used sucha weapon in secret against its own people.
He was 13 when the war ended. He may or may not have any inkling that it existed or not. Irrelevent though. No one is stating that the military used sucha weapon in secret against its own people.
I cannot recall metamars (or anyone else for that matter on this thread) stating boldly with strong convictions that it WAS or MUST HAVE BEEN a mini-nuke. Like-wise with 'space-beams'. but, you seem to think that 'possibilities' are IMPOSSIBLE just because it hasn't been proven with some kind of confession or signed work-order from 'the perps'. They are certainly NOT IMPOSSIBLE, (even though they may be unlikely according to the actual facts we have at our disposal today), nevertheless these 'far-out' things are Certainly MORE LIKELY than EVER finding a work-order (or signed confession) from black opts 'spooks' capable of carrying out such seemingly physics defying acts.
You realize that you started this out by saying no one has stated that they have strong convictions about such exotica and ended it by stating that it is " MORE LIKELY than EVER ".
If you misspoke that last sentence then you better correct it. Otherwise you have two contradictory statements in the same paragraph.
_________________________
Metamars, you seem to have gotten your back up about what I have said about your theories.
Too bad really. However if it is my tone that bothers you then please note that twice I have been told to not use the term 'CT', that it is offensive. I have done so but I still get called 'shill' and you characterize my beliefs as 'fairy tales'. If you don't like my characterization of your theories then please tell me what you would like them referred to as.
This keeps coming up. What 'vaporized' steel?
How much? Got a percentage of steel used in the towers that was powderized or vaoprized?
Please show a link to those "OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES".
You , I suppose refer to the few instances of 'eroded' steel refered to in IIRC, the NIST report. However both you and others seem to want to imply that tons of steel was vaporized. That requires some proof IMHO.
I love the smell of paranoia in the morning!
Happens every time on these 9/11 kook threads.
Leave these clowns alone for a while and their delusions begin to focus on each other.
Hilarious.
Fascinating how different people's emotions are. Some feel sorry for prideful airheads, while others feel sorry for innocent people in Iraq.
QUESTION: Which one of these children blew up the twin towers?
ANSWER: NONE! We need to check our own backyard
The REAL Question: Which of these were killed by Sunni TERRORISTS (you know the ones that Steve1957 supports via his web site)?
_Jan. 5, 2006: A suicide bombing in Ramadi that kills 56 people and a suicide blast near a Shiite Muslim shrine in Karbala that kills 63.
_Jan. 4, 2006: A suicide bomber strikes a Shiite funeral east of Baqouba, killing at least 32 mourners.
_Nov. 24, 2005: A suicide bomber blows up his car outside a hospital south of Baghdad while U.S. troops are handing out candy and food to children, killing 30 people.
_Nov. 19, 2005: A suicide bomber detonates his car in a crowd of Shiite Muslim mourners north of Baghdad, killing at least 36 people.
_Nov. 18, 2005: Near-simultaneous suicide bombings kill 74 worshipers at two Shiite mosques near the Iranian border.
_Nov. 10, 2005: A suicide bomber blows himself up in a Baghdad restaurant killing 35 people.
_Oct. 29, 2005: A truck bomb attack against Shiite civilians in the farming village of Huweder kills 30 people.
_Oct. 11, 2005: A suicide car bomb explodes in a crowded open market in Tal Afar, killing at least 30 people.
_Sept. 29, 2005: Three suicide attackers detonate car bombs in the mostly Shiite town of Balad, north of Baghdad, killing at least 102 people.
_Sept. 17, 2005: A remote-controlled car bomb rips through a produce market in a poor Shiite neighborhood on the outskirts of Baghdad, killing at least 30 people.
_Sept. 14, 2005: A suicide car bomber strikes as day laborers gather shortly after dawn in a heavily Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad, killing 112 people.
_Aug. 17, 2005: Three car bombs explode near a bus station in Baghdad and at a nearby hospital, killing up to 43 people.
_July 16, 2005: Suicide bomber detonates explosives strapped to his body at a gas station near a Shiite mosque in Musayyib, killing at least 54 people.
_March 10, 2005: A suicide bomber blows himself up at a Shiite mosque in the northern city of Mosul, killing at least 47 people.
_Dec. 19, 2004: Car bombs tear through a Najaf funeral procession and Karbala's main bus station, killing at least 60 people.
_Sept. 30, 2004: A series of bombings in Baghdad kill 35 children and seven adults as U.S. troops hand out candy at a ceremony to inaugurate a sewage treatment plant.
_Sept. 14, 2004: A car bomb rips through a market near a Baghdad police headquarters killing at least 59 people.
_July 29, 2004: A suicide car bomb devastates a street in Baqouba, killing 70 people.
_March 2, 2004: Coordinated blasts from suicide bombers, mortars and planted explosives strike Shiite shrines in Karbala and Baghdad, killing at least 181 people.
Great people to associate yourself with STEVE.
That's about 1,000 people, mostly all Shiite, many of them children, at bus stops, markets, funerals and mosques. I left off the relatively few attacks on police stations, since they conceivably have a "military" reason. The attacks listed were ALL against unarmed civilians.
Yeah, those terrorists you support on your web site are real nice people.
Arthur
I most certainly do not imply that tons of steel was vaporized. The very fact that some of it was "vaoprized" (sic) is irrefutable proof that forces other than 2 terrorist-laden aircraft fueled by a hatred for western values were responsible for the demise of the twin towers (and not forgetting wtc7).
PAY PER VIEW HERE
HERE'S THE LINK TO THE CACHED VERSION
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...by_collapse.htm
PAY PER VIEW HERE
HERE'S THE LINK TO THE CACHED VERSION
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...by_collapse.htm
2.8.1 Observations and Findings
a. The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.
b. Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.
c. The sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.
d. The high concentration of sulfides in the grain boundaries of the corroded regions of the steel occurred due to copper diffusing from the high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steel combining with iron and sulfur, making both discrete and continuous sulfides in the steel grain boundaries.
8.2.8 Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination
Two structural steel samples from the WTC site were observed to have unusual erosion patterns. One sample is believed to be from WTC 7 and the other from either WTC 1 or WTC 2
8.2.8.2 Recommendations
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 constitute an unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this was the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch8.pdf
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/20...ring/steel.html
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/20...ring/steel.html
The principal clue leading us to the existence of the rogue network behind 9/11 is the “Angel is next” threat. Since hasty attempts to deny that this ever existed came soon after 9/11, we pause to document the evidence that this call really did take place.
In an interview with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday, National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice confirmed that the September 11 threat against President Bush’s life included a secret code name.
SNOW: Sept. 11 there was a report that there was a coded message that
said, “We’re going to strike Air Force One” that was using specific coded
language and made the threat credible. Is that true?
RICE: That is true.
SNOW: So we have a mole somewhere?
RICE: It’s not clear how this coded name was gotten. We’re a very open
society and I don’t think it’s any surprise to anyone that leaks happen. So,
I don’t know -- it’s possible the code name leaked a long time ago and was
just used.
SNOW: How on earth would that happen?
RICE: I don’t know. I don’t know. We’re obviously looking very hard at
the situation. But I will tell you that it was plenty of evidence from our
point of view to have special measures taken at that moment to make sure
the president was safe
Yes, Foxx there are 'wack-jobs' in the world.
QUOTE
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE | ||
| NIST's Report gives the reader no clue of how unprecedented and unexpected the total collapses of these skyscrapers were. Rather, it suggests that total collapses of high-rise buildings are normal events, but usually happen less suddenly. In our cities, there has been no experience with a disaster of such magnitude, nor has there been any in which the total collapse of a high-rise building occurred so rapidly and with little warning. (p xli/43) QUOTE (adoucette @ Jan 7 2006, 09:54 PM) Total BS. What WAS unprecedented was large high speed passenger jets running into these steel skyscrapers. It does not AT ALL suggest that collapse is a normal event, in fact stating that the buildings probably would have stood, even with the severe damage and fires, had they had decent fire proofing. The last sentence is absolutely true. Of course, the fact is no other high rise steel building has been run into by a passenger jet at high speed either. What a crock. Arthur QUOTE (->
Hmmmm... now he claims the NIST statement is a crock Amazing... Simply Amazing... |
Foxx sometimes has trouble with reading comprehension. Allow me to make it easier for Foxx(or at least try).
The 'crock' and 'B.S.' that Arthur refers to (perhaps indelicately) is the statement that NIST has characterized the collapses as a normal event. NIST certainly never states such a thing. Unprecedented IS the fact that never before have two large, fast aircraft been plowed into buildings deliberately and eventually resulting in their collapse. Also unprecedented is the scale of the disaster which is a direct consequence of the size of the buildings(specifically their height).
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 7 2006, 11:47 PM)
QUOTE
Originally posted by adoucette
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Most people aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue and are just here to push their POLITICAL agenda.
Your red herrings about political agendas mean NOTHING to me (as a Canadian).
But your 'other point' of WHY people like yourself would waste inordinate amounts of your time & resources discussing 'issues' with THOSE YOU CLAIM are IDIOTS is very interesting.
Tell us the REAL REASON you waste SO MUCH of YOUR TIME talking to 'idiots' "Arthur"... ???
IF MOST PEOPLE 'aren't willing to waste their time on such a stupid subject with people who don't have a clue'... Why are YOU?
I can't tell you how much I appreciate you 'wasting your time' with us...
Good-bye 'Arthur'... pick up your paystub on the way out and please don't slam the door...
NEXT !!!
Come on Foxx, you post enough too. What is the name of the 'charitable organization' that pays you? Do they pay you by the word or by the post?
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 7 2006, 11:37 PM)
QUOTE
Originally posted by Adoucette
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
It was given SUBPEONA power, but that does not give it the ability to SEIZE any personal property.
Thus any NDA's that NIST signed were for the agreement that NIST would not release it without the OWNERS permission.
You REALLY ARE living in the fantasy world, Arthur.
Tell us, WHY have we not seen the videos related to the Pentagon attack which were confiscated by the FBI from the personal possession of non-governmental sites? (Like the gas station and hotel?)...
Yep... still believing the official Fairy Tale about the 'land of the free' and 'personal rights'...
Keep Dreaming... (sorry... I mean, "PLEASE WAKE UP")
When you have a 'gun' placed to your head, will you refuse to sign the 'dotted line'? Well, of course you still have the 'freedom' to REFUSE to sign. Don't get me wrong with your lack of imagination... by 'gun' I don't necessarily refer to a fire-arm. There are many different types of 'guns' (enticing rewards for 'co-operation')
The reason they will not release the videos is the Zacarias Moussaoui case. I thought he pleaded guilty?
http://www.flight77.info/govtreply/govermentsreply03.jpg
http://www.flight77.info/
QUOTE
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEMA Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. You folks have basically explained nothing significant with respect to the collapse. Never mind the anomalous features that clearly point to demolition, or at least away from the gravity driven Fairy Tales. You have not even, (no doubt because you cannot), explained how a local collapse would not be quickly arrested.
You all do an OK job of explaining the downward direction of the collapse, but that's about it.
Woo-hoo. We all knew that, anyway.
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this. Had Einstein insisted on denying the evidence and implication of the constancy of c in all frames of reference, we might have had to wait 10 more years for special relativity, and 25 more years for general relativity.
If I was a physics professor at a university, I would never want you as a graduate student. While you might make a competent physicist in an area where you have no emotional or other blindness, apparently your total inability or unwillingness to think outside of the box means that you would likely never make a great one.
As far as contributions to this thread, FEMA Fairy Tale believers have done some worthy debunking (yes, SOME of your arguments are worthwhile) and presented some valuable facts and evidence. I note with amusement, though, that some of the evidence presented to buttress the FEMA Fairy Tale viewpoint has done just the opposite.
Then too, some "explanations" are so outlandish, that their entertainment value must be appreciated even by their opponents. adoucette's Magical Bellows Theory certainly is a gold medal contender, here.
As for any convincing arguments for your Fairy Tales - forget about it.
================================================
Note to Activists:
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios. Not even a physicist will do. All the hours we spend looking up info and then posting, only to have "popes" repeat so much of the same nonsense, ad nauseum, should be teaching us a lesson. If we had worked at minimum wage jobs, we could have pooled our $$ and paid a Ph.D. construction engineer $100/hr for a day or two's work, and then have something we could present to the larger technical community.
That bothers me, and I hope it bothers other folks, too. If nothing else, to persist in this fashion is stupid.
Up until recently, I didn't mind listening to pope-ish pronouncements too much because a ) I had more unanswered question before than I do now and b ) the popes' challenges were eliciting some valuable research, in response. (E.g., we have the popes to thank, in part, for Gordon finally making his dramatic appearance. )
At this point, the popes have been roundly defeated here, but the real battle has hardly begun in academia, and I'm not sanguine about a real debate taking place. While it may have been virtuous to expend a lot of energy groping around, trying to get a handle on what FEMA and NIST should have done, I don't think that's the case any longer.
So, let's think outside the box about a non-physics problem. What is the optimal way to pool our resources to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer?
My own suggestion is to put Professor James Fetzer in charge of such an effort. He has a podium, which he can use to solicit funds, and he strikes me as extremely ethical. I note, with some dismay, that he holds certain beliefs in the 911 arena which I find implausible or just plain wrong (I'm pretty sure that he has spoken about a "free fall" time of collapse, rather than "near free fall", e.g.), however that is secondary. My idea is not to ask HIM to do a technical analysis, but to have him take the lead in making this happen.
(No, I haven't run this by him, and I apologize in advance if I embarrass him.
)Finally, I also note that we may likely have to go outside the US to find a suitable construction engineering candidate. Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org had to go outside the US to hire a suitable "scientist" who was willing to go on record with respect to the fraudulent electronic voting systems here in the US. US scientists would tell her privately what she already suspected, but not publicly.
I'm ashamed to say that the US is home to an awful lot of wusses....
8.2.8 Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination
Two structural steel samples from the WTC site were observed to have unusual erosion patterns. One sample is believed to be from WTC 7 and the other from either WTC 1 or WTC 2
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch8.pdf
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Dec 21 2005, 08:34 AM)
andrew, where are you ?
Have you reached any conclusions over the last 129 pages ?
Heavy Metal
The steel from the debris of the World Trade Centers provides evidence that the buildings were demolished.
Specifically, metal tests on steel remains from the world trade center show something never before seen in building fires: reactions which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." Sulfur and other elements commonly used in high-explosives were also found. The New York Times described this as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." (this quote is contained in the following link)
As stated by the scientists who studied this phenomenon:
"A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges -- which are curled like a paper scroll -- have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes -- some larger than a silver dollar -- let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending -- but not holes"
Moreover, an expert stated about World Trade Center building 7 (the third building in the World Trade Center to collapse on 9/11):
"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view); or see a cached version of the article here.
Steel does not evaporate unless it is heated to at least 5000 degrees Fahrenheit. Everyone agrees that fires from conventional building fires are thousands of degrees cooler than that.
In addition, there was molten metal running under ground zero for months after 9/11. So far, no reports of molten metal from any previous building fire have surfaced.
And while some have attempted to argue that molten metal under the Twin Towers was caused by the enormous friction created by the collapse of the 110-story giants, building 7 -- which was only 47 stories high -- seems to have experienced the same temperatures as the Twin Towers. Specifically, this thermal image of ground zero with an overlay of the demolished buildings, taken five days after 9/11, shows that the debris under building 7 (the trapezoid-shaped building at the upper right) was about as hot as under the Twin Towers. See this web page (lower left) for an explanation of the thermal image, this aerial photo showing the shape of WTC7, and the maps contained here which confirms which building is building 7 on the thermal image. The friction argument simply doesn't work, since a 47-story building cannot have experienced nearly as much friction as 110-story buildings. And remember it was building 7 which experienced partial evaporation of its steel beams.
The sulfur and other unusual chemicals, gaping holes, partial evaporation of steel, and molten metal from the trade centers are therefore very strong evidence of controlled demolition.
full version at link below
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...eavy-metal.html
WHAT TEMPERATURE DOES STEEL HAVE TO REACH TO EVAPORATE ?
UNDER WHAT PROCESS COULD THIS BE ACHIEVED ?
Have you reached any conclusions over the last 129 pages ?
Heavy Metal
QUOTE
The steel from the debris of the World Trade Centers provides evidence that the buildings were demolished.
Specifically, metal tests on steel remains from the world trade center show something never before seen in building fires: reactions which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." Sulfur and other elements commonly used in high-explosives were also found. The New York Times described this as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." (this quote is contained in the following link)
As stated by the scientists who studied this phenomenon:
"A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges -- which are curled like a paper scroll -- have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes -- some larger than a silver dollar -- let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending -- but not holes"
Moreover, an expert stated about World Trade Center building 7 (the third building in the World Trade Center to collapse on 9/11):
"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view); or see a cached version of the article here.
Steel does not evaporate unless it is heated to at least 5000 degrees Fahrenheit. Everyone agrees that fires from conventional building fires are thousands of degrees cooler than that.
In addition, there was molten metal running under ground zero for months after 9/11. So far, no reports of molten metal from any previous building fire have surfaced.
And while some have attempted to argue that molten metal under the Twin Towers was caused by the enormous friction created by the collapse of the 110-story giants, building 7 -- which was only 47 stories high -- seems to have experienced the same temperatures as the Twin Towers. Specifically, this thermal image of ground zero with an overlay of the demolished buildings, taken five days after 9/11, shows that the debris under building 7 (the trapezoid-shaped building at the upper right) was about as hot as under the Twin Towers. See this web page (lower left) for an explanation of the thermal image, this aerial photo showing the shape of WTC7, and the maps contained here which confirms which building is building 7 on the thermal image. The friction argument simply doesn't work, since a 47-story building cannot have experienced nearly as much friction as 110-story buildings. And remember it was building 7 which experienced partial evaporation of its steel beams.
The sulfur and other unusual chemicals, gaping holes, partial evaporation of steel, and molten metal from the trade centers are therefore very strong evidence of controlled demolition.
full version at link below
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...eavy-metal.html
WHAT TEMPERATURE DOES STEEL HAVE TO REACH TO EVAPORATE ?
UNDER WHAT PROCESS COULD THIS BE ACHIEVED ?
It's easier to believe what the government says, buy a six pack and fall asleep in front of American Idol
Joe Six Pack also highlights the Bush connection to John W. Hinckley Jnr., Reagan's would be assassin, as being another one of our fantasies.
Is it a fantasy that the Associated Press reported on March 31st 1981 that the Hinckley family were scheduled to have dinner with the Bush family?
Is this another urban legend?
On the subject of 9/11, anyone who still believes that the attack was perpetrated by nineteen 'fundamental jihadists hell bent on destroying America' who, the night before the grandest terror attack of all time, were getting shitfaced drunk in a tit bar, at the behest of a dying man spending his time equally between being on a kidney dialysis machine and in a cave, would have been sorely disappointed recently when Santa Claus didn't drop down their chimney and leave bundles of gifts.
Anyone who still believes the 'official' fairytale of 9/11, a yarn that we are told vaporized the bodies of two thirds of the victims yet produced photo ID's within hours at two of the different crash sites identifying the hijackers, would do well to remove their baby teeth from under the pillow.
The lies promulgated about 9/11 are so legion that the deceivers are starting to trip over their own twisted tongues. Larry Silverstein claims his "pull it" comment meant to evacuate firefighters from WTC Building 7 and yet Popular Mechanics' own 9/11 debunking special stated that there were no firefighters in the building whatsoever.
The tooth fairy doesn't exist. It's time to grow up and face reality. We have a government criminally hell bent on destroying America, a government that openly and brazenly lied a country into a war that cost the lives of thousands of US soldiers and countless hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, 'liberated' out of their very existence.
Judging from recent history alone, we should automatically disbelieve anything government tells us and let them do the work to prove otherwise. Their track record on telling the truth would put a used car salesman to shame.
The catalyst of the blossoming rise of the alternative media was the fact that the mainstream media deliberately engaged in spin and deception by regurgitating state mantra as gospel. This became abundantly clear and people started to search for sources of information that at least tried to tell the truth.
QUOTE (metamars+Jan 8 2006, 07:56 AM)
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEM Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. [
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this.
metamars, I have absolutely no emotional attachment to the official record and certainly not to the present US administration.
Why is it so common among those who believe as you do that anyone who does not believe that the towers were blown by explosives or that a plane hit the Pentagon, are somehow lovers of the neo-con agenda or the Republicans in power?
Talk about emotion! Emotion is the only reason that I can think of that would have you or Foxx or steve1957stating that.
As far as fairy tales go I consider your "out of the box" solutions to be exactly that. A fairy tale at worst, I suppose, a too vivid an imagination more likely.
Mini-nukes may exist but ones that do not require a fusion trigger? I do not know about that. Even if it does exist you have no evidence whatsoever that one was installed in the towers. The mini-nuke is the best of the bunch of exotic solutions to the supposed puzzle that you have proposed. There is no evidence that a space based beam weapon is in orbit nor is there any evidence that one was employed on 9/11. If you have anything other than 'well it could be" then please show it.
This is a lengthy topic which I have just recently found and have read through a good portion but have not yet made it all the way (about 45 pages). There is a good deal of extraneous material and considerable sniping on both sides which makes getting through the posts somewhat arduous. It seems one of those topics in which it is difficult to restrain one's emotional response.
I do have a couple of what I think are basic physics questions that I have not seen covered. It is possible that I they are covered in the posts I have not yet read and if so I apologize.
This thread got started with questions about the fall rates of the WTC towers. Several posts stated, IIRC, that the towers did not fall at "near" free fall rates by comparing the time of fall to the free fall time in a vacuum. This does not seem to be the correct comparison to me. Some have mentioned air resistance but I have not seen any calculations for the associated free fall times. If someone could help me with those calculations or point out some resources for working them out (preferably on-line as I don't have easy access to textbooks) I would be greatly interested. Again, if I missed those somewhere in this thread I apologize.
Also, there has been some mention that because there is clearly debris ahead of (i.e. lower than) the collapse zone of the buildings (WTC 1 and 2) they could not be falling at free fall rates. However, its seems to me, assuming the explosive demolition hypothesis is true for a moment, that the initial velocity of this debris should not be taken as zero and that at least some, and perhaps much, of it would have a "downward" component of its initial velocity well in excess of zero which would distort the fall rates. Intuitively (we have to start somewhere), I would expect some material to be ejected up, out, and down, and this seems to be corroborated by the photos I have seen. I am not claiming the explosive demoltion hypothesis is true, nor am I claiming my intuition is correct or reliable, or that I have accurately interpreted the photos. I am seeking clarifications (or belittlement if that suits your temperament ).
I do have a couple of what I think are basic physics questions that I have not seen covered. It is possible that I they are covered in the posts I have not yet read and if so I apologize.
This thread got started with questions about the fall rates of the WTC towers. Several posts stated, IIRC, that the towers did not fall at "near" free fall rates by comparing the time of fall to the free fall time in a vacuum. This does not seem to be the correct comparison to me. Some have mentioned air resistance but I have not seen any calculations for the associated free fall times. If someone could help me with those calculations or point out some resources for working them out (preferably on-line as I don't have easy access to textbooks) I would be greatly interested. Again, if I missed those somewhere in this thread I apologize.
Also, there has been some mention that because there is clearly debris ahead of (i.e. lower than) the collapse zone of the buildings (WTC 1 and 2) they could not be falling at free fall rates. However, its seems to me, assuming the explosive demolition hypothesis is true for a moment, that the initial velocity of this debris should not be taken as zero and that at least some, and perhaps much, of it would have a "downward" component of its initial velocity well in excess of zero which would distort the fall rates. Intuitively (we have to start somewhere), I would expect some material to be ejected up, out, and down, and this seems to be corroborated by the photos I have seen. I am not claiming the explosive demoltion hypothesis is true, nor am I claiming my intuition is correct or reliable, or that I have accurately interpreted the photos. I am seeking clarifications (or belittlement if that suits your temperament
).
what causes steel to vaporize ?
metamars, dont know what the best course of action would be but just to let you know I would be willing to add my support to any reasonable course you think may be fruitful.
I feel your frustration but you may be too hard on your fellow countrymen. Take heart from the fact those most dynamic in exposing this grotesque lie are largely patriotic Americans.
I suspect that many of those supporters of the lie may not be, at least they may not be Americans first and foremost as is the case with many in positions of power and influence in your country.
All the best.
I feel your frustration but you may be too hard on your fellow countrymen. Take heart from the fact those most dynamic in exposing this grotesque lie are largely patriotic Americans.
I suspect that many of those supporters of the lie may not be, at least they may not be Americans first and foremost as is the case with many in positions of power and influence in your country.
All the best.
QUOTE (metamars+Jan 8 2006, 07:56 AM)
QUOTE
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEMA Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. You folks have basically explained nothing significant with respect to the collapse. Never mind the anomalous features that clearly point to demolition, or at least away from the gravity driven Fairy Tales. You have not even, (no doubt because you cannot), explained how a local collapse would not be quickly arrested.
You all do an OK job of explaining the downward direction of the collapse, but that's about it.
Woo-hoo. We all knew that, anyway.
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this. Had Einstein insisted on denying the evidence and implication of the constancy of c in all frames of reference, we might have had to wait 10 more years for special relativity, and 25 more years for general relativity.
If I was a physics professor at a university, I would never want you as a graduate student. While you might make a competent physicist in an area where you have no emotional or other blindness, apparently your total inability or unwillingness to think outside of the box means that you would likely never make a great one.
As far as contributions to this thread, FEMA Fairy Tale believers have done some worthy debunking (yes, SOME of your arguments are worthwhile) and presented some valuable facts and evidence. I note with amusement, though, that some of the evidence presented to buttress the FEMA Fairy Tale viewpoint has done just the opposite.
Then too, some "explanations" are so outlandish, that their entertainment value must be appreciated even by their opponents. adoucette's Magical Bellows Theory certainly is a gold medal contender, here.
As for any convincing arguments for your Fairy Tales - forget about it.
================================================
Note to Activists:
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios. Not even a physicist will do. All the hours we spend looking up info and then posting, only to have "popes" repeat so much of the same nonsense, ad nauseum, should be teaching us a lesson. If we had worked at minimum wage jobs, we could have pooled our $$ and paid a Ph.D. construction engineer $100/hr for a day or two's work, and then have something we could present to the larger technical community.
That bothers me, and I hope it bothers other folks, too. If nothing else, to persist in this fashion is stupid.
Up until recently, I didn't mind listening to pope-ish pronouncements too much because a ) I had more unanswered question before than I do now and b ) the popes' challenges were eliciting some valuable research, in response. (E.g., we have the popes to thank, in part, for Gordon finally making his dramatic appearance. )
At this point, the popes have been roundly defeated here, but the real battle has hardly begun in academia, and I'm not sanguine about a real debate taking place. While it may have been virtuous to expend a lot of energy groping around, trying to get a handle on what FEMA and NIST should have done, I don't think that's the case any longer.
So, let's think outside the box about a non-physics problem. What is the optimal way to pool our resources to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer?
My own suggestion is to put Professor James Fetzer in charge of such an effort. He has a podium, which he can use to solicit funds, and he strikes me as extremely ethical. I note, with some dismay, that he holds certain beliefs in the 911 arena which I find implausible or just plain wrong (I'm pretty sure that he has spoken about a "free fall" time of collapse, rather than "near free fall", e.g.), however that is secondary. My idea is not to ask HIM to do a technical analysis, but to have him take the lead in making this happen.
(No, I haven't run this by him, and I apologize in advance if I embarrass him.
)Finally, I also note that we may likely have to go outside the US to find a suitable construction engineering candidate. Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.org had to go outside the US to hire a suitable "scientist" who was willing to go on record with respect to the fraudulent electronic voting systems here in the US. US scientists would tell her privately what she already suspected, but not publicly.
I'm ashamed to say that the US is home to an awful lot of wusses....
Metamar,
I appreciate your contributions to the thread. You do not need permission or a consensus from the forum members to pursue your ideas. My suggestion would be email Gordon’s spreadsheet with his explanation to Professor James Fetzer and all 9/11 truth movement websites and see what response is generates( if that is OK with Gordon). Gordon has provided this free and their would be know cost involved. This opens the door for engineers to prove the analysis false or agree with it and do further analysis to support it. Gordon’s spreadsheet and analysis are so simple it should open the eyes of engineers that normally would not question the official theory. Another idea would be to start a new thread with all of Gordon’s and Andrews’s initial post then go to other forums asking people to debunk it.
This thread is becoming useless and nearly impossible to find relevant information as Lon Waters pointed out. In addition, arguing about free fall speed if explosives are used puzzles me. You are saying extra energy is being introduced from explosive but the forces are only directed horizontally and in a vertical upward direction. For obvious reasons this would be desired but almost impossible to achieve. Good luck and I would support a plan of action that has a reasonable chance of success.
QUOTE (yesitdid+Jan 8 2006, 05:31 PM)
QUOTE (metamars+Jan 8 2006, 07:56 AM)
Invoking unconventional hypotheses to explain unconventional phenomena is completely rational. Especially when the unconventional hypotheses have more going for them than the conventional ones. The unyielding efforts of some FEM Fairy Tale believers to try an fit square data into round holes is pathetic. [
Frankly, yesitdid, I doubt your sincerity, more than than I doubt your inability to understand this.
metamars, I have absolutely no emotional attachment to the official record and certainly not to the present US administration.
Why is it so common among those who believe as you do that anyone who does not believe that the towers were blown by explosives or that a plane hit the Pentagon, are somehow lovers of the neo-con agenda or the Republicans in power?
Talk about emotion! Emotion is the only reason that I can think of that would have you or Foxx or steve1957stating that.
As far as fairy tales go I consider your "out of the box" solutions to be exactly that. A fairy tale at worst, I suppose, a too vivid an imagination more likely.
Mini-nukes may exist but ones that do not require a fusion trigger? I do not know about that. Even if it does exist you have no evidence whatsoever that one was installed in the towers. The mini-nuke is the best of the bunch of exotic solutions to the supposed puzzle that you have proposed. There is no evidence that a space based beam weapon is in orbit nor is there any evidence that one was employed on 9/11. If you have anything other than 'well it could be" then please show it.
Your side has stated many accusations wrt motives, as has "my" side. I nomally avoid and even discourage this, and even with the post you quote, I say "I DOUBT your sincerity".
Perhaps you would like me to lie, but I won't. I will, though, stick with my policy of not commenting, in general, on motivation of somebody else, since it's ultimately unknowable.
Most everybody in my family, as well as most all my friends, that I have discussed this with, believe in FEMA Fairy Tale collapse scenarios. This includes a friend who has a Ph.D. in civil engineering, who I discussed it with for about 10 or 15 minutes.
Just before my Ph.D friend left for vacation over 4 months ago, I emailed him a link or two to 911 info, with a request that he consider it and get back to me. He still hasn't done so, and with 2 infant twins, I don't begrudge him his inability to prioritize my request.
I don't have a problem with people who believe in the FEMA Fairy Tale. But with so much evidence and basic physics pointing to something much more nefarious, if a person, such as yourself, keeps turning a blind eye to it or pretends that it's something that it isn't, I become, well, DUBIOUS.
If my Ph.D. friend ever gets around to looking at all the evidence that should have been headline news, I have little doubt that he'll change his mind OR, if by some chance he doesn't, I'm quite sure that he won't keep blabbering about "no evidence" for a demolition. He will say something like "I see what you mean, and though I haven't changed my mind, I must admit that I can't explain either the collapse itself, nor any of the anomalous phenomena you have pointed out."
Your pope-ishness gives you away as something other than a truth-teller.
The pope-ish pronouncements about "no evidence", when there is so much of it, reveal a mindset that doesn't seek the truth. And the pope-ish pronouncements which dismiss alternative hypotheses in favor of inferior ones, and furthermore present their inferior hypotheses as something more, reveal a mind actively seeking to construct a pseudo-reality. It would be one thing if you kept this pseudo-reality to yourself. But you are trying to convince others of it, and thus you are fulfilling a propagandistic function.
So yes, I do doubt your sincerity.
I don't really CARE what your agenda is, or even if you are consciously pursuing one at all. I also don't care if you're political or not, in an emotional way or not.
It's the observable gross distortions of your writing that is important, and all the blindness it implies.
Think of what a normal person who knew high school physics thinks of somebody else who maintains a free fall collapse time fiction, even AFTER seeing the photographic evidence presented IN THIS THREAD, and you should understand why I find you being insincere to be more likely than finding you merely mistaken.
Since you will doubtless maintiain your untenatble position, do you wish us well in combining resources in order to hire the mental muscle we need to obtain a more authoritative analysis, as I mentioned just recently? Since we have no intention of dropping the subject, you should be happy to have us disabuse ourselves from our "fantasy"......
Even Abraham Lincoln said, as great as this constitution may be, when the people depart from the Lord this country will be destroyed.
And it may be the christians who are the most guilty of departing from the Lord, as they profess to be ambassadors of Christ on one hand, while they support murder, deception, and every other abomination under the sun.
But let us not put all the blame on the christians alone, we're all guilty to some degree, maybe some more than others.
But as I was flicking through the channels I stopped at one of the false prophet, anti-christ, satan worshiping shows, IE; Jerry Falwell.
Not that anything is new, as the bible BOLDLY PROCLAIMS the things these evangelical, used car salesman, HALF-WITTED PREACHERS are doing is of the devil, meaning (the evil part of man, not a cartoon character)
And so as I was watching to see what the latest abomination of a message would be, (all the while making sure I was wearing my long boots symbolically speaking, as the dung gets very deep)
And lo and behold Jerry is CHANTING his typical bow down and worship bush speech and praise god for all the wonderful murders that we're accomplishing in Iraq, confirming how the bible says "Thou shalt steal, and thou shalt murder, and thou shalt worship little bush, and of course, thou shalt dig deep in your pockets and give Jerry Falwell lots of money" He also addressed some of the concerns his congregation has about the troops in Iraq and the war we're involved with.
Even though I've read the scriptures old and new hundreds of times, and it's embedded in my memory, I still have to re-read books and chapters and verses much of the time, for my own pleasure and also to re-confirm that these guys really are wolves in sheep's clothing, and that I haven't completely lost my mind.
And sure enough, IT'S WRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, & NOT CONFUSING. They are lying and what they say is completely the opposite of what is written in the scriptures, REALLY.
Because the scriptures really do say "Thou shall not murder" & and "Thou shall not steal" and "Thou shall not trespass" and contrary to the lie told by the evangelists, the bible does not say, "thou shall worship little bush, or even a false prophet or a wolf in sheep's clothing. Yes the bible says to worship God in spirit and in truth. The bible says "To love thy neighbor as thyself is the fulfillment of all the law and the prophets"
But back to the point, (AS IF ANY OF YOU GOD HATERS WILL EVEN BOTHER TO READ THIS) as I mention God, which is a complete abomination in the minds of most of you on this board, never the less, there may be a person or to that does drop by and read this, but here is what the respected reverend had to say, when asked by one of his flocks if they could pray to God to bring the troops home safely...
And Jerry said, "Absolutely not. I would never pray that God brings the troops home, until they are finished KILLING EVERY LAST TERRORIST IN THE MIDDLE EAST, or converting them"
Jerry then went on to praise bush about doing such a wonderful job in Iraq, and that THOSE PEOPLE, (in Iraq) did 9/11 (paraphrasing) and then Jerry went on to talk about how evil the LEFT, LIBERAL, ANTI-WAR people are in this country are because they FORGOT ABOUT 9/11. They forgot about what those evil people in Iraq did to us on 9/11.
All the while SELLING HIS MESSAGE that the people in Iraq did 9/11 and little bush is a great president for protecting us from those terrorists.
Needless to say, I already know the truth and know where his message is coming from and what the intended effect is. I also know that the word of the Lord is forever, which is why the verses are relevant for today...
2Thessalonians 2:11-12 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Now it seems to be very clear that Arthur for example does not see any resemblance between the collapse of the WTC buildings to that of a control demolition.
So it's one of two things.
1) Either Arthur is lying, and he knows they resembled the control demolition.
or
2) Arthur is blind and really can't see it.
Yes, it is possible that because little Arthur takes so much much pleasure in unrighteousness, including the slaughter of innocent babies in Iraq, that he is blinded and can't even see the resemblance.
And that's why talking with Arthur, yesdidit and other people who love the lie and hate the truth is usually fruitless, and a waste of time, because I can't say for sure whether their distorted visions are just lies they're trying to pass off to aid and abet in the murder of Innocent people, or if they are legitimately BLINDED by their pleasure in unrighteousness.
So, while I sometimes put these people in their rightful place, IE liars, I also understand that their lying may be for other underlying reasons that I'm not aware of. It could be that they share in most Americans desire to slaughter innocent people, or it could be for other reasons not known to me.
And so I place more responsibility at the feet of people who should know better. Another words, I understand the fairy tale supporters are nothing more than sick demented serial child killers, who lie, cheat and steal to justify their cause, while more responsibility is placed on people who do have enough intelligence to know that explosives were used.
It's not just about understanding the physics involved in 9/11 and being honest enough to proclaim that explosives were in fact used, based on all the evidence, BECAUSE THIS IS UNDEBATABLE. ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE FAIRY TALE IS LYING, and you can't legitimately debate with them about the facts, because it has nothing to do with the facts, it's about supporting their murderous heart, IE; their justification for slaughtering all those innocent children in Iraq.
Having fun on this board with physical evidence that PROVES BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT EXPLOSIVES WERE IN FACT USED might be fun for a while, but if any of you actually think these people like Arthur, yesdidit and other fairy tale supporters have one iota of interest in the truth or discovering what really happened, then your lying to yourself, because for the time present, facts and evidence have nothing to do with.
THEY ARE ADVOCATES FOR THE DEFENSE. Like OJ's lawyers mustering up any thing they can to defend their client, that is their mission. You might be better off trying to convince Johnnie Cocroach of OJ's guilt based on scientific evidence, Johnnie probably knew OJ was guilty more than most of us, but the last thing he wanted was the truth. Just like Arthur, yesdidit and other people who want to kill as many Muslims as they can, no matter how old or young. Not that killing all the Musilms is their end goal, as their end goal may be to prove that we are gods in our own eyes, and will rule the world. However, in order to rule the world and convince everyone that we are gods, there are many more Arabs that have to be killed.
And this is the final solution
And if you disagree, you probably share the same desire to kill all the terrorists, because remember, the goal of the Americans, republicans and democrats is to destroy EVERY LAST TERRORIST ON THE PLANET. And remember this, ANYONE WHO OPPOSES THE POLICIES OR THE WAYS OF THE US IS A TERRORIST, SO THAT MEANS YOU GOTTA KILL A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
You might as well learn to enjoy killing people who disagree with the American way of life, because if you're gonna be a proud patriotic American, then you gotta kill every last one of them, no matter how many there are.
What else can any of us expect from Arthur, yesdidit, etc. AT LEAST YOU KNOW WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM. At least we know they are liars and murderers in their heart. When I say "We know" I'm talking directly to people who love the truth, which probably excludes 90% of the people on this board, because Murder begins in the heart, even if you don't carry out the plan, if you think it in your heart, then according to Jesus (which is the truth) YOU'VE DONE IT.
yesdidit said I was emotional, and yes, he got that right, I do have feelings about innocent people getting slaughtered, yes it bother me a lot. Maybe if I was more like some of the people on this board it wouldn't bother me and I'd even enjoy watching all those people getting slaughtered.
In fact if I didn't have any emotions it wouldn't upset me that ANOTHER 17 AMERICANS WERE KILLED IN THE LAST 24 HOURS.
If I were only like Arthur and yesdidit I could feel good that more people are getting killed, including innocent Iraqi's and US soldiers, but as sick and disgusting as I am, it does bother me.
So either delete, throw this in the trash, avoid or maybe talk with monitor about my posts and see if you can get me kicked out of hear since I've gone way over board and broke the rules. I mentioned God in a good way.
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
QUOTE (Lon Waters+Jan 8 2006, 05:42 PM)
This is a lengthy topic which I have just recently found and have read through a good portion but have not yet made it all the way (about 45 pages). There is a good deal of extraneous material and considerable sniping on both sides which makes getting through the posts somewhat arduous. It seems one of those topics in which it is difficult to restrain one's emotional response.
I do have a couple of what I think are basic physics questions that I have not seen covered. It is possible that I they are covered in the posts I have not yet read and if so I apologize.
This thread got started with questions about the fall rates of the WTC towers. Several posts stated, IIRC, that the towers did not fall at "near" free fall rates by comparing the time of fall to the free fall time in a vacuum. This does not seem to be the correct comparison to me. Some have mentioned air resistance but I have not seen any calculations for the associated free fall times. If someone could help me with those calculations or point out some resources for working them out (preferably on-line as I don't have easy access to textbooks) I would be greatly interested. Again, if I missed those somewhere in this thread I apologize.
Also, there has been some mention that because there is clearly debris ahead of (i.e. lower than) the collapse zone of the buildings (WTC 1 and 2) they could not be falling at free fall rates. However, its seems to me, assuming the explosive demolition hypothesis is true for a moment, that the initial velocity of this debris should not be taken as zero and that at least some, and perhaps much, of it would have a "downward" component of its initial velocity well in excess of zero which would distort the fall rates. Intuitively (we have to start somewhere), I would expect some material to be ejected up, out, and down, and this seems to be corroborated by the photos I have seen. I am not claiming the explosive demoltion hypothesis is true, nor am I claiming my intuition is correct or reliable, or that I have accurately interpreted the photos. I am seeking clarifications (or belittlement if that suits your temperament ).
emphasis mine
Having watched movies which were reasonably closeup, it's obvious that most all of the ejecta is traveling horizontally when it crosses the planes demarcated by the foot print of the building. In fact, if anything there's a slight net upwards bias, due to the fact that the collapse is from top downwards. Thus, when a given floor "goes", there's less to obstruct it going upwards. Below the collapse zone, there are still the uncollapsed floors. It's also easy to tell from isolated squibs that the direction of demolition is outwards.
I myself have pointed out "streamers" which reveal downard acceleration not due to gravity, but these are a small part of the ejecta. Most of the ejecta is powder, so of course, air resistance will slow it down greatly. Thus, even if you could trace the path of most of this mass with any confidence, even the mass with downwards initial velocity would be so slowed that it wouldn't tell you what you really want to know.
It's the large chunks of "sublimating" building (and also non-sublimating columns) that came off early in the collapse, which should be used to "eyeball" a free fall time reference, and which are lower than other, more powder-like falling debris. Comparing the location of these chunks of building to the topmost portion of the undamaged corners - easily 20 floors worth, at only 1/3 - 2/3* through the collapse - puts the lie to the free-fall collapse time.
Truth be told, we can't clearly see when the exterior of the building has hit the ground. But we can infer what happens from photographic evidence before the obscuring debris had completely encircled the tower. Assuming an accelerated demolition which 'catches up' with the falling debris begs the question of "who cares?" since you are already assuming a demolition. Assuming an accelerated gravitational collapse which would exceed the rate of free falling, large metallic pieces of building, is unphysical, even if the rest of the building "decided" to collapse at free fall speed after a 20+ floor head start.
IIRC, Aristotle might have though that plausible, but Galileo actually took the touble to measure the difference in free falls speeds between objects of different weight, and definitely got a better handle on the real physics.
* this was determined by eyeballing, not by measuring.
I do have a couple of what I think are basic physics questions that I have not seen covered. It is possible that I they are covered in the posts I have not yet read and if so I apologize.
This thread got started with questions about the fall rates of the WTC towers. Several posts stated, IIRC, that the towers did not fall at "near" free fall rates by comparing the time of fall to the free fall time in a vacuum. This does not seem to be the correct comparison to me. Some have mentioned air resistance but I have not seen any calculations for the associated free fall times. If someone could help me with those calculations or point out some resources for working them out (preferably on-line as I don't have easy access to textbooks) I would be greatly interested. Again, if I missed those somewhere in this thread I apologize.
Also, there has been some mention that because there is clearly debris ahead of (i.e. lower than) the collapse zone of the buildings (WTC 1 and 2) they could not be falling at free fall rates. However, its seems to me, assuming the explosive demolition hypothesis is true for a moment, that the initial velocity of this debris should not be taken as zero and that at least some, and perhaps much, of it would have a "downward" component of its initial velocity well in excess of zero which would distort the fall rates. Intuitively (we have to start somewhere), I would expect some material to be ejected up, out, and down, and this seems to be corroborated by the photos I have seen. I am not claiming the explosive demoltion hypothesis is true, nor am I claiming my intuition is correct or reliable, or that I have accurately interpreted the photos. I am seeking clarifications (or belittlement if that suits your temperament
).emphasis mine
Having watched movies which were reasonably closeup, it's obvious that most all of the ejecta is traveling horizontally when it crosses the planes demarcated by the foot print of the building. In fact, if anything there's a slight net upwards bias, due to the fact that the collapse is from top downwards. Thus, when a given floor "goes", there's less to obstruct it going upwards. Below the collapse zone, there are still the uncollapsed floors. It's also easy to tell from isolated squibs that the direction of demolition is outwards.
I myself have pointed out "streamers" which reveal downard acceleration not due to gravity, but these are a small part of the ejecta. Most of the ejecta is powder, so of course, air resistance will slow it down greatly. Thus, even if you could trace the path of most of this mass with any confidence, even the mass with downwards initial velocity would be so slowed that it wouldn't tell you what you really want to know.
It's the large chunks of "sublimating" building (and also non-sublimating columns) that came off early in the collapse, which should be used to "eyeball" a free fall time reference, and which are lower than other, more powder-like falling debris. Comparing the location of these chunks of building to the topmost portion of the undamaged corners - easily 20 floors worth, at only 1/3 - 2/3* through the collapse - puts the lie to the free-fall collapse time.
Truth be told, we can't clearly see when the exterior of the building has hit the ground. But we can infer what happens from photographic evidence before the obscuring debris had completely encircled the tower. Assuming an accelerated demolition which 'catches up' with the falling debris begs the question of "who cares?" since you are already assuming a demolition. Assuming an accelerated gravitational collapse which would exceed the rate of free falling, large metallic pieces of building, is unphysical, even if the rest of the building "decided" to collapse at free fall speed after a 20+ floor head start.
IIRC, Aristotle might have though that plausible, but Galileo actually took the touble to measure the difference in free falls speeds between objects of different weight, and definitely got a better handle on the real physics.
* this was determined by eyeballing, not by measuring.
QUOTE
Metamar,
I appreciate your contributions to the thread. You do not need permission or a consensus from the forum members to pursue your ideas. My suggestion would be email Gordon’s spreadsheet with his explanation to Professor James Fetzer and all 9/11 truth movement websites and see what response is generates( if that is OK with Gordon). Gordon has provided this free and their would be know cost involved. This opens the door for engineers to prove the analysis false or agree with it and do further analysis to support it. Gordon’s spreadsheet and analysis are so simple it should open the eyes of engineers that normally would not question the official theory. Another idea would be to start a new thread with all of Gordon’s and Andrews’s initial post then go to other forums asking people to debunk it.
This thread is becoming useless and nearly impossible to find relevant information as Lon Waters pointed out. In addition, arguing about free fall speed if explosives are used puzzles me. You are saying extra energy is being introduced from explosive but the forces are only directed horizontally and in a vertical upward direction. For obvious reasons this would be desired but almost impossible to achieve. Good luck and I would support a plan of action that has a reasonable chance of success.
I appreciate your contributions to the thread. You do not need permission or a consensus from the forum members to pursue your ideas. My suggestion would be email Gordon’s spreadsheet with his explanation to Professor James Fetzer and all 9/11 truth movement websites and see what response is generates( if that is OK with Gordon). Gordon has provided this free and their would be know cost involved. This opens the door for engineers to prove the analysis false or agree with it and do further analysis to support it. Gordon’s spreadsheet and analysis are so simple it should open the eyes of engineers that normally would not question the official theory. Another idea would be to start a new thread with all of Gordon’s and Andrews’s initial post then go to other forums asking people to debunk it.
This thread is becoming useless and nearly impossible to find relevant information as Lon Waters pointed out. In addition, arguing about free fall speed if explosives are used puzzles me. You are saying extra energy is being introduced from explosive but the forces are only directed horizontally and in a vertical upward direction. For obvious reasons this would be desired but almost impossible to achieve. Good luck and I would support a plan of action that has a reasonable chance of success.
Thanks. The point of my question was moreso to spread the meme of "it's time to take this to the next level", than just intellectual curiosity about what other people think (though I am interested, and hope to be surprised with some good ideas.)
I'm pretty sure that I have not gotten a spreadsheet yet from Gordon, though I sent him a request through this system, asking for one. When I did so, I was warned that Gordon would know my email address, so I presume he has not gotten around to emailing one, yet.
Gordon, please don't forget me.
I am thinking of calling Fetzer. He has guts, and was a Marine, one of the few subsets of Americans that have any guts at all. And this is coming from a near pacifist....
Another complication wrt explosives is: at least some explosives can be made in such a way as to direct their energy, and, in fact, shaped charges are killing many of our soldiers in Iraq.
Also, as I have stated many times, demolition is not identically equal to explosives, and the full story has not been told.... Anybody who can look at the mysterious collapsing spire and call it's disintegration into powder in the space of 3 seconds either a free fall collapse or an explosion needs to get their eyesight checked. Frankly, I find the hypothesis of massive fraud more plausible than either of these 2 non-starters. Is it possible that all the videos and stills, from different angles, were all faked? I wish somebody would look into this hypothesis - I certainly can't.
This forum needs a better search capability....
QUOTE
metamars
Frankly, I find the hypothesis of massive fraud more plausible than either of these 2 non-starters
Frankly, I find the hypothesis of massive fraud more plausible than either of these 2 non-starters
2Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:"
I rest my point
QUOTE (brian+Jan 8 2006, 08:10 PM)
metamars, dont know what the best course of action would be but just to let you know I would be willing to add my support to any reasonable course you think may be fruitful.
I feel your frustration but you may be too hard on your fellow countrymen. Take heart from the fact those most dynamic in exposing this grotesque lie are largely patriotic Americans.
I suspect that many of those supporters of the lie may not be, at least they may not be Americans first and foremost as is the case with many in positions of power and influence in your country.
All the best.
Thank-you for the encouragement.
It's true that there are many patriotic and courageous Americans seeking to counter the 911 evil-doers, whoever they ultimately turn out to specifically be.
What is discouraging is that so few people of prominence are willing to stick their necks out. Can you name 1 television or movie star, or athlete, who has publicly said "Sure looks like an inside job to me"?
I can't think of any.
Mike Ruppert also reports that many Congress people definitely don't buy the official Fairy Tales, but choose to keep their mouths shut. God bless Cynthia McKinney for being somewhat of an exception, though I do wish she'd call a spade a spade, and give voice to what she really believes.
I believe it's good to be realistic, which, in my book, means that failure IS an option. We may fail to arouse the populace to do the right thing, end up, eventually, in a catastrophic nuclear war, and thus end up "killing" a really beautiful planet.
Life will go on, but humans will have forfeited their opportunity to be a part of that future.
Less dire scenarios may also ensue, wherein most people won't particularly WANT to survive.
I feel sorry for people who believe that their 3 score and 10 years is the totality of their existence, even if it's true!
I feel your frustration but you may be too hard on your fellow countrymen. Take heart from the fact those most dynamic in exposing this grotesque lie are largely patriotic Americans.
I suspect that many of those supporters of the lie may not be, at least they may not be Americans first and foremost as is the case with many in positions of power and influence in your country.
All the best.
Thank-you for the encouragement.
It's true that there are many patriotic and courageous Americans seeking to counter the 911 evil-doers, whoever they ultimately turn out to specifically be.
What is discouraging is that so few people of prominence are willing to stick their necks out. Can you name 1 television or movie star, or athlete, who has publicly said "Sure looks like an inside job to me"?
I can't think of any.
Mike Ruppert also reports that many Congress people definitely don't buy the official Fairy Tales, but choose to keep their mouths shut. God bless Cynthia McKinney for being somewhat of an exception, though I do wish she'd call a spade a spade, and give voice to what she really believes.
I believe it's good to be realistic, which, in my book, means that failure IS an option. We may fail to arouse the populace to do the right thing, end up, eventually, in a catastrophic nuclear war, and thus end up "killing" a really beautiful planet.
Life will go on, but humans will have forfeited their opportunity to be a part of that future.
Less dire scenarios may also ensue, wherein most people won't particularly WANT to survive.
I feel sorry for people who believe that their 3 score and 10 years is the totality of their existence, even if it's true!
QUOTE
metamars
God bless Cynthia McKinney for being somewhat of an exception, though I do wish she'd call a spade a spade
God bless Cynthia McKinney for being somewhat of an exception, though I do wish she'd call a spade a spade
You forgot to say, "No punt intended"
QUOTE
metamars
I feel sorry for people who believe that their 3 score and 10 years is the totality of their existence, even if it's true!
I feel sorry for people who believe that their 3 score and 10 years is the totality of their existence, even if it's true!
Fascinating how different people's emotions are. Some feel sorry for prideful airheads, while others feel sorry for innocent people in Iraq.
QUESTION: Which one of these children blew up the twin towers?
ANSWER: NONE! We need to check our own backyard
Bush again flashes el Diablo sign
According to this AP report President Bush flashes the "Hook'em Horns" sign as he addresses the Economic Club of Chicago in Chicago, Friday, Jan. 6, 2006. (AP Photo/Charles
Pat Robertson Displays Satanic 'El Diablo' Sign During 700 Club Show
You see, satan is not a cartoon character in red underwear, but it represents the bad part of mankind
According to this AP report President Bush flashes the "Hook'em Horns" sign as he addresses the Economic Club of Chicago in Chicago, Friday, Jan. 6, 2006. (AP Photo/Charles
Pat Robertson Displays Satanic 'El Diablo' Sign During 700 Club Show
You see, satan is not a cartoon character in red underwear, but it represents the bad part of mankind
QUOTE
Originally posted by YID
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Uhhhh, I don't think I said (or implied) that thermite burning for days & weeks would produce no more than a wiff of H2S. Go back and read it again properly YID (without bias), and I think you'll find that I said, ... if it wasn't the diasite formula burning in the basement, and just regular thermite (or formulations that don't use sulphur as the binder), then it would not produce H2S AT ALL). Don't you see how the sophism and semantics you use detracts from your credibility? Your statement above simply sets up a 'straw-man' by misquoting me, which you then proceed to gleefully attack. People who use such tactics quickly lose their objectivitiy and credibilty in these types of debates.
Im not going to waste bandwidth, by again quoting metamars chastisement, but as far as I am concerned he has you nailed to a T.
If you were honestly debating this issue you would take the list of factors which I presented regarding the underground fires and show point by point how normal gravity-driven collapse scenarios can account for all those factors. As I don't believe this CAN be done (and you certainly have NOT attempted to address that list in an honest rational debating style), you demonstrate again your unflinching bias with regard to the questions we are attempting to dicuss in a rational and un-emotional way... well, at least some of us.
As far as the implied 'ridiculousness' of hearing theories & speculations regarding mini-nukes & space based weapons, I honestly don't see what you find so outrageous about those things. Are you claiming that 'YOU' (or the public) is fully aware of all top secret weaponry projects the US HAS in it's arsenal. Now THERE's a TOTALLY Ridiculous statement ranking right up there with the Amazing Bowling Ball Experiment, the Amazing Billiard Ball Theory, and the Amazing Basement Bellows theory.
According to your implied proposition anyone who thinks the US has Secret Weaponry is an 'idiot' --- the average man-on-the-street knows everything about what's going on in the Ultra-Secret Star Wars (and other Black Projects) military programs... (I saw it all explained on NOVA and Popular Mechanics --- Right?)
Ask your father (I assume he was around during the last World War), If he had ANY INKLING that Nuclear Bombs were in development and operational PRIOR to their USE in Japan.
I cannot recall metamars (or anyone else for that matter on this thread) stating boldly with strong convictions that it WAS or MUST HAVE BEEN a mini-nuke. Like-wise with 'space-beams'. but, you seem to think that 'possibilities' are IMPOSSIBLE just because it hasn't been proven with some kind of confession or signed work-order from 'the perps'. They are certainly NOT IMPOSSIBLE, (even though they may be unlikely according to the actual facts we have at our disposal today), nevertheless these 'far-out' things are Certainly MORE LIKELY than EVER finding a work-order (or signed confession) from black opts 'spooks' capable of carrying out such seemingly physics defying acts.
QUOTE (steve1957+Jan 9 2006, 03:54 AM)
Bush again flashes el Diablo sign
I'm not sure why I'm responding to this, but this Prison Planet page (which is where I'm assuming you got this), debunks itself. Scroll down the page, and you find these pictures:
The caption underneath states that the left picture (of the right-handed gesture) represents the "horned god of witchcraft". Note that the left picture clearly shows the thumb under the middle two fingers, but in all the pictures of Mr. & Mrs. Bush flashing this sign (and almost everyone else caught doing it), they are using their right hands with their thumbs over their middle two fingers.
I'm no Bush lover (well...), but the sign they are flashing does not match what is being claimed.
Sorry for wasting bandwidth on this..
I'm not sure why I'm responding to this, but this Prison Planet page (which is where I'm assuming you got this), debunks itself. Scroll down the page, and you find these pictures:
The caption underneath states that the left picture (of the right-handed gesture) represents the "horned god of witchcraft". Note that the left picture clearly shows the thumb under the middle two fingers, but in all the pictures of Mr. & Mrs. Bush flashing this sign (and almost everyone else caught doing it), they are using their right hands with their thumbs over their middle two fingers.
I'm no Bush lover (well...
), but the sign they are flashing does not match what is being claimed.Sorry for wasting bandwidth on this..
Reply to Lon Waters
emphasis mine
Sorry, but this is really not clear. Frankly, I myself find this last sentence confusing.
What I'm trying to say is that, assuming a FEMA Friendly gravitational collapse scenario, once you know that falling debris is already at least 20 floors lower than the uncollapsed top of the tower, midway through the collapse, the only way you can "end up" with a free fall like collapse time is if the building started falling even faster than the debris. (Which also implies faster than free fall.)
Aristotle (IIRC) used to teach that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, so if he was alive today, and had never studied physics, he might look at the photo and say "Oh, it was heavier, so catching up with the debris is possible"
If Galileo, OTOH, was alive today, he would laugh at Aristotle, who still hadn't caught on after all these years.
QUOTE
Truth be told, we can't clearly see when the exterior of the building has hit the ground. But we can infer what happens from photographic evidence before the obscuring debris had completely encircled the tower. Assuming an accelerated demolition which 'catches up' with the falling debris begs the question of "who cares?" since you are already assuming a demolition. Assuming an accelerated gravitational collapse which would exceed the rate of free falling, large metallic pieces of building, is unphysical, even if the rest of the building "decided" to collapse at free fall speed after a 20+ floor head start.
emphasis mine
Sorry, but this is really not clear. Frankly, I myself find this last sentence confusing.
What I'm trying to say is that, assuming a FEMA Friendly gravitational collapse scenario, once you know that falling debris is already at least 20 floors lower than the uncollapsed top of the tower, midway through the collapse, the only way you can "end up" with a free fall like collapse time is if the building started falling even faster than the debris. (Which also implies faster than free fall.)
Aristotle (IIRC) used to teach that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, so if he was alive today, and had never studied physics, he might look at the photo and say "Oh, it was heavier, so catching up with the debris is possible"
If Galileo, OTOH, was alive today, he would laugh at Aristotle, who still hadn't caught on after all these years.
The U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Information
Identifying Misinformation
You Are In: USINFO > Resource Tools > Identifying Misinformation
9/11 Revealed?
New book repeats false conspiracy theories
9/11 Revealed, published in August 2005, is the latest book putting forth bizarre conspiracy theories about the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. Its two British authors, Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan, give credence to a hodgepodge of sinister, unfounded allegations.
The book claims the World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers collapsed because they were pre-rigged with explosives but ignores an extraordinarily thorough, three-year investigation by the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST concluded the towers collapsed because the impact of the plane crashes severed and damaged support columns and dislodged fireproofing insulation from the steel floor trusses and support columns, which allowed the fires to weaken them to the point where they bowed, buckled, and failed. It recently stated, in the WTC Towers Report (p. 12) on its Web site, that it found “no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition… .”
The book suggests that the 47-story World Trade Center 7 building, which also collapsed on September 11, was intentionally demolished, citing a comment by the property owner that he had decided to “pull it.” The property owner was referring to pulling a contingent of firefighters out of the building in order to save lives because it appeared unstable.
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005.../16-241966.html
I have not read the book and am not recommending it , just thought it interesting the state department would be reviewing it.
Identifying Misinformation
You Are In: USINFO > Resource Tools > Identifying Misinformation
9/11 Revealed?
New book repeats false conspiracy theories
9/11 Revealed, published in August 2005, is the latest book putting forth bizarre conspiracy theories about the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. Its two British authors, Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan, give credence to a hodgepodge of sinister, unfounded allegations.
The book claims the World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers collapsed because they were pre-rigged with explosives but ignores an extraordinarily thorough, three-year investigation by the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST concluded the towers collapsed because the impact of the plane crashes severed and damaged support columns and dislodged fireproofing insulation from the steel floor trusses and support columns, which allowed the fires to weaken them to the point where they bowed, buckled, and failed. It recently stated, in the WTC Towers Report (p. 12) on its Web site, that it found “no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition… .”
The book suggests that the 47-story World Trade Center 7 building, which also collapsed on September 11, was intentionally demolished, citing a comment by the property owner that he had decided to “pull it.” The property owner was referring to pulling a contingent of firefighters out of the building in order to save lives because it appeared unstable.
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005.../16-241966.html
I have not read the book and am not recommending it , just thought it interesting the state department would be reviewing it.
QUOTE
Mel,
horned god of witchcraft
horned god of witchcraft
Sounds like you've got a pretty impressive background in witchcraft.
To tell you the truth, I don't really care about there stupid finger signs, it's just all the murders that I take issue with.
But regarding another one of bush's famous finger signs, I think most of us understand this one...
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
QUOTE
Metemars
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios
I'll assume your just being SARCASTIC, because anyone with intelligence understands the elementary rules in expert witnesses.
If the prosecution pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the prosecution.
If the defense pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the defense.
I know this is just a hypothetical joke, because who would be the one hiring the guy/girl?
If you payed the guy, and his report was true, which concluded control demolition, do you honestly think the pancake people would believe it?
And if a fairy tale person payed for the report, would you be surprised that he concluded the towers came down as a result of pancakes???
Of course in our make believe fantasy world everyone with a PHD is honest and trustworthy and would never be influenced by financial gain.
Is this really the physics board or did I accidentally wind up in teletubby land
In fact, metemars, I've been watching you for a little while and have had a few puzzling questions in my mind as to why you seem to feel that the evidence is not clear enough to make a reasonable conclusion about what happened.
Are you a PLANT? A plant is normally someone you least expect. Someone that APPEARS to be for the truth in order to win people's confidence, such as in your case, you already know it was control demolition, as ANYBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND KNOWS THAT, so you have to come off as a person who seems to support the CD view, just enough to win people's confidence in you and gordon.
And then when people least expect it, you subtly introduce ridiculous and highly IRRELEVANT STATEMENTS in your analysis, which have absolutely nothing to do with reality, but they are very subtle bits of information.
And these tiny little bits of twisted information stack up and then are manipulated in such a way so as to lead people away from the truth. And of course most of the people on this board are ignorant as the heathen and don't have enough common sense to see what your doing.
I mean the fairy tale supporters are no surprise, their foolishness is out in the open, but you're more cleaver and are able to hide your true intentions so that you can subtly sway people away from the truth, and because most of the people have weak minds they're not able to resist.
But I've been watching you enough to see what your doing. I've been patient and have held my judgment for a while, as I didn't want to prematurely judge the situation. In fact I introduced a few posts to watch your reaction, and although you've tried to avoid these things as much as you can, the truth has a way of exposing people.
Don't feel too bad, we've all messed up in our lives and have all played the harlot, and I'm sure it must be embarrassing to be exposed, but I'm sure you'll get over it. And of course, since most of the people are far too ignorant to see past their own facades, it's doubtful that they'll be able to see past yours.
But here's some of the clues that really give you away.
#1. Leading people to believe we need more evidence before we can reach any conclusions about what happened.
That's the first give away, in fact people with true intelligence know that this statement is fraudulent and insincere on it's face.
#2. Making a big issue out of the free-fall speed, when that is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, because in truth it is the buildings fell at virtual free-fall speed enough TO PROVE NO RESISTANCE, and because of your lack of knowledge and/or dishonesty you attempt to persuade people that they didn't fall at free fall speed, which is ridiculous.
First of all, what are you basing your incorrect theories on? The governments information? Intelligent people know that's like asking the wolf for unbiased info about who really stole the chicken. Or my other analogy. It's like watching you ask OJ Simpson if he killed those people, and then coming back saying you have proof, OJ's own testimony.
#3 Trying to convince people not to believe their own eyes, but rather to put their trust in people. Another words "Don't think for yourself", but rather put your confidence in someone with a PhD.
This is one of the biggest give aways, that you are just a typical plant, trying to sway people away from the truth, as you're trying to convince people to disregard any evidence they have, throw it in the trash, and then wait until some bought off prostitute issues some kind of report.
#4 Implying that we need more evidence to reach a conclusion.
That's another dead give away as to your insincerity. As if legitimate people need more proof. This type of obvious misleading advise goes right along with what the deceivers try to do, which is to persuade people not to form an opinion about what they've seen.
As I said, the fairy tale, pancake heads on this board, such as Arthur, yedidit, and etc. etc. are obvious, admitted child killers, who openly support the killings in Afghanistan and Iraq, and of course the possibility of Iran on the horizon. They are queens out of the closet.
But you sir have been hiding your true intentions for far too long. Consider yourself EXPOSED.
QUOTE (steve1957+Jan 9 2006, 02:08 PM)
QUOTE
Metemars
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios
In my view, we should raise the level of debate by paying a reputable Ph.D. level construction engineer to analyze plausible collapse scenarios
I'll assume your just being SARCASTIC, because anyone with intelligence understands the elementary rules in expert witnesses.
If the prosecution pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the prosecution.
If the defense pays them, they'll SLANT their report for the defense.
I know this is just a hypothetical joke, because who would be the one hiring the guy/girl?
If you payed the guy, and his report was true, which concluded control demolition, do you honestly think the pancake people would believe it?
And if a fairy tale person payed for the report, would you be surprised that he concluded the towers came down as a result of pancakes???
Of course in our make believe fantasy world everyone with a PHD is honest and trustworthy and would never be influenced by financial gain.
Is this really the physics board or did I accidentally wind up in teletubby land
Your assumption is completely wrong. I am dead serious.
The goal is to hire somebody honest and impartial, not to mention unafraid. Bev Harris hired a scientist, but you are assuming that we cannot successfully do so.
I say you're wrong, and in any event, you'll recall that the reason I gave for doing so is to create a document that activists can then distribute to academics, which essentially constitutes a peer review (of sorts). Hopefully it will spark an honest debate, and the results of which will stand on it's own.
I am not interested in hiring a scientist who states, "In view of my many years of experience, the government version of collapse is a Fairy Tale" or "In view of my many years of experience, the government version of collapse is not a Fairy Tale".
I AM interested in hiring a scientists who has a good reputation, and analyzes the buildings' collapses in a quantitative way, with assumptions and methodology CLEARLY laid out, in a manner consistent with the best his/her discipline has to offer. No matter what the scientist concludes, the paper should be solid enough to be able to present to peers in the construction engineering community.
I forgot to mention this, but another aspect of the desired paper is a thorough analysis of the applicability of Bazant Zhou. My expectation is that the paper will be thoroughly rebutted as essentially useless.
I find it a bit odd that you are a nay-sayer. Did you not know that science is a consensual affair, and that there are no "popes" in science, even if, unfortunately, there are cliques and yes, whores? Do you avoid going to major cities because you know that somewhere there are whores there, or do you simply go and stay out of the red light districts? (It's a rhetorical question - I'm NOT asking you about your personal morality.)
I know little about expert witnesses. I do know a bit about academia, and my hope is to spark a serious debate there, not win a lawsuit. With such a corrupt and cowardly government, winning lawsuits hardly seems likely, though, of course, I wish anybody luck attempting that. NY State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer was handed lots of evidence, sits on it until this day, and will probably sit on it for all eternity.
metemars,
You didn't read the edited post up above, so I'll remind you.
YOU'RE CAUGHT RED HANDED. YOU ARE EXPOSED.
Have you ever heard of professor Jones from Utah? how about Jerry Russel? How about Eric, from painful deceptions?
The point is if you really need a PhD. there are more than enough people who have already given their analysis.
You were hiding your true intentions for a while, but I thought I could help draw it out of you and sure enough you're not as tricky as you thought. You might be able to fool some of the heathens on this board, but people with intelligence can see right through you.
You didn't read the edited post up above, so I'll remind you.
YOU'RE CAUGHT RED HANDED. YOU ARE EXPOSED.
Have you ever heard of professor Jones from Utah? how about Jerry Russel? How about Eric, from painful deceptions?
The point is if you really need a PhD. there are more than enough people who have already given their analysis.
You were hiding your true intentions for a while, but I thought I could help draw it out of you and sure enough you're not as tricky as you thought. You might be able to fool some of the heathens on this board, but people with intelligence can see right through you.
QUOTE (steve1957+Jan 9 2006, 02:53 PM)
metemars,
You didn't read the edited post up above, so I'll remind you.
YOU'RE CAUGHT RED HANDED. YOU ARE EXPOSED.
Have you ever heard of professor Jones from Utah? how about Jerry Russel? How about Eric, from painful deceptions?
The point is if you really need a PhD. there are more than enough people who have already given their analysis.
You were hiding your true intentions for a while, but I thought I could help draw it out of you and sure enough you're not as tricky as you thought. You might be able to fool some of the heathens on this board, but people with intelligence can see right through you.
Do they, or don't they, have Ph.D.'s in Construction Engineering? I specifically stated that "not even a physicist will do", though I have lots of respect for Professor Jones and very much respect what he has done, even if it's limited and has unexplicated references to conservation of linear momentum. Jerry Russel has a Ph.D. in psychology, and only a master's degree in engineering. Since his higher degree is in psychology, I doubt he even practices engineering. Furthermore, his "paper" (really a Usenet post, not a technical paper) basically rests on the discredited "free fall" argument. He now says,
http://www.911-strike.com/demolition.htm
At any rate, I claimed to have proof of controlled demolition, and I certainly did not. In retrospect, I should not have posted the article without checking it with a structural engineer.
As for Eric Hufshcmid, he still hasn't figured out correct collapse times, and seems to be at fault for propagating the discredited numbers at reopen911.org. Either he's very sloppy, doesn't understand physics, or worse.
When you have cancer, you see an oncologist. When you have eye problems, you see an opthamologist.
What is it that you don't get about seeking the professional input of not just a Ph.D., but a Ph.D. in Construction Engineering?
You didn't read the edited post up above, so I'll remind you.
YOU'RE CAUGHT RED HANDED. YOU ARE EXPOSED.
Have you ever heard of professor Jones from Utah? how about Jerry Russel? How about Eric, from painful deceptions?
The point is if you really need a PhD. there are more than enough people who have already given their analysis.
You were hiding your true intentions for a while, but I thought I could help draw it out of you and sure enough you're not as tricky as you thought. You might be able to fool some of the heathens on this board, but people with intelligence can see right through you.
Do they, or don't they, have Ph.D.'s in Construction Engineering? I specifically stated that "not even a physicist will do", though I have lots of respect for Professor Jones and very much respect what he has done, even if it's limited and has unexplicated references to conservation of linear momentum. Jerry Russel has a Ph.D. in psychology, and only a master's degree in engineering. Since his higher degree is in psychology, I doubt he even practices engineering. Furthermore, his "paper" (really a Usenet post, not a technical paper) basically rests on the discredited "free fall" argument. He now says,
QUOTE
http://www.911-strike.com/demolition.htm
At any rate, I claimed to have proof of controlled demolition, and I certainly did not. In retrospect, I should not have posted the article without checking it with a structural engineer.
As for Eric Hufshcmid, he still hasn't figured out correct collapse times, and seems to be at fault for propagating the discredited numbers at reopen911.org. Either he's very sloppy, doesn't understand physics, or worse.
When you have cancer, you see an oncologist. When you have eye problems, you see an opthamologist.
What is it that you don't get about seeking the professional input of not just a Ph.D., but a Ph.D. in Construction Engineering?
Gee, Steve1957... Your vitriolic accusations are beginning to sound more like Schneibster from the opposite end of the spectrum.
Although I agree with some of your 'religious' viewpoints, I am thinking you are taking these to the extreme (in a forum designed not for spiritual or religious debate, but rather centered around an objective science format).
Also, I tend to think your 'religious' viewpoints are quite extreme to the point of implying that you and only you have a direct communication with the Lord, which (in my view) is a dangerous and delusional position to take). Do you consider yourself a prophet in direct communication with the Lord? Sorry, but perhaps you should study a little more the words of Jesus on humility and avoiding taking 'judgement' into your own hands... But (as I don't intend to get into metaphysics and religious discussions on this thread), that's all I'm going to respond to your religious viewpoints. As I understand it, there are other threads for discussing religious & biblical issues.
Hope you understand.
Cheers
Foxx
Although I agree with some of your 'religious' viewpoints, I am thinking you are taking these to the extreme (in a forum designed not for spiritual or religious debate, but rather centered around an objective science format).
Also, I tend to think your 'religious' viewpoints are quite extreme to the point of implying that you and only you have a direct communication with the Lord, which (in my view) is a dangerous and delusional position to take). Do you consider yourself a prophet in direct communication with the Lord? Sorry, but perhaps you should study a little more the words of Jesus on humility and avoiding taking 'judgement' into your own hands... But (as I don't intend to get into metaphysics and religious discussions on this thread), that's all I'm going to respond to your religious viewpoints. As I understand it, there are other threads for discussing religious & biblical issues.
Hope you understand.
Cheers
Foxx
If metamars is a plant then I want paid.
Whilst there are clearly, and not so clearly, those involved in the September 11 truth movement who wish to muddy the waters, I personally find throwaway accusations aimed at those who happen to take a different approach or suggest a different way forward no help whatsoever.
steve, many would accept your point re metamars suggestions as fair, expert in the witnesses sense does not guarentee truth, but to extrapolate from there to him being a plant .....?
The classic example is Ruppert. Ruppert was one of the first to expose the lie and generated as much if not more awareness than most with his articles and book "Crossing The Rubicon". To say Ruppert is a plant because of his peak oil scenario, his perception that any opportunity to expose the perpatrators of September 11 was lost after Bushs' second election and it was time to move on does the man an injustice to my mind. You may not agree with him but to write off all his contributions to the issue because of that seems absurd.
metamars like all reasonable people wants an independent inquiry, to acheive that end a critical mass is required. To achieve critical mass an independent inquiry should be the one and only goal and how each goes about trying acheive that end is not nor cannot be prescribed, we can only attempt to raise awareness in our own ways.
Remember, metamars is the one who has more than once suggested we take the Jones Hoffman etc papers to our local physics/engineeering faculties. metamars recently suggested Jones presentation be put on DVD - an excellent idea in my opinion.
United we stand ....
Whilst there are clearly, and not so clearly, those involved in the September 11 truth movement who wish to muddy the waters, I personally find throwaway accusations aimed at those who happen to take a different approach or suggest a different way forward no help whatsoever.
steve, many would accept your point re metamars suggestions as fair, expert in the witnesses sense does not guarentee truth, but to extrapolate from there to him being a plant .....?
The classic example is Ruppert. Ruppert was one of the first to expose the lie and generated as much if not more awareness than most with his articles and book "Crossing The Rubicon". To say Ruppert is a plant because of his peak oil scenario, his perception that any opportunity to expose the perpatrators of September 11 was lost after Bushs' second election and it was time to move on does the man an injustice to my mind. You may not agree with him but to write off all his contributions to the issue because of that seems absurd.
metamars like all reasonable people wants an independent inquiry, to acheive that end a critical mass is required. To achieve critical mass an independent inquiry should be the one and only goal and how each goes about trying acheive that end is not nor cannot be prescribed, we can only attempt to raise awareness in our own ways.
Remember, metamars is the one who has more than once suggested we take the Jones Hoffman etc papers to our local physics/engineeering faculties. metamars recently suggested Jones presentation be put on DVD - an excellent idea in my opinion.
United we stand ....
WHY DID I HAVE TO EXPOSE METEMARS along with others?
I don't need to re-iterate all the reasons why WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT OUR GOVERNMENT SPONSORED 9/11, & THAT MUSLIMS DID NOT SUSPEND THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. Because you either believe in the truth, or you love the lie.
If we followed metemars dis-ingenuous line of thinking we would have to DENY the multitudes of irrefutable evidence, that is not only proven through physics, but through bush's time line, his own statements, NORAD, the FAA, testimonies from firemen, police, news journalists, hundreds of eye witnesses at the scene, etc. etc.
The physics is absolutely conclusive because of the virtual free-fall speed ALONE, that's in and of itself is PROOF, even if it is not exact free-fall speed, it is fast enough to PROVE WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that the steel frame structures offered NO RESISTANCE.
In fact all anyone has to do is watch a video on television to see that all three buildings collapsed in the exact manner as control demolition'd buildings.
And of course there is the heat of the metal, there is the fine dust, and on and on and on, there are mountains of evidence in addition to the virtual free-fall speed - no resistant factor that prove beyond any doubt the government sponsored the implementation of some types of explosions to demolish the structures.
People have already chosen their sides. They are either for the truth, or for the lies.
Now here's why it's so important to expose metemars, not to take away from exposing the lies of arthur, yesdidit, common sense, etc. etc., but why exposing metemars may be more significant at this point.
the other pancake heads are obvious, but people like metemars are subtle. The pancake heads have no hope of recruiting other liars to their camp, but metemars seems to have a better chance of wining the respect of people who know the towers were imploded, and so when they see people like metemars they might think, great, here's a guy that can be trusted, not knowing his true intentions, and so they follow in his corrupt line of thinking and are led down the primrose path to destruction.
Why is this so important?
There may be nothing we can do individually about a possible nuclear war in the middle east, or even the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I doubt if bush, the defense contractors, the neo/cons, the Jerry Falwell's and other wolves who are making a fortune on these wars will change their paths just because you know they did 9/11.
But it's the belief in this lie, along with the belief in other lies of course, that is getting innocent people killed, tortured, persecuted, etc.
Gangs of kids and even adults have brutally assaulted many innocent people in the US, who happen to be of Arab decent, for one thing, and there is a general hatred in the minds of a huge percentage of Americans towards any Muslim and/or Arab, and or anyone else who is against this war, because they rest their justification on the lie that Bin Laden, and Saddam did 9/11.
By not owning up to the truth in this matter, people are blaming an innocent group of people for a crime they did not do. And when you pervert justice there is a rippling effect of many more injustices.
When and if an Arab, Muslim, black, white commits a crime, they should be prosecuted period, and should not be given a free pass because of political correctness. And for the same token when a Arab, Muslim, black, or white is innocent of a crime then guess what folks? They should not be punished for a crime they did not do.
But for the last several years, the hearts of millions of Americans, including christians, athiests, republicans, democrats, neo/cons and liberals alike have shared the same hatred of Arabs and Muslims, for a crime they did not do, and because of this hundreds of thousands of innocent children have been killed along with many other casualties, assaults and tortures right in our own home towns.
Unfortunately all too many people here in America have been raised with and/or adopted the Nazi/KKK/christian/athiest/prideful philosophy of making up lies about a group of people in order to steal their resources or put the blame on them for other reasons and then justify those lies with other lies.
We did it to the Indians, we did it to African Americans, who we kidnapped, killed, then made the rest slaves, we did it to 6 million Jews, and now we're doing to the Muslims, who's next I don't know, but one thing is common in all of these abominations, and that is LIES.
Lies were told in all of those circumstance to justify all those rapes, thefts, murders, and injustices, just like the lies that are being used today, and it's not that the events of 9/11 are the only lies, they just so happen to be the biggest lie for the times we live in.
And so we need to focus on doing the things we can do, while accepting the things we cannot. I can't go back in time and stop the Nazi's from killing all those Jews, or stop the KKK from hanging all those innocent blacks, but because I live in this century, I can at least speak out against the sick crimes and injustices that are going on today, specifically WHO DID 9/11.
And so this physics board can be a pretty good idea. Show what really happened by examining the true physics involved. As TRUE PHYSICS AND TRUE LOGIC PROVES WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THE GOVERNMENT DID 9/11.
But like everything else, the government plants, which may be nothing more than a bunch of airheads who get their kicks out of watching Arab children getting slaughtered naturally seek out and find places where some truth is being exposed, and so they do what they do best. Pollute the truth with lies, add confusion, BS, twisted facts, perverted information, etc. for the sole purpose of PREVENTING AND HINDERING THE TRUTH from going forward.
And part of their scam is use prostitutes with PhD's and other titles, who have sold themselves out and promoted some of the most OBVIOUS AND RIDICULOUS theories on the planet, yet because most people are biblically illiterate, ignorant as the heathen and have a natural hatred of the truth, they fall for it hook line and sinker.
And the next thing you know, you have big groups of of people carrying around HATE ARABS signs in their hands, looking for middle eastern people they can torture to PAY THEM BACK FOR 9/11.
So periodically I have to slap around people like arthur, yesdidit, common sense and the other COWARDS, who aren't fooling anyone with their SHAMEFUL posts, but they are more than obvious, so after a while it become fruitless to waste another second on their obvious lunacy.
Now maybe metemars doesn't understand that innocent people are getting assaulted, tortured and killed because of these lies. Maybe metemars is just a board guy, sitting in his trailer, with nothing better to do than jerk himself and other people off with irrelevant facts about 9/11 that have nothing to do with reality or how that relates to who did it, or anything useful, other than to assist in pumping up his ego and helping to make himself feel important.
I don't know all his motives, that's none of my business anyway, but the reason I have no problem in exposing his lies, however subtle as they happen to be, is because of the destructive effect they have on innocent peoples lives.
Yeah, we shouldn't blame metemars for any of the crimes going on, the poor guy is probably just sitting in his trailer, trying to sound important, and lo and behold it seems like I'm blaming all these crimes on him.
No, if I blamed metemars for crimes he didn't do, that would be another injustice, but I am exposing the insincerity and the lies he's telling, not just to slap him around, but because people need to wake up and smell the coffee and stop feeling so sorry for themselves and their little pride and ego, and start thinking about some of the innocent people in this country and around the world that we, the US and it's people are torturing and killing, based upon lies.
As I said, I don't hate metemars, anymore than I hate the pancake heads or even little bush, I know they're just ignorant as the heathen and may not even have a clue as to why they are doing what they are doing, but I do hate the lies and the injustice, the torture and the murders, and of course, the self centered, air head attitude towards it.
I am curious when the monitors are going to kick me off this board. Normally when I mention the truth too much or God's name or use too much logic and common sense I get kicked out, as the truth offends too many people.
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
I don't need to re-iterate all the reasons why WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT OUR GOVERNMENT SPONSORED 9/11, & THAT MUSLIMS DID NOT SUSPEND THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. Because you either believe in the truth, or you love the lie.
If we followed metemars dis-ingenuous line of thinking we would have to DENY the multitudes of irrefutable evidence, that is not only proven through physics, but through bush's time line, his own statements, NORAD, the FAA, testimonies from firemen, police, news journalists, hundreds of eye witnesses at the scene, etc. etc.
The physics is absolutely conclusive because of the virtual free-fall speed ALONE, that's in and of itself is PROOF, even if it is not exact free-fall speed, it is fast enough to PROVE WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that the steel frame structures offered NO RESISTANCE.
In fact all anyone has to do is watch a video on television to see that all three buildings collapsed in the exact manner as control demolition'd buildings.
And of course there is the heat of the metal, there is the fine dust, and on and on and on, there are mountains of evidence in addition to the virtual free-fall speed - no resistant factor that prove beyond any doubt the government sponsored the implementation of some types of explosions to demolish the structures.
People have already chosen their sides. They are either for the truth, or for the lies.
Now here's why it's so important to expose metemars, not to take away from exposing the lies of arthur, yesdidit, common sense, etc. etc., but why exposing metemars may be more significant at this point.
the other pancake heads are obvious, but people like metemars are subtle. The pancake heads have no hope of recruiting other liars to their camp, but metemars seems to have a better chance of wining the respect of people who know the towers were imploded, and so when they see people like metemars they might think, great, here's a guy that can be trusted, not knowing his true intentions, and so they follow in his corrupt line of thinking and are led down the primrose path to destruction.
Why is this so important?
There may be nothing we can do individually about a possible nuclear war in the middle east, or even the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I doubt if bush, the defense contractors, the neo/cons, the Jerry Falwell's and other wolves who are making a fortune on these wars will change their paths just because you know they did 9/11.
But it's the belief in this lie, along with the belief in other lies of course, that is getting innocent people killed, tortured, persecuted, etc.
Gangs of kids and even adults have brutally assaulted many innocent people in the US, who happen to be of Arab decent, for one thing, and there is a general hatred in the minds of a huge percentage of Americans towards any Muslim and/or Arab, and or anyone else who is against this war, because they rest their justification on the lie that Bin Laden, and Saddam did 9/11.
By not owning up to the truth in this matter, people are blaming an innocent group of people for a crime they did not do. And when you pervert justice there is a rippling effect of many more injustices.
When and if an Arab, Muslim, black, white commits a crime, they should be prosecuted period, and should not be given a free pass because of political correctness. And for the same token when a Arab, Muslim, black, or white is innocent of a crime then guess what folks? They should not be punished for a crime they did not do.
But for the last several years, the hearts of millions of Americans, including christians, athiests, republicans, democrats, neo/cons and liberals alike have shared the same hatred of Arabs and Muslims, for a crime they did not do, and because of this hundreds of thousands of innocent children have been killed along with many other casualties, assaults and tortures right in our own home towns.
Unfortunately all too many people here in America have been raised with and/or adopted the Nazi/KKK/christian/athiest/prideful philosophy of making up lies about a group of people in order to steal their resources or put the blame on them for other reasons and then justify those lies with other lies.
We did it to the Indians, we did it to African Americans, who we kidnapped, killed, then made the rest slaves, we did it to 6 million Jews, and now we're doing to the Muslims, who's next I don't know, but one thing is common in all of these abominations, and that is LIES.
Lies were told in all of those circumstance to justify all those rapes, thefts, murders, and injustices, just like the lies that are being used today, and it's not that the events of 9/11 are the only lies, they just so happen to be the biggest lie for the times we live in.
And so we need to focus on doing the things we can do, while accepting the things we cannot. I can't go back in time and stop the Nazi's from killing all those Jews, or stop the KKK from hanging all those innocent blacks, but because I live in this century, I can at least speak out against the sick crimes and injustices that are going on today, specifically WHO DID 9/11.
And so this physics board can be a pretty good idea. Show what really happened by examining the true physics involved. As TRUE PHYSICS AND TRUE LOGIC PROVES WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THE GOVERNMENT DID 9/11.
But like everything else, the government plants, which may be nothing more than a bunch of airheads who get their kicks out of watching Arab children getting slaughtered naturally seek out and find places where some truth is being exposed, and so they do what they do best. Pollute the truth with lies, add confusion, BS, twisted facts, perverted information, etc. for the sole purpose of PREVENTING AND HINDERING THE TRUTH from going forward.
And part of their scam is use prostitutes with PhD's and other titles, who have sold themselves out and promoted some of the most OBVIOUS AND RIDICULOUS theories on the planet, yet because most people are biblically illiterate, ignorant as the heathen and have a natural hatred of the truth, they fall for it hook line and sinker.
And the next thing you know, you have big groups of of people carrying around HATE ARABS signs in their hands, looking for middle eastern people they can torture to PAY THEM BACK FOR 9/11.
So periodically I have to slap around people like arthur, yesdidit, common sense and the other COWARDS, who aren't fooling anyone with their SHAMEFUL posts, but they are more than obvious, so after a while it become fruitless to waste another second on their obvious lunacy.
Now maybe metemars doesn't understand that innocent people are getting assaulted, tortured and killed because of these lies. Maybe metemars is just a board guy, sitting in his trailer, with nothing better to do than jerk himself and other people off with irrelevant facts about 9/11 that have nothing to do with reality or how that relates to who did it, or anything useful, other than to assist in pumping up his ego and helping to make himself feel important.
I don't know all his motives, that's none of my business anyway, but the reason I have no problem in exposing his lies, however subtle as they happen to be, is because of the destructive effect they have on innocent peoples lives.
Yeah, we shouldn't blame metemars for any of the crimes going on, the poor guy is probably just sitting in his trailer, trying to sound important, and lo and behold it seems like I'm blaming all these crimes on him.
No, if I blamed metemars for crimes he didn't do, that would be another injustice, but I am exposing the insincerity and the lies he's telling, not just to slap him around, but because people need to wake up and smell the coffee and stop feeling so sorry for themselves and their little pride and ego, and start thinking about some of the innocent people in this country and around the world that we, the US and it's people are torturing and killing, based upon lies.
As I said, I don't hate metemars, anymore than I hate the pancake heads or even little bush, I know they're just ignorant as the heathen and may not even have a clue as to why they are doing what they are doing, but I do hate the lies and the injustice, the torture and the murders, and of course, the self centered, air head attitude towards it.
I am curious when the monitors are going to kick me off this board. Normally when I mention the truth too much or God's name or use too much logic and common sense I get kicked out, as the truth offends too many people.
http://www.iwilltryit.com/menu.htm
steve, for clarity and for your own wellbeing - list metamars' lies.
you know, steve1957, metamars has put up some pretty 'hardcore' arguments, already. i don't think a shill would be giving such good stuff to the other side. this is a long thread, but i'm personally confident that metamars is no gatekeeper. he left the gate wide open, and should be fired, if he is a bushite desk agent.
indeed, if a professional were hired(i think it would be VERY hard to find one in america), any paper or opinion would still be subject to debate and peer review. this isn't religion(although i'd be hard put to tell the difference between bush worship and the worship[ of god. in fact, bushites put the will of bush WAY over the will of god (with all the lying, stealing, false witness, and vengeful, hateful killing and whatnot)
i agree, that there is enough proof already. fall times and pyroclastic flows are really enough evidence to CONVICT someone, if there were someone to point a finger directly at.
unfortunately, the adversary has done an excellent job at leaving another enigma wrapped in a riddle, much like the yet unresolved kennedy assassination.
and this is where perhaps i can forge off into my own branch of my personal interpretation of reality....
the truth barely matters, unfortunately. the world's perception is controlled by marketing managers. the majority of people are locked in a reality matrix created by advertising, and don't have the time or patience to seek the truth.
it is sad, but no reason to attack anyone who doesn't see things EXACTLY the way you do.
the most effective attack on the lie would be a professional marketing campaign, IMHO. i think the science gets too deep too quickly for the layman(especially when 200+ pages of scientific(and ad hominem!, lol) debate can not even agree on actual fall times.
i would love to see that one single issue agreed on by both sides.
any argument will be met with a counter, no matter how absurd. it is a good exercise to discuss these things in public forums like this, as it allows the arguments themselves to go down as many blind alleys and loops as possible, which should be training you in wrasslin' with the enemy(the most fun part of being a 'good guy', imo, lol).
indeed, if a professional were hired(i think it would be VERY hard to find one in america), any paper or opinion would still be subject to debate and peer review. this isn't religion(although i'd be hard put to tell the difference between bush worship and the worship[ of god. in fact, bushites put the will of bush WAY over the will of god (with all the lying, stealing, false witness, and vengeful, hateful killing and whatnot)
i agree, that there is enough proof already. fall times and pyroclastic flows are really enough evidence to CONVICT someone, if there were someone to point a finger directly at.
unfortunately, the adversary has done an excellent job at leaving another enigma wrapped in a riddle, much like the yet unresolved kennedy assassination.
and this is where perhaps i can forge off into my own branch of my personal interpretation of reality....
the truth barely matters, unfortunately. the world's perception is controlled by marketing managers. the majority of people are locked in a reality matrix created by advertising, and don't have the time or patience to seek the truth.
it is sad, but no reason to attack anyone who doesn't see things EXACTLY the way you do.
the most effective attack on the lie would be a professional marketing campaign, IMHO. i think the science gets too deep too quickly for the layman(especially when 200+ pages of scientific(and ad hominem!, lol) debate can not even agree on actual fall times.
i would love to see that one single issue agreed on by both sides.
any argument will be met with a counter, no matter how absurd. it is a good exercise to discuss these things in public forums like this, as it allows the arguments themselves to go down as many blind alleys and loops as possible, which should be training you in wrasslin' with the enemy(the most fun part of being a 'good guy', imo, lol).
brian and foxx,
Yes keep on trying to convince people there's not enough evidence to prove control demolition and that the pancake fairy tale might be correct.
But try to be a little more subtle with your next posts, because your true intentions are showing. And I'm sure you don't want people to know that you still believe in fairy tales.
Yes keep on trying to convince people there's not enough evidence to prove control demolition and that the pancake fairy tale might be correct.
But try to be a little more subtle with your next posts, because your true intentions are showing. And I'm sure you don't want people to know that you still believe in fairy tales.
QUOTE
I am curious when the monitors are going to kick me off this board. Normally when I mention the truth too much or God's name or use too much logic and common sense I get kicked out, as the truth offends too many people.
We should be so lucky. Why don't you ask your handlers? I think it's rather obvious why you find the notion of hiring a Ph.D. Construction Engineer to analyse the WTC collapse to be so, hmmmm, what's the word, unnecessary. This is, after all, the most relevant discipline, all your blathering nonsense notwithstanding. This is a no-brainer, if there ever was one, and even people with half a brain should immediately understand it's desirability.
Since Steven Jones has called for a large, international investigation, including engineers, your "position" is not only wrong, it's not even consistent.
FWIW, I had you sized up correctly from the first few few of your ludicrous posts.
Too bad there's not an Ignore feature on this forum....
A Note to Activists
Please take careful note of the following:
1) The lack of encouragement of the popes for my call to hire a Ph.D. construction engineer. Obviously, if they believed their tripe, one expects that they would welcome such an event, as it would work to definitively support their position. They should be happy to have us disabuse ourselves of our "fantasy", at our own nickel, no less.
2) The "coming out" of steve1957, who has claimed to "expose" me, but who should have, if he was sincere, WELCOMED the opportunity to substantiate "our" position.
I interpret both of these observations as pointing to the desirability of my suggestion.
metemars, brian and foxx,
Here's another lie.
Trying to convince people that I'm preventing you guys from hiring a structural engineer or what ever professional you prefer to analyze the data.
If you want to spend a ton of money and several more years on professional help, because YOU STILL CAN'T QUITE FIGURE IT OUT, then fine, you don't need my permission.
So it's another obvious lie your all telling in trying to cover up your own obvious tricks by saying that I'm preventing you from hiring a professional to give his own spin on the data.
Most people with intelligence know that neither one of you need my permission to get professional help, hire more spin doctors and close off the mind to the data that is already OBVIOUS.
Only God knows what your really up to with your motives. For all I know your attempting to scam money from people by saying we should pool our money together to hire a spin doctor, just click this PayPal button or give us your credit card. That's just a guess, and may not have anything to do with it, as their could be other MOTIVES.
But what your doing is similar to the phony preachers who tell people, don't read the bible on your own, but pay us lots of money to teach you our spin, and don't even try to commune with God in your head and heart, but rather put your blind trust and faith in our pastors.
In truth, I'm encouraging people to think for themselves, use whatever comon sense they have, search and seek and discern from the multitudes of facts and evidence already available, open up your eyes and see.
Whereas you and your buds are doing all that you can to convince people to DENY the knowledge they already have and instead trust in some spin doctor.
Here's another lie.
Trying to convince people that I'm preventing you guys from hiring a structural engineer or what ever professional you prefer to analyze the data.
If you want to spend a ton of money and several more years on professional help, because YOU STILL CAN'T QUITE FIGURE IT OUT, then fine, you don't need my permission.
So it's another obvious lie your all telling in trying to cover up your own obvious tricks by saying that I'm preventing you from hiring a professional to give his own spin on the data.
Most people with intelligence know that neither one of you need my permission to get professional help, hire more spin doctors and close off the mind to the data that is already OBVIOUS.
Only God knows what your really up to with your motives. For all I know your attempting to scam money from people by saying we should pool our money together to hire a spin doctor, just click this PayPal button or give us your credit card. That's just a guess, and may not have anything to do with it, as their could be other MOTIVES.
But what your doing is similar to the phony preachers who tell people, don't read the bible on your own, but pay us lots of money to teach you our spin, and don't even try to commune with God in your head and heart, but rather put your blind trust and faith in our pastors.
In truth, I'm encouraging people to think for themselves, use whatever comon sense they have, search and seek and discern from the multitudes of facts and evidence already available, open up your eyes and see.
Whereas you and your buds are doing all that you can to convince people to DENY the knowledge they already have and instead trust in some spin doctor.
My personal view is that Metamars is most certainly not a shill. The previous 200+ pages of posts should clear any doubts of this. I do not, however agree that a Construction Engineer, (P.H.D or not) will resolve anything.
The photographic and first-hand witness statements, although appearing diametrically opposite to the "official conspiracy theory" prove nothing. (Pretty much what Arthur said - one of the few points we agree on). I would call this "soft evidence".
The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics.
The temperature needed to vaporize steel requires such a quantitative rise (4 to 5 times) in the normal maximum temperature reached by an aircraft-fuel fire is reason enough, in itself, to prove that the "story" we have been told about 9-11 is simply not true.
We should write publicly to NIST, and ask them what conditions have led to vaporized steel in the basements of at least 2 of the WTC buildings.
The photographic and first-hand witness statements, although appearing diametrically opposite to the "official conspiracy theory" prove nothing. (Pretty much what Arthur said - one of the few points we agree on). I would call this "soft evidence".
The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics.
The temperature needed to vaporize steel requires such a quantitative rise (4 to 5 times) in the normal maximum temperature reached by an aircraft-fuel fire is reason enough, in itself, to prove that the "story" we have been told about 9-11 is simply not true.
We should write publicly to NIST, and ask them what conditions have led to vaporized steel in the basements of at least 2 of the WTC buildings.
you find it funny, adoucette.
i find it to be the nature of the lone wolf conspiracy theorist, and something that works against the grand unification conspiracy theory. funny?
yeah, i guess it is. HAHAHAHA! we're sharing a laugh.
now, you go back to being evil, and i'll go back to being good.
and, when we die, the experiment will be to determine if the postulate that what you do in life affects what you get in afterlife is correct
i am also curious what happens to the grandchildren of corporate world destroyers. do they get to live on a clean planet somewhere else, after this one is murdered by rampant privatization and corporatism?
i was born near-sighted. for some people, it's a choice.
i find it to be the nature of the lone wolf conspiracy theorist, and something that works against the grand unification conspiracy theory. funny?
yeah, i guess it is. HAHAHAHA! we're sharing a laugh.
now, you go back to being evil, and i'll go back to being good.
and, when we die, the experiment will be to determine if the postulate that what you do in life affects what you get in afterlife is correct
i am also curious what happens to the grandchildren of corporate world destroyers. do they get to live on a clean planet somewhere else, after this one is murdered by rampant privatization and corporatism?
i was born near-sighted. for some people, it's a choice.
QUOTE
Originally posted by yesitdid:
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by yesitdid: Foxx refers to "wack-jobs" but also states that large quantities of thermite burning for days or weeks with "lakes" of water poured on it would produce no more than a whiff of H2S. metamars invokes mini-nukes and space based super weapons which steve1957 and Foxx embrace without batting an eye. |
originally posted by Foxx
Uhhhh, I don't think I said (or implied) that thermite burning for days & weeks would produce no more than a wiff of H2S
Go back and read it again properly YID (without bias), and I think you'll find that I said, ... if it wasn't the diasite formula burning in the basement, and just regular thermite (or formulations that don't use sulphur as the binder), then it would not produce H2S AT ALL)..
No diasite begs the question, what was it?
Burning for days or weeks
Begs the question, how could that much be installed in the towers without anyone noticing?
QUOTE
There are innumerable reports of the STENCH at Ground Zero.
Although, I have yet to run across any which specifically states the stench as being specific to the odor of rotting eggs... the odor of thermite (if it was mixed with sulphur) would also be mixed with OTHER stenches such as burning / rotting corpses (apologies for such graphics - but they can not be discounted) along with anything else which may have been burning, decomposing, or merely present. Not to mention that 'thermite' in the basement area MAY NOT have been 'diasite' (which is the term for the sulphur formula), and may have been another form of thermite which didn't use sulphur as a binder.
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
They could easily mistake it if mixed with other obnoxious fumes.
Oh, it's POISONOUS now ALSO. It'll kill you.
No wonder people are offended by others farting in public (or private for that matter). Perhaps we should pass a law that farting is illegal and anyone doing so should be arrested for attempted murder...
One wiff of a rotting egg will kill you? ... amazing that anyone who knows what a rotting egg smells like has lived to report it to others.
Although, I have yet to run across any which specifically states the stench as being specific to the odor of rotting eggs... the odor of thermite (if it was mixed with sulphur) would also be mixed with OTHER stenches such as burning / rotting corpses (apologies for such graphics - but they can not be discounted) along with anything else which may have been burning, decomposing, or merely present. Not to mention that 'thermite' in the basement area MAY NOT have been 'diasite' (which is the term for the sulphur formula), and may have been another form of thermite which didn't use sulphur as a binder.
And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself.
They could easily mistake it if mixed with other obnoxious fumes.
Oh, it's POISONOUS now ALSO. It'll kill you.
No wonder people are offended by others farting in public (or private for that matter). Perhaps we should pass a law that farting is illegal and anyone doing so should be arrested for attempted murder...
One wiff of a rotting egg will kill you? ... amazing that anyone who knows what a rotting egg smells like has lived to report it to others.
There would be NO rotting bodies at the WTC on the morning of 9/11. They have to be dead first. Did this chemical compound(which in your mind either is or isn't thermite and is or isn't diasite if it is thermite) have some type of delay on it that would cause it not to start reacting until those bodies staarted rotting?
If so this begs the question of how sucha device could survive the collapse of two 110 story buildings?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| There are innumerable reports of the STENCH at Ground Zero. Although, I have yet to run across any which specifically states the stench as being specific to the odor of rotting eggs... the odor of thermite (if it was mixed with sulphur) would also be mixed with OTHER stenches such as burning / rotting corpses (apologies for such graphics - but they can not be discounted) along with anything else which may have been burning, decomposing, or merely present. Not to mention that 'thermite' in the basement area MAY NOT have been 'diasite' (which is the term for the sulphur formula), and may have been another form of thermite which didn't use sulphur as a binder. And this still ignores what I said that PERHAPS it wasn't 'THERMITE' per-se, but 'something' having similar properties, yet might be slower burning than thermite itself. They could easily mistake it if mixed with other obnoxious fumes. Oh, it's POISONOUS now ALSO. It'll kill you. No wonder people are offended by others farting in public (or private for that matter). Perhaps we should pass a law that farting is illegal and anyone doing so should be arrested for attempted murder... One wiff of a rotting egg will kill you? ... amazing that anyone who knows what a rotting egg smells like has lived to report it to others. |
There would be NO rotting bodies at the WTC on the morning of 9/11. They have to be dead first. Did this chemical compound(which in your mind either is or isn't thermite and is or isn't diasite if it is thermite) have some type of delay on it that would cause it not to start reacting until those bodies staarted rotting?
If so this begs the question of how sucha device could survive the collapse of two 110 story buildings?
Don't you see how the sophism and semantics you use detracts from your credibility? Your statement above simply sets up a 'straw-man' by misquoting me, which you then proceed to gleefully attack. People who use such tactics quickly lose their objectivitiy and credibilty in these types of debates.
Your sophistry is invoking some type of explanation and when confronted with facts that contradict your theory, you simply change the theory.
First it was diasite, then just powder thermite now it is an unknown thermite like chemical that burns more slowly.
QUOTE
If you were honestly debating this issue you would take the list of factors which I presented regarding the underground fires and show point by point how normal gravity-driven collapse scenarios can account for all those factors.
Which factors? The underground heat? I don't knwo but simply picking something out of the air seems to be your process in 'explaining' such things. If thermite or some now unknown chemical incindiary was used then show some sort of evidence that it was used. I do recall that your previous foray into such was to show the sulfur concentrations in the samples from the river. Well you have now abandoned the diasite thus no sulfur to react with that 'lake of water' thus no H2S. So what is your evidence now other than the underground heat itself?
Answer: you don't have any(least not that you have shown.
Yet despite this you contend that it is now up to mme to prove that gravity collapse and available fuels could account for the underground fires.
That sir is hypocrisy, a close relative of sophistry.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| If you were honestly debating this issue you would take the list of factors which I presented regarding the underground fires and show point by point how normal gravity-driven collapse scenarios can account for all those factors. |
Which factors? The underground heat? I don't knwo but simply picking something out of the air seems to be your process in 'explaining' such things. If thermite or some now unknown chemical incindiary was used then show some sort of evidence that it was used. I do recall that your previous foray into such was to show the sulfur concentrations in the samples from the river. Well you have now abandoned the diasite thus no sulfur to react with that 'lake of water' thus no H2S. So what is your evidence now other than the underground heat itself?
Answer: you don't have any(least not that you have shown.
Yet despite this you contend that it is now up to mme to prove that gravity collapse and available fuels could account for the underground fires.
That sir is hypocrisy, a close relative of sophistry.
As I don't believe this CAN be done (and you certainly have NOT attempted to address that list in an honest rational debating style), you demonstrate again your unflinching bias with regard to the questions we are attempting to dicuss in a rational and un-emotional way... well, at least some of us.
Your 'emotion' shines through just fine Foxx. You post and post about JFK, JFK jr., and Pearl Harbor, Kent State and your hate of the Bush administration and the neo-cons, here and at other forums yet you wish to have me believe that you are unemotional in your theorizing about the events of 9/11?
Once again, I hate Geo.W.Bush and his administration. I believe that at best the man is out of his league being the POTUS. He is an idiot. Despite all of that I cannot see that there is any evidence that he or any of his administration actually planned and caused to happen the events of 9/11 much less enhanced it by planting bombs or utilizing exotic weaponry.
QUOTE
As far as the implied 'ridiculousness' of hearing theories & speculations regarding mini-nukes & space based weapons, I honestly don't see what you find so outrageous about those things.
Therein lies the problem. You see no problem in invoking such exotic devices even with no evidence that they actually exist or that the existed in Manhattan on 9/11.
I require something more than a 'could'a been'.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| As far as the implied 'ridiculousness' of hearing theories & speculations regarding mini-nukes & space based weapons, I honestly don't see what you find so outrageous about those things. |
Therein lies the problem. You see no problem in invoking such exotic devices even with no evidence that they actually exist or that the existed in Manhattan on 9/11.
I require something more than a 'could'a been'.
According to your implied proposition anyone who thinks the US has Secret Weaponry is an 'idiot' --- the average man-on-the-street knows everything about what's going on in the Ultra-Secret Star Wars (and other Black Projects) military programs... (
Se above. No, I do not claim that I know all about the military's secret weaponry nor that such things may exist. However invoking such things is tantamount to invoking magic.
QUOTE
Ask your father (I assume he was around during the last World War), If he had ANY INKLING that Nuclear Bombs were in development and operational PRIOR to their USE in Japan.
He was 13 when the war ended. He may or may not have any inkling that it existed or not. Irrelevent though. No one is stating that the military used sucha weapon in secret against its own people.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Ask your father (I assume he was around during the last World War), If he had ANY INKLING that Nuclear Bombs were in development and operational PRIOR to their USE in Japan. |
He was 13 when the war ended. He may or may not have any inkling that it existed or not. Irrelevent though. No one is stating that the military used sucha weapon in secret against its own people.
I cannot recall metamars (or anyone else for that matter on this thread) stating boldly with strong convictions that it WAS or MUST HAVE BEEN a mini-nuke. Like-wise with 'space-beams'. but, you seem to think that 'possibilities' are IMPOSSIBLE just because it hasn't been proven with some kind of confession or signed work-order from 'the perps'. They are certainly NOT IMPOSSIBLE, (even though they may be unlikely according to the actual facts we have at our disposal today), nevertheless these 'far-out' things are Certainly MORE LIKELY than EVER finding a work-order (or signed confession) from black opts 'spooks' capable of carrying out such seemingly physics defying acts.
You realize that you started this out by saying no one has stated that they have strong convictions about such exotica and ended it by stating that it is " MORE LIKELY than EVER ".
If you misspoke that last sentence then you better correct it. Otherwise you have two contradictory statements in the same paragraph.
_________________________
Metamars, you seem to have gotten your back up about what I have said about your theories.
Too bad really. However if it is my tone that bothers you then please note that twice I have been told to not use the term 'CT', that it is offensive. I have done so but I still get called 'shill' and you characterize my beliefs as 'fairy tales'. If you don't like my characterization of your theories then please tell me what you would like them referred to as.
QUOTE
The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics
This keeps coming up. What 'vaporized' steel?
How much? Got a percentage of steel used in the towers that was powderized or vaoprized?
Please show a link to those "OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES".
You , I suppose refer to the few instances of 'eroded' steel refered to in IIRC, the NIST report. However both you and others seem to want to imply that tons of steel was vaporized. That requires some proof IMHO.
newton,
Even though I have to be tough on metemars, it's really not about him personally, it's about the TRUTH and justice.
Here is the best analogy I can use.
It's like living in Nazi Germany and discovering through a mountain of evidence, that Jews are being rounded up, thrown into trains and hauled off into Auschwitz, later to be gassed.
And a few people know about it, have video evidence, eyewitnesses, and some testimonies from people who have escaped.
And so they get together with their town folks and show all the evidence, which goes beyond any doubt.
There's a few Nazi's standing around them, (we'll use Arthur, yesdidit and common sense, as an example) who call all the evidence lies, saying Hitler is a great guy who would never do such a thing, but when the Jews who escaped present irrefutable evidence, the Nazi, like arthur can't legitimately disprove it so he he screams like a chicken with it's head cut off, and dances around the issues in hopes of getting peoples minds off of what's really going on.
Now as Nazi like as arthur is, he's not even that much of a problem, because he wears his swastika right on his arm, we know exactly who he worships.
And so when the Nazi's are gone, the Jews gather together and discuss what their doing to our brothers and sisters in Auschwitz, however un-be known to most of the people, there are some Jews who have secretly made some deals with Nazi's to infiltrate their meeting and try to detour the group from taking action to save as many lives as they can.
They're not quite sure what to do, but the more evidence they get, the better equipped they are to make the best decisions on how to MINIMIZE the damage, maybe by planning an escape or some other means of escaping Auschwitz.
But little by little, one of the Jews starts saying, "We don't know for sure what's happening in Auschwitz" "Maybe we should raise some money and go to Berlin and hire some PhD's to help analyze the evidence so we know for sure.
And then someone like myself says, we don't have the time, let alone the money. The train is coming to take us away tomorrow and we need to make some decisions based upon what we already know, so we can do whatever we have to do QUICKLY. And furthermore, the PhD's in Berlin may also be Nazi's or Hitler supporters, or they may be too afraid to speak out against Hitler and will therefore taint their spin, so as to make Hitler not look so bad.
And furthermore, this could take months or years to analyze the data, and the train is coming tomorrow.
And so it is, the Jew, much like metemars proceeds to convince the rest of the crowd that IT'S WRONG TO MAKE QUICK DECISIONS, and that THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS HIRE A PhD., no matter how long it takes.
But the guy who knows what the Nazi's are doing understands the critical nature of the situation and proceeds to tell the rest of the people that WE HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH EVIDENCE and we simply do not have time.
So a little argument takes place, and some people side with the guy who wants to hire the spin doctors, while others understand that people are getting killed and the evidence is overwhelming. The spin doctor crowd takes the position that because one of the guys who presented the evidence, conclusively proving that the Nazi's are indeed killing people, just happens to believe in God, that the evidence therefore must be null and void, no matter how conclusive it is.
This of course is just an analogy.
Even though I have to be tough on metemars, it's really not about him personally, it's about the TRUTH and justice.
Here is the best analogy I can use.
It's like living in Nazi Germany and discovering through a mountain of evidence, that Jews are being rounded up, thrown into trains and hauled off into Auschwitz, later to be gassed.
And a few people know about it, have video evidence, eyewitnesses, and some testimonies from people who have escaped.
And so they get together with their town folks and show all the evidence, which goes beyond any doubt.
There's a few Nazi's standing around them, (we'll use Arthur, yesdidit and common sense, as an example) who call all the evidence lies, saying Hitler is a great guy who would never do such a thing, but when the Jews who escaped present irrefutable evidence, the Nazi, like arthur can't legitimately disprove it so he he screams like a chicken with it's head cut off, and dances around the issues in hopes of getting peoples minds off of what's really going on.
Now as Nazi like as arthur is, he's not even that much of a problem, because he wears his swastika right on his arm, we know exactly who he worships.
And so when the Nazi's are gone, the Jews gather together and discuss what their doing to our brothers and sisters in Auschwitz, however un-be known to most of the people, there are some Jews who have secretly made some deals with Nazi's to infiltrate their meeting and try to detour the group from taking action to save as many lives as they can.
They're not quite sure what to do, but the more evidence they get, the better equipped they are to make the best decisions on how to MINIMIZE the damage, maybe by planning an escape or some other means of escaping Auschwitz.
But little by little, one of the Jews starts saying, "We don't know for sure what's happening in Auschwitz" "Maybe we should raise some money and go to Berlin and hire some PhD's to help analyze the evidence so we know for sure.
And then someone like myself says, we don't have the time, let alone the money. The train is coming to take us away tomorrow and we need to make some decisions based upon what we already know, so we can do whatever we have to do QUICKLY. And furthermore, the PhD's in Berlin may also be Nazi's or Hitler supporters, or they may be too afraid to speak out against Hitler and will therefore taint their spin, so as to make Hitler not look so bad.
And furthermore, this could take months or years to analyze the data, and the train is coming tomorrow.
And so it is, the Jew, much like metemars proceeds to convince the rest of the crowd that IT'S WRONG TO MAKE QUICK DECISIONS, and that THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS HIRE A PhD., no matter how long it takes.
But the guy who knows what the Nazi's are doing understands the critical nature of the situation and proceeds to tell the rest of the people that WE HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH EVIDENCE and we simply do not have time.
So a little argument takes place, and some people side with the guy who wants to hire the spin doctors, while others understand that people are getting killed and the evidence is overwhelming. The spin doctor crowd takes the position that because one of the guys who presented the evidence, conclusively proving that the Nazi's are indeed killing people, just happens to believe in God, that the evidence therefore must be null and void, no matter how conclusive it is.
This of course is just an analogy.
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 9 2006, 04:47 PM)
I love the smell of paranoia in the morning!
Happens every time on these 9/11 kook threads.
Leave these clowns alone for a while and their delusions begin to focus on each other.
Hilarious.
QUOTE (steve1957+Jan 9 2006, 12:04 AM)
Fascinating how different people's emotions are. Some feel sorry for prideful airheads, while others feel sorry for innocent people in Iraq.
QUESTION: Which one of these children blew up the twin towers?
ANSWER: NONE! We need to check our own backyard
The REAL Question: Which of these were killed by Sunni TERRORISTS (you know the ones that Steve1957 supports via his web site)?
_Jan. 5, 2006: A suicide bombing in Ramadi that kills 56 people and a suicide blast near a Shiite Muslim shrine in Karbala that kills 63.
_Jan. 4, 2006: A suicide bomber strikes a Shiite funeral east of Baqouba, killing at least 32 mourners.
_Nov. 24, 2005: A suicide bomber blows up his car outside a hospital south of Baghdad while U.S. troops are handing out candy and food to children, killing 30 people.
_Nov. 19, 2005: A suicide bomber detonates his car in a crowd of Shiite Muslim mourners north of Baghdad, killing at least 36 people.
_Nov. 18, 2005: Near-simultaneous suicide bombings kill 74 worshipers at two Shiite mosques near the Iranian border.
_Nov. 10, 2005: A suicide bomber blows himself up in a Baghdad restaurant killing 35 people.
_Oct. 29, 2005: A truck bomb attack against Shiite civilians in the farming village of Huweder kills 30 people.
_Oct. 11, 2005: A suicide car bomb explodes in a crowded open market in Tal Afar, killing at least 30 people.
_Sept. 29, 2005: Three suicide attackers detonate car bombs in the mostly Shiite town of Balad, north of Baghdad, killing at least 102 people.
_Sept. 17, 2005: A remote-controlled car bomb rips through a produce market in a poor Shiite neighborhood on the outskirts of Baghdad, killing at least 30 people.
_Sept. 14, 2005: A suicide car bomber strikes as day laborers gather shortly after dawn in a heavily Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad, killing 112 people.
_Aug. 17, 2005: Three car bombs explode near a bus station in Baghdad and at a nearby hospital, killing up to 43 people.
_July 16, 2005: Suicide bomber detonates explosives strapped to his body at a gas station near a Shiite mosque in Musayyib, killing at least 54 people.
_March 10, 2005: A suicide bomber blows himself up at a Shiite mosque in the northern city of Mosul, killing at least 47 people.
_Dec. 19, 2004: Car bombs tear through a Najaf funeral procession and Karbala's main bus station, killing at least 60 people.
_Sept. 30, 2004: A series of bombings in Baghdad kill 35 children and seven adults as U.S. troops hand out candy at a ceremony to inaugurate a sewage treatment plant.
_Sept. 14, 2004: A car bomb rips through a market near a Baghdad police headquarters killing at least 59 people.
_July 29, 2004: A suicide car bomb devastates a street in Baqouba, killing 70 people.
_March 2, 2004: Coordinated blasts from suicide bombers, mortars and planted explosives strike Shiite shrines in Karbala and Baghdad, killing at least 181 people.
Great people to associate yourself with STEVE.
That's about 1,000 people, mostly all Shiite, many of them children, at bus stops, markets, funerals and mosques. I left off the relatively few attacks on police stations, since they conceivably have a "military" reason. The attacks listed were ALL against unarmed civilians.
Yeah, those terrorists you support on your web site are real nice people.
Arthur
Costal,
I wonder why these guys don't think it's so funny?
I wonder why these guys don't think it's so funny?
Hey Adolph, I mean arthur,
Yeah, since those little Muslim bastards did 9/11 they deserve everything that we did to them and we can all sleep good at night knowing we're doing the right thing.
adolph, if you felt some shame and disgrace you'd be far better off, but here's the real danger. When people don't feel ashamed they continue on their path to destruction.
In some ways I feel more sorry for you, because I have no doubt that God is with these little children, and will comfort them in His time, you on the other hand may have some serious issues to resolve with your Maker, that may not be as pleasant as you'd like.
I'm not God and it's not my place to say just how you'll be dealt with, however God makes it very clear that murdering innocent children may indeed result in un-desirable consequences from heaven above.
Luke 17:2 "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones".
Yeah, since those little Muslim bastards did 9/11 they deserve everything that we did to them and we can all sleep good at night knowing we're doing the right thing.
adolph, if you felt some shame and disgrace you'd be far better off, but here's the real danger. When people don't feel ashamed they continue on their path to destruction.
In some ways I feel more sorry for you, because I have no doubt that God is with these little children, and will comfort them in His time, you on the other hand may have some serious issues to resolve with your Maker, that may not be as pleasant as you'd like.
I'm not God and it's not my place to say just how you'll be dealt with, however God makes it very clear that murdering innocent children may indeed result in un-desirable consequences from heaven above.
Luke 17:2 "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones".
well, i agree with your summing up of the parallel conditions that existed in nazi germany.
however, when i look back at that war, i don't just see nazis and jews and double agents. i see a whole lattice of falsehood overlaid atop reality. and, most importantly, that MASSES of people went along with it.
i think if someone wants to hire professional thinker, that is good. it won't stop other people from screaming 'they're exterminating people'. the more people who actually DO something towards a resolution, the better.
the truth movement doesn't need to be unified. it only needs to keep moving, imo.
look at the salivating. laughing devils on the sidelines, here. they love to watch us fall on one another.
best to focus on what can be done. i made copies of 911eyewitness and passed them out to people i know, for example. it is propoganda we are fighting, and it must be fought with counter-propoganda.
however, when i look back at that war, i don't just see nazis and jews and double agents. i see a whole lattice of falsehood overlaid atop reality. and, most importantly, that MASSES of people went along with it.
i think if someone wants to hire professional thinker, that is good. it won't stop other people from screaming 'they're exterminating people'. the more people who actually DO something towards a resolution, the better.
the truth movement doesn't need to be unified. it only needs to keep moving, imo.
look at the salivating. laughing devils on the sidelines, here. they love to watch us fall on one another.
best to focus on what can be done. i made copies of 911eyewitness and passed them out to people i know, for example. it is propoganda we are fighting, and it must be fought with counter-propoganda.
QUOTE
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics This keeps coming up. What 'vaporized' steel? How much? Got a percentage of steel used in the towers that was powderized or vaoprized? Please show a link to those "OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES". You , I suppose refer to the few instances of 'eroded' steel refered to in IIRC, the NIST report. However both you and others seem to want to imply that tons of steel was vaporized. That requires some proof IMHO. |
I most certainly do not imply that tons of steel was vaporized. The very fact that some of it was "vaoprized" (sic) is irrefutable proof that forces other than 2 terrorist-laden aircraft fueled by a hatred for western values were responsible for the demise of the twin towers (and not forgetting wtc7).
QUOTE
A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said.
PAY PER VIEW HERE
HERE'S THE LINK TO THE CACHED VERSION
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...by_collapse.htm
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said. |
PAY PER VIEW HERE
HERE'S THE LINK TO THE CACHED VERSION
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...by_collapse.htm
2.8.1 Observations and Findings
a. The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.
b. Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.
c. The sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.
d. The high concentration of sulfides in the grain boundaries of the corroded regions of the steel occurred due to copper diffusing from the high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steel combining with iron and sulfur, making both discrete and continuous sulfides in the steel grain boundaries.
8.2.8 Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination
Two structural steel samples from the WTC site were observed to have unusual erosion patterns. One sample is believed to be from WTC 7 and the other from either WTC 1 or WTC 2
8.2.8.2 Recommendations
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 constitute an unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this was the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch8.pdf
QUOTE
The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel
There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.
Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.
A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.
"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."
Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says.
From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.
The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community.
There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.
Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.
A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.
"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."
Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says.
From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.
The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community.
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/20...ring/steel.html
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese. Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes. A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity. "The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain." Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says. From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity. The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community. |
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/20...ring/steel.html
The principal clue leading us to the existence of the rogue network behind 9/11 is the “Angel is next” threat. Since hasty attempts to deny that this ever existed came soon after 9/11, we pause to document the evidence that this call really did take place.
In an interview with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday, National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice confirmed that the September 11 threat against President Bush’s life included a secret code name.
SNOW: Sept. 11 there was a report that there was a coded message that
said, “We’re going to strike Air Force One” that was using specific coded
language and made the threat credible. Is that true?
RICE: That is true.
SNOW: So we have a mole somewhere?
RICE: It’s not clear how this coded name was gotten. We’re a very open
society and I don’t think it’s any surprise to anyone that leaks happen. So,
I don’t know -- it’s possible the code name leaked a long time ago and was
just used.
SNOW: How on earth would that happen?
RICE: I don’t know. I don’t know. We’re obviously looking very hard at
the situation. But I will tell you that it was plenty of evidence from our
point of view to have special measures taken at that moment to make sure
the president was safe
QUOTE
Leahy asked Ashcroft by what authority had he decided - on his own and without judicial review - to nullify the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. He asked for an explanation and some description of the procedural safeguards that Ashcroft would put in place. He asked Ashcroft to appear before the Judiciary committee and to respond in writing by November 13.
His answer came a little late.
On November 16, Patrick Leahy received an anthrax letter. And, as of this press time, Ashcroft has not responded in writing.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992265
Anthrax attack bug "identical" to army strain
19:00 09 May 02 NewScientist.com news service
The DNA sequence of the anthrax sent through the US mail in 2001 has been revealed and confirms suspicions that the bacteria originally came from a US military laboratory.
The data released uses codenames for the reference strains against which the attack strain was compared. But New Scientist can reveal that the two reference strains that appear identical to the attack strain most likely originated at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick (USAMRIID), Maryland.
The new work also shows that substantial genetic differences can emerge in two samples of an anthrax culture separated for only three years. This means the attacker's anthrax was not separated from its ancestors at USAMRIID for many generations.
April 8, 2002
Anthrax and the Agency: Thinking the Unthinkable
By Wayne Madsen
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsenanthrax.html
Now that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has officially put the anthrax investigation on a back burner, it is time for Americans to think the unthinkable: that the FBI has never been keen to identify the perpetrator because that perpetrator may, in fact, be the U.S. Government itself. Evidence is mounting that the source of the anthrax was a top secret U.S. Army laboratory in Maryland and that the perpetrators involve high-level officials in the U.S. military and intelligence infrastructure.
X: ANTHRAX
I would say the vaporized steel, the "made in USA" anthrax and the "angel is next" threat are sufficient grounds for the immediate arrest of George W. Bush for the murder of 3000 Americans on September 11th 2001.
His answer came a little late.
On November 16, Patrick Leahy received an anthrax letter. And, as of this press time, Ashcroft has not responded in writing.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992265
Anthrax attack bug "identical" to army strain
19:00 09 May 02 NewScientist.com news service
The DNA sequence of the anthrax sent through the US mail in 2001 has been revealed and confirms suspicions that the bacteria originally came from a US military laboratory.
The data released uses codenames for the reference strains against which the attack strain was compared. But New Scientist can reveal that the two reference strains that appear identical to the attack strain most likely originated at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick (USAMRIID), Maryland.
The new work also shows that substantial genetic differences can emerge in two samples of an anthrax culture separated for only three years. This means the attacker's anthrax was not separated from its ancestors at USAMRIID for many generations.
April 8, 2002
Anthrax and the Agency: Thinking the Unthinkable
By Wayne Madsen
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsenanthrax.html
Now that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has officially put the anthrax investigation on a back burner, it is time for Americans to think the unthinkable: that the FBI has never been keen to identify the perpetrator because that perpetrator may, in fact, be the U.S. Government itself. Evidence is mounting that the source of the anthrax was a top secret U.S. Army laboratory in Maryland and that the perpetrators involve high-level officials in the U.S. military and intelligence infrastructure.
X: ANTHRAX
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Leahy asked Ashcroft by what authority had he decided - on his own and without judicial review - to nullify the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. He asked for an explanation and some description of the procedural safeguards that Ashcroft would put in place. He asked Ashcroft to appear before the Judiciary committee and to respond in writing by November 13. His answer came a little late. On November 16, Patrick Leahy received an anthrax letter. And, as of this press time, Ashcroft has not responded in writing. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992265 Anthrax attack bug "identical" to army strain 19:00 09 May 02 NewScientist.com news service The DNA sequence of the anthrax sent through the US mail in 2001 has been revealed and confirms suspicions that the bacteria originally came from a US military laboratory. The data released uses codenames for the reference strains against which the attack strain was compared. But New Scientist can reveal that the two reference strains that appear identical to the attack strain most likely originated at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick (USAMRIID), Maryland. The new work also shows that substantial genetic differences can emerge in two samples of an anthrax culture separated for only three years. This means the attacker's anthrax was not separated from its ancestors at USAMRIID for many generations. April 8, 2002 Anthrax and the Agency: Thinking the Unthinkable By Wayne Madsen http://www.counterpunch.org/madsenanthrax.html Now that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has officially put the anthrax investigation on a back burner, it is time for Americans to think the unthinkable: that the FBI has never been keen to identify the perpetrator because that perpetrator may, in fact, be the U.S. Government itself. Evidence is mounting that the source of the anthrax was a top secret U.S. Army laboratory in Maryland and that the perpetrators involve high-level officials in the U.S. military and intelligence infrastructure. X: ANTHRAX The anthrax incidents of October 2001 must be regarded as an integral part of the entire 9/11 operation. The 9/11 terror attacks were highly effective in terrorizing urban populations, since no one knew when another city might be struck, and with what means. But what of the vast suburbs, and what of rural America? Here kamikaze aircraft, poison gas and dirty bombs were hardly likely. But everyone in the country had a mailbox, and now that mailbox could become the delivery system for a deadly disease. Even the most humble and obscure person living in the most remote location could never be sure that a piece of junk mail in the letterbox had not brushed up against an envelope teeming with lethal anthrax spores. The most harmless daily routine, that of checking the mailbox, suddenly became a tense encounter with the world of biological warfare. The anthrax attacks also provided a most welcome pretext for the Bush administration and the FBI to scale down and to slow down the ongoing probes into 9/11. The anthrax letters provided a reason to re-assign FBI agents to the new danger, before they got anywhere near unearthing the explosive secrets of 9/11. On October 10, FBI assets were shifted away from the 9/11 investigation with the explanation that they were needed for the anthrax emergency. At the same time the anthrax attacks, if properly regarded, can become the Achilles heel of the entire 9/11 operation, since it is here that the cause and effect relationship reaching into the secure weapons labs and military facilities of the US federal government is the most obvious. Anthrax cannot be synthesized by a bunch of rag-heads in a distant cave. Weaponized anthrax can only be obtained at the US Army’s biological weapons facility at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and at a very few other centers of the same type controlled by other governments.The existence of weaponized anthrax is ipso facto a strong case for US government collusion in terror attacks on this country. The anthrax cases also provide a case study in FBI obstruction of justice. After the anthrax letters were used as a pretext for paring down the 9/11 searches, the agents so reassigned accomplished virtually nothing. For a long time the bureau pretended that any microbiologist could have been the killer. But the pool of potential anthrax suspects was of course much smaller – it numbered in the dozens, or less. But, in order to define a realistic suspect pool, the FBI would have had to admit that the most likely source of the anthrax attacks was the government labs themselves, and that was something the FBI clearly did not want to do, lest this revelation be projected backwards onto 9/11. After a while Stephen Hatfill, a supposedly disgruntled former biowar researcher with a sinister resume and opinions, and thus a probable diversionary scapegoat, was identified as a person of interest. He was vilified by FBI leakers, but never indicted. The FBI made a Potemkin show of an investigation by draining a pond near Frederick, Maryland, but Hatfill was never charged. We may also note in passing that the US government response to the anthrax cases pointed up the extent of oligarchical stratification in this society. Bush and the White House staff started taking Cipro, an antidote to anthrax, before the attacks even started. Members of Congress and congressional staffers got Cipro as soon as anthrax letters were found on Capitol Hill, and their offices were shut down instantly. In the case of black postal workers, the Postal Service expected them to keep working in tainted facilities, while at the same time there was a marked reluctance to give out free Cipro to these workers. The head of the USPS, a Bush appointee, said that any criticism of how he ran his agency amounted to aid and comfort for terrorists. We cannot exclude the hypothesis that the anthrax cases were intended to become a much larger epidemic, one that might have claimed thousands of lives rather than just a few. Finally, in the anthrax cases, we have a prima facie case for political targeting. The first recipients of anthrax letters were a tabloid newspaper which had been prominent in publicizing the disorderly and at times illegal conduct of Bush 43’s two substanceabusing daughters. Other recipients, like Senators Daschel and Leahy, were possible sources of opposition to the Patriot Act and other liberticide measures demanded by Bushand Ashcroft. Between October 10 and October 11, just one week after the first case of anthrax had been reported, the FBI contacted the University of Iowa in Ames, Iowa. For seventy years this university had maintained a comprehensive repository of samples of every known strain of anthrax pathogen. This university was furthermore the source which provided samples of anthrax pathogen to researchers seeking cures, and also to labs seeking to weaponize the pathogen. Immediately after this phone call by the FBI, the University of Iowa destroyed the Ames anthrax repository. While it is not difficult to imagine the cover stories the FBI might have used to obtain this result, it is also clear that the Ames repository could have been the key to definitively solving the anthrax letters case. Analysis of the anthrax spores in the letters by chemical and DNA techniques identified these spores as belonging to the Ames strain. With the help of the samples collected in the repository, it would have been possible to identify with great precision the specific batch from which the anthrax letters had been filled, along with a paper trail leading to the agency to which the sample had been transferred. As the New York Times reported: Shortly after the first case of anthrax arose, the FBI said it had no objection to the destruction of a collection of anthrax samples at Iowa State University, but some scientists involved in the investigation now say that collection may have contained genetic clues valuable to the inquiry. Criminal investigators have not visited many of the companies, laboratories, and scientific institutions with the equipment or capability to make the kind of highly potent anthrax sent in a letter to Senator Tom Daschle, the majority leader. Where investigators have conducted interviews, they often seemed to ask general questions unlikely to elicit new evidence, several laboratory directors said. Evidence Disappears Last month, after consulting with the FBI, Iowa State University in Ames destroyed anthrax spores collected over more than seven decades and kept in more than 100 vials. A variant of the so-called Ames strain had been implicated in the death of a Florida man from inhalation anthrax, and the university was nervous about security. Now, a dispute has arisen, with scientists in and out of government saying the rush to destroy the spores may have eliminated crucial evidence about the anthrax in the letters sent to Congress and the news media. If the archive still existed, it would by no means solve the mystery. But scientists said a precise match between the anthrax that killed four people and a particular strain in the collection might have offered hints as to when the bacteria had been isolated and, perhaps, how widely it had been distributed to researchers. And that, in turn, might have given investigators important clues to the killer’s identity. No matter how scientifically illiterate they might be, the reflex response of any real detective would be to veto the destruction of anything remotely resembling evidence, or even of a key to interpreting evidence. But this time around, the FBI was pleading ignorance. According to Bill Tobin, a former forensic metallurgist who had worked at the infamous and scandal-ridden FBI crime laboratory in Washington DC, “The bureau was caught almost as unaware and unprepared as the public was for these events. It’s just not realistic to ask 7,000 agents to overnight become sufficiently knowledgeable about bioterrorist agents [sic] and possible means of theft of those items and how they might be disseminated lethally to an American public.” Dr. Martin Jones, an anthrax expert at Louisiana State University, commented: “If those cultures were still alive they could have helped in clearing up the muddied history” of the spores found in the letters. Ronald M. Atlas, the president-elect of the American Society of Microbiology, the world’s largest group of “germ professionals,” saw large legal implications in the destruction of evidence. “Potentially,” he said, “it loses evidence that would have been useful” in the legal investigation. (New York Times, “Experts See FBI Missteps Hampering Anthrax Inquiry,” November 11, 2002) The FBI was obviously out to sabotage its own investigation. Here is yet another case of manifest obstruction of justice by the FBI molehill. The 9/11 commission ignores both the anthrax affair overall and the obstruction of justice by the FBI. Starting about a week after 9/11, anthrax letters began to arrive at the offices of The Sun, a supermarket tabloid based in Florida, of Senators Daschle and Leahy, NBC News, and the New York Post. On October 5, Bob Stevens, photo editor of The Sun, died of anthrax. A number of postal workers in Washington DC also succumbed. A total of five people died. The anthrax spores found in the letters were the product of very sophisticated milling, and were coated with a chemical, silica, that is unique to US laboratories, Iraqi anthrax, by contrast, is coated with bentonite, a mixture of silica and aluminum.  A great deal of publicity was given to a series of reports by Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, a former government official and microbiologist at the State University of New York who was also working for the Federation of American Scientists. Rosenberg’s work was enthusiastically supported by the Stockholm International Peace Institute (SIPRI), and the radical ecologists of Greenpeace. The FBI orchestrated a series of derogatory leaks about Rosenberg, suggesting that a gang/counter-gang operation might be in progress. Rosenberg’s basic thesis was that the anthrax attacks were the work of a disgruntled lone assassin who had once worked for the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Maryland, near Frederick, but had subsequently been laid off. Naturally, the lone assassin approach tended to rule out an action by a more extensive network of moles in the federal government, which seems much more probable. Whenever extremely complicated and demanding operations are attributed to a disgruntled loner, we should be on guard against disinformation fabricated by the intelligence community. For example, the terrorizing impact of the anthrax letters was vastly increased by their synchronization with the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Was this a mere coincidence, or did the authors of the anthrax operation have advance knowledge that 9/11 was coming? How could Hatfill have been able to coordinate his supposed actions with 9/11? Once again, the rogue networks of the invisible government, and not any disgruntled loner, emerge as the prime suspects. And there were other disinformation operations. Former CIA Director James Woolsey, a neocon who worked for a law firm representing Achmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress, began a vigorous campaign to blame the anthrax attacks on Iraq. In addition, an anonymous letter was sent to police, apparently in September, accusing an Egyptianborn American scientist who had been laid off by USAMRIID of being a terrorist. The FBI questioned him and said that he was innocent. Details of the letter have not been released. Rosenberg thought it likely that this letter had been sent by the perpetrator. According to Rosenberg’s January 2002 statement, The FBI has surely known for several months that the anthrax attack was an inside job. A government estimate for the number of scientists involved in the US anthrax program over the last five years is 200 people. According to a former defense scientist the number of defense scientists with hands-on anthrax experience and the necessary access is smaller, under 50. The FBI has received short lists of specific suspects with credible motives from a number of knowledgeable inside sources, and has found or been given clues (beyond those presented below) that could lead to incriminating evidence. By now the FBI must have a good idea of who the perpetrator is. There may be two factors accounting for the lack of public acknowledgement and the paucity of information being released: a fear that embarrassing details might become public, and a need for secrecy in order to acquire sufficient hard evidence to convict the perpetrator. As for the anthrax, Rosenberg agreed that there was no doubt that the spores came from a US government lab:All letter samples contain the same strain of anthrax, corresponding to the AMES strain in the Northern Arizona University database (which has been used for identification)…..Contrary to early speculation, there are no more than about 20 laboratories known to have the Ames strain. The names of 15 of these have been found in the open literature. Of these, probably only about four in the US might possibly have the capability for weaponizing anthrax. Those four include both US military laboratories and a government contractor. Rosenberg based these conclusions on a technical analysis of the anthrax spores: The extraordinary concentration (one trillion spores per gram) and purity of the letter anthrax is believed to be characteristic of material made by the optimal US process…..The optimal US weaponization process is secret— Bill Patrick, its inventor, holds five secret patents on the process and says it involves a combination of chemicals. There is no evidence that any other country possesses the formula. Under the microscope, the letter anthrax appears to be unmilled. Milled anthrax spores are identifiable because they contain debris. The optimal US process does not use milling. The Daschle sample contains a special form of silica used in the US process. It does not contain bentonite (used by the Iraqis). A “coating” on the spores in the letter sample, indicative of the secret US process, has been observed. Rosenberg’s thesis was that the sender of the anthrax letters had been familiar with a study about using a scenario of this type for a terror attack which had been conducted by anthrax weaponization expert Bill Patrick of USAMRID a couple of years earlier: A classified report dated February, 1999 discusses responses to an anthrax attack through the mail. The report, precipitated by a series of false anthrax mailings, was written by William Patrick, inventor of the US weaponization process, under a CIA contract to SAIC. The report describes what the US military could do and what a terrorist might be able to achieve…..the report predicted about 2.5g of anthrax per envelope (the Daschle letter contained 2g) and assumed a poorer quality of anthrax than that found in the Daschle letter. If the perpetrator had access to the materials and information necessary for the attack, he must have had security clearance or other means for accessing classified information, and may therefore have seen the report and used it as a model for the attack. Rosenberg offered the following portrait of the anthrax killer: “Insider in US biodefense, doctoral degree in a relevant branch of biology; Middle-aged American; Experienced and skilled in working with hazardous pathogens, including anthrax, and avoiding contamination; Works for a CIA contractor in Washington, DC area; Has up-to-date vaccination with anthrax vaccine; Has clearance for access to classified information;Worked in USAMRIID laboratory in the past, in some capacity, and has access now; Knows Bill Patrick and has probably learned a thing or two about weaponization from him, informally; Has had training or experience in covering evidence; May have had an UNSCOM connection; Has had a dispute with a government agency; Has a private location where the materials for the attack were accumulated and prepared; Worked on the letters alone or with peripheral encouragement and assistance; Fits FBI profile; Has the necessary expertise, access and a past history indicating appropriate capabilities and temperament; Has been questioned by FBI.” (Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, “Analysis of the Source of the Anthrax Attacks,” January 17-31, 2002) During the autumn of 2001, the FBI blanketed central New Jersey with leaflets showing a sample of the anthrax killer’s handwriting. The FBI also sent questionnaires to 32,000 US microbiologists, most of whom worked in fields that had nothing to do with the government’s anthrax labs. This was clearly busy work designed to avoid making the government the prime suspects in the attacks. George Monbiot of The Guardian mocked this farce as “kind of ‘investigation’ which might have been appropriate for the unwitnessed hit and run killing of a person with no known enemies. Rather than homing in on the likely suspects, in other words, it appears to have cast a net full of holes over the entire population.” Monbiot reported that he had telephoned an FBI spokesman about this issue. “Why, I asked, when the evidence was so abundant, did the trail appear to have gone cold? ‘The investigation is continuing,’ the spokesman replied. ‘Has it gone cold because it has led you to a government office?’ I asked. He put down the phone.” Monbiot speculated that the reticence had to do with covering up US violations of international biowarfare treaties, since “the army's development of weaponized anthrax, for example, directly contravenes both the biological weapons convention and domestic law. So does its plan to test live microbes in ‘aerosol chambers’ at the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, also in Maryland. So does its development of a genetically modified fungus for attacking coca crops in Colombia, and GM bacteria for destroying materials belonging to enemy forces. These, as the research group Project Sunshine has discovered, appear to be just a tiny sample of the illegal offensive biological research programmes which the US government has secretly funded. Several prominent scientists have suggested that the FBI's investigation is being pursued with less than the rigour we might have expected because the federal authorities have something to hide. The FBI has dismissed them as conspiracy theorists. But there is surely a point after which incompetence becomes an insufficient explanation for failure.” (The Guardian, May 21,2002) This would appear to have been Barbara Hatch Rosenberg’s line as well. In a sympathetic profile in the March 18, 2002 New Yorker, Nicholas Lemann reported that Rosenberg believes that the American bioweapons program, which won't allow itself to be monitored, may be in violation of the 1972 Biological Weapons convention. If the anthrax attacks were the work of a lone, disgruntled, mad scientist, the case for strengthening international safeguards would be enhanced. Rosenberg’s basic demand was that this program be monitored. Fair enough, but not the whole story.Towards the end of June, 2002 the FBI obtained a search warrant to examine the Maryland home of Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, 48, a bio-defence researcher who had worked at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Hatfill said at once that he was the victim of a witch-hunt. When he lived in Rhodesia, Hatfill once studied close to a school which bears the same name as the bogus address on the envelopes containing the fatal doses of anthrax. (The Guardian, June 28, 2002) On July 2, New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof referred to Hatfill as “Mr. Z” and strongly suggested that the FBI should jail him as the anthrax terrorist. “If Mr. Z were an Arab national, he would have been imprisoned long ago. It's time for the FBI to make a move: Either it should go after him more aggressively, sifting thoroughly through his past and picking up loose threads, or it should seek to exculpate him and remove this cloud of suspicion.” In essence, the FBI did neither. Kristof and the other journalists hostile to Hatfill claimed that in the late 1970s, Rhodesian special forces attacked black-owned farms with anthrax, and sought to link Hatfill to these attacks. Hatfill held a press conference on August 12, 2002 in which he once again denied everything. In late August 2002, a paid two-page advertisement in the Washington Times argued that the anthrax killer had to be a member of the US military, probably someone with access to the U.S. off-budget, secret biological-warfare laboratories, or else someone with access to the Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC) report on anthrax-mailing. The author of the ad was a certain Pete Velis. Velis asserted that Steven Hatfill was not the perpetrator. Velis maintained that the evidence indicated that the mailings were probably prepared beginning two years earlier, and that the purpose was political -- to scare the U.S. into a domestic security/wartime response -- and not to kill a lot of people. He noted that the targets were among the strongest potential opponents of “Executive Branch/Homeland Security Wartime Powers expansions,” citing, for example, the mailing to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The SAIC report, which Velis says contained “the exact specifications of the anthrax mailed” would suggest that the mailers came from a group of military officers with access to the SAIC report. (Washington Times, August 26, 2002) A day earlier Hatfill and his lawyer held a second press conference, which received exceptionally broad media coverage, denouncing the FBI and Attorney General John Ashcroft for the tactics used in their investigation. Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, after having been interviewed by the FBI, said that the agents had asked repeatedly whether a team of government scientists could be trying to frame Hatfill. “They kept asking me did I think there might be a group in the biodefense community that was trying to land the blame on Hatfill,” she told the press. (Washington Times, August 3, 2002) Whatever the gyrations of the FBI, it was clear that the anthrax came from the US government, and that the FBI had deliberately flubbed the investigation. The pond draining of 2003 changed nothing in this picture. By the summer of 2004, it was evident that the FBI would never solve the anthrax case because it did not want to awaken the US population to the reality that terrorism can come, and indeed does come, not out of a distant cave, but out of a US government lab on a military base. As for Hatfill, he was most probably a fall guy. If the FBI was incompetent before 9/11, and incompetent in its first major test thereafter, what then is the likely truth value of the statements made by the FBI about 9/11 itself?  anthrax note 1 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/lon.../07/317435.html WIKIPEDIA ANTHRAX ATTACKS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks  anthrax note 2 Wow, all the VISIBLE evidence points to crazy arab terrorists who want to destoy israel, but the PHYSICAL evidence points elsewhere. I think this debate is just about where it points to, a theoretical physics debate is just that....theoretical. Hard physical evidence on the other hand... |
I would say the vaporized steel, the "made in USA" anthrax and the "angel is next" threat are sufficient grounds for the immediate arrest of George W. Bush for the murder of 3000 Americans on September 11th 2001.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Jan 9 2006, 05:33 PM)
My personal view is that Metamars is most certainly not a shill. The previous 200+ pages of posts should clear any doubts of this. I do not, however agree that a Construction Engineer, (P.H.D or not) will resolve anything.
The photographic and first-hand witness statements, although appearing diametrically opposite to the "official conspiracy theory" prove nothing. (Pretty much what Arthur said - one of the few points we agree on). I would call this "soft evidence".
The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics.
The temperature needed to vaporize steel requires such a quantitative rise (4 to 5 times) in the normal maximum temperature reached by an aircraft-fuel fire is reason enough, in itself, to prove that the "story" we have been told about 9-11 is simply not true.
We should write publicly to NIST, and ask them what conditions have led to vaporized steel in the basements of at least 2 of the WTC buildings.
A construction engineer is unlikely to have a clue about the anomalous* aspects of the collapses, and my thinking is not to even ask them to try. However, a construction engineer should be able to do calculations in idealized situations that can cast light on the collapse even ignoring anomalous aspects.
I seriously doubt that such calculations will show that a global collapse is possible, which should certainly raise red flags.
Definitive? No - how can anything short of full computer modeling be definitive (even ignoring anomalous aspects?) But remember, the point is to stimulate a real debate in academia. So, if Professor Steven Young's call is answered, that would obviate the need for my suggestion. Mind you, I'm assuming a limited budget, and I'm not counting on academics rising to the occasion. Obviously, if we had 8 million dollars, we could go whole hog.
Also, I really don't see the point of writing NIST about anything.....
Now that I think about it, I wonder why Jimmy Walter at reopen911.org has not done such a thing.
* I am using the word "anomalous" loosely, and, in fact, am including phenomena that are more or less quantifiable and approachable, but hard to understand via structural engineering in a simple way. E.g., the loss of angular momentum by the top of the North Tower.
The photographic and first-hand witness statements, although appearing diametrically opposite to the "official conspiracy theory" prove nothing. (Pretty much what Arthur said - one of the few points we agree on). I would call this "soft evidence".
The vaporized steel, on the other hand is HARD EVIDENCE, and not only that, it is documented by OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT SOURCES. It's existence is undeniable and not open to subjective interpretation, unlike the (near) free fall pedantic semantics.
The temperature needed to vaporize steel requires such a quantitative rise (4 to 5 times) in the normal maximum temperature reached by an aircraft-fuel fire is reason enough, in itself, to prove that the "story" we have been told about 9-11 is simply not true.
We should write publicly to NIST, and ask them what conditions have led to vaporized steel in the basements of at least 2 of the WTC buildings.
A construction engineer is unlikely to have a clue about the anomalous* aspects of the collapses, and my thinking is not to even ask them to try. However, a construction engineer should be able to do calculations in idealized situations that can cast light on the collapse even ignoring anomalous aspects.
I seriously doubt that such calculations will show that a global collapse is possible, which should certainly raise red flags.
Definitive? No - how can anything short of full computer modeling be definitive (even ignoring anomalous aspects?) But remember, the point is to stimulate a real debate in academia. So, if Professor Steven Young's call is answered, that would obviate the need for my suggestion. Mind you, I'm assuming a limited budget, and I'm not counting on academics rising to the occasion. Obviously, if we had 8 million dollars, we could go whole hog.
Also, I really don't see the point of writing NIST about anything.....
Now that I think about it, I wonder why Jimmy Walter at reopen911.org has not done such a thing.
* I am using the word "anomalous" loosely, and, in fact, am including phenomena that are more or less quantifiable and approachable, but hard to understand via structural engineering in a simple way. E.g., the loss of angular momentum by the top of the North Tower.
The energy sinks are totally impossible relative
to the official pancake fable. That is the most
obvious thing here.
to the official pancake fable. That is the most
obvious thing here.
i agree!
the most obvious thing is the anthrax from us military labs.
the most obvious thing is tower seven.
the most obvious thing is repeated freudian slips by the conspirators.
the most obvious thing is a twenty dollar american bill folded like an paper airplane(great 'mad' art, although it's SUPER-EVIL!).
the most obvious thing is the energy sink.
the most obvious thing is the destruction of american freedom by those sworn to protect it.
the most obvious thing is media complicity.
the most obvious thing is the money, insider trading, insurance rewards...
the most obvious thing is that ALL this is OBVIOUS and IRREFUTABLE.
now what?
the most obvious thing is the anthrax from us military labs.
the most obvious thing is tower seven.
the most obvious thing is repeated freudian slips by the conspirators.
the most obvious thing is a twenty dollar american bill folded like an paper airplane(great 'mad' art, although it's SUPER-EVIL!).
the most obvious thing is the energy sink.
the most obvious thing is the destruction of american freedom by those sworn to protect it.
the most obvious thing is media complicity.
the most obvious thing is the money, insider trading, insurance rewards...
the most obvious thing is that ALL this is OBVIOUS and IRREFUTABLE.
now what?
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.