QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 2 2006, 03:28 PM)
I see arthurs back to his hide & obfuscate role re: the Sonnenfeld case. Didn't you point out that he (Sonnenfeld) was one of 4 official photographers at WTC? Yet, adou-baba switches that around immediately to claim that ALL CT'ers say he was the ONLY one.
Straw-man, Straw-man, Straw-man !!!
Foxx
I NEVER claimed that ALL CTers said Sonnenfeld was the only photographer.
I SAID:
QUOTE
The one thing that I saw as a frequent errors (on the CTers side) is the presentation that Kurt was the only photographer at GZ, which is not the case, that Argentina doesn't extradite and that he "fled" immediately after he was released.
FREQUENT does not equate to ALL.
Quit being a "Used Prophylatic"
Arthur
Could someone please send Foxx a new word of the day calender, or maybe just a thesaurus.
Thanks
Thanks
QUOTE
Originally posted by Adoucette
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
Wrong again adou-baba. Once again you clearly demonstrate your lack of engineering knowledge regarding terms such as what a spandrel IS,(and/or your incessant obfuscations).
Is it a 'coincidence' that Foxx did not crop a picture which showed the column marked in yellow paint OHTF?
Well, let's just have a look... Here is the zoomed image of what adou-baba is referring to...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop4.jpg
As can be seen the central core box column (marked 'OHTF') is similar in size as the column which the GZ worker is standing on.
Furthermore, the SPANDREL which runs 90 degrees to the core column can clearly be seen directly below the 'OHTF' column. The two buckets to the right of the worker are sitting on it.
As I have said before NOT ONLY did the perimeter columns have spandrels upon which the the truss floor seats were set on, but ALSO these spandrels ran like tensioning belts around the exterior of the CENTRAL CORE COLUMNS, and it is these interior core spandrels upon which the inner ends of the truss floors were attached to.
There is a hole 'cut' in this central core column by some 'action' which then caused the central core column to fracture at that hole.
NO 'buckling and bending of THAT column. It was somehow CUT, and that hole looks suspiciously & quite plausibly to me, like it was eaten away by some kind of euctectic reaction at that spot. But even if it wasn't an euctectic reaction which cut the hole, then something (other than gravity-driven collapse') carved that hole.
Thanks again for the original picture and making me have a close look at it.
Go back to obfuscating school arthur.
Any More Questions
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 2 2006, 04:02 PM)
QUOTE
Originally posted by Adoucette
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
Wrong again adou-baba. Once again you clearly demonstrate your lack of engineering knowledge regarding terms such as what a spandrel IS,(and/or your incessant obfuscations).
Is it a 'coincidence' that Foxx did not crop a picture which showed the column marked in yellow paint OHTF?
Well, let's just have a look... Here is the zoomed image of what adou-baba is referring to...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop4.jpg
As can be seen the central core box column (marked 'OHTF') is similar in size as the column which the GZ worker is standing on.
Furthermore, the SPANDREL which runs 90 degrees to the core column can clearly be seen directly below the 'OHTF' column. The two buckets to the right of the worker are sitting on it.
As I have said before NOT ONLY did the perimeter columns have spandrels upon which the the truss floor seats were set on, but ALSO these spandrels ran like tensioning belts around the exterior of the CENTRAL CORE COLUMNS, and it is these interior core spandrels upon which the inner ends of the truss floors were attached to.
There is a hole 'cut' in this central core column by some 'action' which then caused the central core column to fracture at that hole.
NO 'buckling and bending of THAT column. It was somehow CUT, and that hole looks suspiciously & quite plausibly to me, like it was eaten away by some kind of euctectic reaction at that spot. But even if it wasn't an euctectic reaction which cut the hole, then something (other than gravity-driven collapse') carved that hole.
Thanks again for the original picture and making me have a close look at it.
Go back to obfuscating school arthur.
Any More Questions
No Foxx, you are WRONG.
LOOK at the piece the guy is standing on.
That piece is ALSO a Spandrel (as you know there are THREE in a Tree).
Its TWISTED so it LOOKS LIKE it is part of the column, but ITS NOT.
Notice that the piece he is standing on is MUCH WIDER than the column with the hole in it.
Notice that there are BOLTS in the piece he is standing on, just like in the Spandrel with the two buckets on it. Columns do not have bolts on the edge like that.
Note the BOLT pattern is the same as the other spandrel.
This spandrel, like the one above it is BENT away from the field of view, thus it disappears from sight. The lower spandrel must have a more accute bend, but it is NOT STRAIGHT which is why the "column" appears to get WIDER as you move away from the hole. You can see from OTHER pieces in the picture that this is not an effect from camera angle.
Its OBVIOUS it is not an euctectic reaction as it has CLEAN lines where the piece that left the hole was RIPPED away.
Here is another picture of that same piece which makes it clear that the guy is standing on a Spandrel.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4144.jpg
Arthur
QUOTE (Guest_guest+Feb 2 2006, 06:21 PM)
puppetry of the penis
Says the penis puppet
Foxx,
I don't know why, but after looking at a bunch of these pictures, one of the things that helps me to tell the pieces apart, when its not obvious from the shape, is color.
Don't know why but the trees seem to almost always have a reddish color to them while the core columns are almost always brownish.
I've seen some brownish tree columns but I can't recall a single reddish core column.
Arthur
I don't know why, but after looking at a bunch of these pictures, one of the things that helps me to tell the pieces apart, when its not obvious from the shape, is color.
Don't know why but the trees seem to almost always have a reddish color to them while the core columns are almost always brownish.
I've seen some brownish tree columns but I can't recall a single reddish core column.
Arthur
Did you see that damage ?
Looks like a bomb has gone off.
Looks like a bomb has gone off.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 2 2006, 05:55 PM)
Did you see that damage ?
Looks like a bomb has gone off.
A bomb is essentially nothing more than the rapid release of a lot of energy.
The falling of the towers was a rapid release of a lot of energy.
One would expect certain similarities.
Arthur
Looks like a bomb has gone off.
A bomb is essentially nothing more than the rapid release of a lot of energy.
The falling of the towers was a rapid release of a lot of energy.
One would expect certain similarities.
Arthur
Editorial from the MIAMI HERALD:
9/11 ATTACKS
Avoiding the hard questions
ROBERT STEINBACK
I was 8 years old when President John Kennedy was shot to death in Dallas in 1963. If grace favors me, I'll be 62 when documents related to the assassination are released to the public, and 84 when the Warren Commission's investigative files into the tragedy are finally opened.
That's a long time to wait for a chance to evaluate the purported truth.
It's a blot on the presumed sophistication of the people of the United States that any aspect of an event so dramatic and shocking should be kept from us. Perhaps it's true, to abuse the line from A Few Good Men yet again, that we can't handle the truth. But there cannot be genuine resolution as long as such critical information remains concealed.
Transformed by 9/11
Since Kennedy's assassination, Americans have lurched between demanding to know and plugging their ears: The Pentagon Papers, My Lai, the King assassination, Watergate, Iran-contra, the savings-and-loan debacle, Monicagate. Lately, however, it would seem the public's verdict is in: Don't tell us. Keep us in the dark. We don't want to know.
This is the worst possible time for probe-ophobia to grip us. Our nation was irretrievably transformed by 9/11 -- and yet there remain troubling questions about what really happened before, during and after that day. Rather than demanding a full and fearless vetting to hone in on the truth and silence the conjecture about 9/11, many Americans remain unwilling to peer into the microscope.
An online cottage industry of theorists, theory debunkers and debunker debunkers has flourished since 9/11. Sometimes the flimsy theories are easy to spot -- come on, if the four passenger jets didn't crash where it appears they did, where did they go? More often, though, the cases aren't so obvious.
A group of experts and academicians 'devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, `letting the chips fall where they may,' '' last week accused the government of covering up evidence that the three destroyed New York City buildings were brought down that day by controlled demolition rather than structural failure. The group, called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has a website, www.st911.org.
Unanswered questions
The reflexive first reaction is incredulity -- how, one asks, could anyone even contemplate, never mind actually do such a barbaric thing? But before you shut your mind, check the resumés -- these aren't Generation X geeks subsisting on potato chips and PlayStation. Then look at the case they present.
''I am a professional philosopher who has spent 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning,'' group co-founder and University of Minnesota professor James H. Fetzer told me. ``When I come to 9/11, it's not hard for me to determine what is going on. This is a scientific question. And it is so elementary that I don't think you can find a single physicist who could disagree with the idea that this was a controlled demolition.''
The group asks, for example,
• How did a fire fed by jet fuel, which at most burns at 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit, cause the collapse of the Twin Towers, built of steel that melts at 2,800 degrees? (Most experts agree that the impact of airliners, made mostly of lightweight aluminum, should not have been enough alone to cause structural failure.) How could a single planeload of burning jet fuel -- most of which flared off in the initial fireball -- cause the South World Trade Center tower to collapse in just 56 minutes?
• Why did building WTC-7 fall, though no aircraft struck it? Fire alone had never before caused a steel skyscraper to collapse.
• Why did all three buildings collapse largely into their own footprints -- in the style of a controlled demolition?
• Why did no U.S. military jet intercept the wayward aircraft?
• Why has there been no investigation of BBC reports that five of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were alive and accounted for after the event?
Our current probe-ophobia is due in part to the political landscape: When one party holds all the cards, any call to investigate an alleged abuse of power or cover-up -- no matter how valid -- will look like a partisan vendetta. Those in power never want to investigate themselves.
Maybe that's politics; he who holds the hammer drives the nails. But the outrage of 9/11 transcends party affiliation.
We need all the outstanding questions answered -- wherever the chips may fall.
9/11 ATTACKS
Avoiding the hard questions
ROBERT STEINBACK
I was 8 years old when President John Kennedy was shot to death in Dallas in 1963. If grace favors me, I'll be 62 when documents related to the assassination are released to the public, and 84 when the Warren Commission's investigative files into the tragedy are finally opened.
That's a long time to wait for a chance to evaluate the purported truth.
It's a blot on the presumed sophistication of the people of the United States that any aspect of an event so dramatic and shocking should be kept from us. Perhaps it's true, to abuse the line from A Few Good Men yet again, that we can't handle the truth. But there cannot be genuine resolution as long as such critical information remains concealed.
Transformed by 9/11
Since Kennedy's assassination, Americans have lurched between demanding to know and plugging their ears: The Pentagon Papers, My Lai, the King assassination, Watergate, Iran-contra, the savings-and-loan debacle, Monicagate. Lately, however, it would seem the public's verdict is in: Don't tell us. Keep us in the dark. We don't want to know.
This is the worst possible time for probe-ophobia to grip us. Our nation was irretrievably transformed by 9/11 -- and yet there remain troubling questions about what really happened before, during and after that day. Rather than demanding a full and fearless vetting to hone in on the truth and silence the conjecture about 9/11, many Americans remain unwilling to peer into the microscope.
An online cottage industry of theorists, theory debunkers and debunker debunkers has flourished since 9/11. Sometimes the flimsy theories are easy to spot -- come on, if the four passenger jets didn't crash where it appears they did, where did they go? More often, though, the cases aren't so obvious.
A group of experts and academicians 'devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, `letting the chips fall where they may,' '' last week accused the government of covering up evidence that the three destroyed New York City buildings were brought down that day by controlled demolition rather than structural failure. The group, called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has a website, www.st911.org.
Unanswered questions
The reflexive first reaction is incredulity -- how, one asks, could anyone even contemplate, never mind actually do such a barbaric thing? But before you shut your mind, check the resumés -- these aren't Generation X geeks subsisting on potato chips and PlayStation. Then look at the case they present.
''I am a professional philosopher who has spent 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning,'' group co-founder and University of Minnesota professor James H. Fetzer told me. ``When I come to 9/11, it's not hard for me to determine what is going on. This is a scientific question. And it is so elementary that I don't think you can find a single physicist who could disagree with the idea that this was a controlled demolition.''
The group asks, for example,
• How did a fire fed by jet fuel, which at most burns at 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit, cause the collapse of the Twin Towers, built of steel that melts at 2,800 degrees? (Most experts agree that the impact of airliners, made mostly of lightweight aluminum, should not have been enough alone to cause structural failure.) How could a single planeload of burning jet fuel -- most of which flared off in the initial fireball -- cause the South World Trade Center tower to collapse in just 56 minutes?
• Why did building WTC-7 fall, though no aircraft struck it? Fire alone had never before caused a steel skyscraper to collapse.
• Why did all three buildings collapse largely into their own footprints -- in the style of a controlled demolition?
• Why did no U.S. military jet intercept the wayward aircraft?
• Why has there been no investigation of BBC reports that five of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were alive and accounted for after the event?
Our current probe-ophobia is due in part to the political landscape: When one party holds all the cards, any call to investigate an alleged abuse of power or cover-up -- no matter how valid -- will look like a partisan vendetta. Those in power never want to investigate themselves.
Maybe that's politics; he who holds the hammer drives the nails. But the outrage of 9/11 transcends party affiliation.
We need all the outstanding questions answered -- wherever the chips may fall.
The fight between the Truthers and the ptb whores will continue right after this short break you may find funny...
A man enters a bar and orders a drink. The bar has a robot bartender. The robot serves him a perfectly prepared cocktail, and then asks him, "What's your IQ?" The man replies "150" and the robot proceeds to make conversation about global warming factors, quantum physics and spirituality, biomimicry, environmental interconnectedness, string theory, nano-technology, and sexual proclivities.
The customer is very impressed and thinks, "This is really cool." He decides to test the robot. He walks out of the bar, turns around, and comes back in for another drink. Again, the robot serves him the perfectly prepared drink and asks him, "What's your IQ?" The man responds, "about a 100." Immediately the robot starts talking, but this time, about football, NASCAR, baseball, cars, beer, guns, and breasts.
Really impressed, the man leaves the bar and decides to give the robot one more test. He heads out and returns, the robot serves him and asks, "What's your IQ?" The man replies, "Er, 50, I think."
And the robot says... real slowly... "So............... ya ... gonna ... vote . for . Bush .. again???"
A man enters a bar and orders a drink. The bar has a robot bartender. The robot serves him a perfectly prepared cocktail, and then asks him, "What's your IQ?" The man replies "150" and the robot proceeds to make conversation about global warming factors, quantum physics and spirituality, biomimicry, environmental interconnectedness, string theory, nano-technology, and sexual proclivities.
The customer is very impressed and thinks, "This is really cool." He decides to test the robot. He walks out of the bar, turns around, and comes back in for another drink. Again, the robot serves him the perfectly prepared drink and asks him, "What's your IQ?" The man responds, "about a 100." Immediately the robot starts talking, but this time, about football, NASCAR, baseball, cars, beer, guns, and breasts.
Really impressed, the man leaves the bar and decides to give the robot one more test. He heads out and returns, the robot serves him and asks, "What's your IQ?" The man replies, "Er, 50, I think."
And the robot says... real slowly... "So............... ya ... gonna ... vote . for . Bush .. again???"
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 3 2006, 12:16 AM)
Editorial from the MIAMI HERALD:
9/11 ATTACKS
Avoiding the hard questions
ROBERT STEINBACK
I was 8 years old when President John Kennedy was shot to death in Dallas in 1963. If grace favors me, I'll be 62 when documents related to the assassination are released to the public, and 84 when the Warren Commission's investigative files into the tragedy are finally opened.
That's a long time to wait for a chance to evaluate the purported truth.
It's a blot on the presumed sophistication of the people of the United States that any aspect of an event so dramatic and shocking should be kept from us. Perhaps it's true, to abuse the line from A Few Good Men yet again, that we can't handle the truth. But there cannot be genuine resolution as long as such critical information remains concealed.
Transformed by 9/11
Since Kennedy's assassination, Americans have lurched between demanding to know and plugging their ears: The Pentagon Papers, My Lai, the King assassination, Watergate, Iran-contra, the savings-and-loan debacle, Monicagate. Lately, however, it would seem the public's verdict is in: Don't tell us. Keep us in the dark. We don't want to know.
This is the worst possible time for probe-ophobia to grip us. Our nation was irretrievably transformed by 9/11 -- and yet there remain troubling questions about what really happened before, during and after that day. Rather than demanding a full and fearless vetting to hone in on the truth and silence the conjecture about 9/11, many Americans remain unwilling to peer into the microscope.
An online cottage industry of theorists, theory debunkers and debunker debunkers has flourished since 9/11. Sometimes the flimsy theories are easy to spot -- come on, if the four passenger jets didn't crash where it appears they did, where did they go? More often, though, the cases aren't so obvious.
A group of experts and academicians 'devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, `letting the chips fall where they may,' '' last week accused the government of covering up evidence that the three destroyed New York City buildings were brought down that day by controlled demolition rather than structural failure. The group, called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has a website, www.st911.org.
Unanswered questions
The reflexive first reaction is incredulity -- how, one asks, could anyone even contemplate, never mind actually do such a barbaric thing? But before you shut your mind, check the resumés -- these aren't Generation X geeks subsisting on potato chips and PlayStation. Then look at the case they present.
''I am a professional philosopher who has spent 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning,'' group co-founder and University of Minnesota professor James H. Fetzer told me. ``When I come to 9/11, it's not hard for me to determine what is going on. This is a scientific question. And it is so elementary that I don't think you can find a single physicist who could disagree with the idea that this was a controlled demolition.''
The group asks, for example,
• How did a fire fed by jet fuel, which at most burns at 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit, cause the collapse of the Twin Towers, built of steel that melts at 2,800 degrees? (Most experts agree that the impact of airliners, made mostly of lightweight aluminum, should not have been enough alone to cause structural failure.) How could a single planeload of burning jet fuel -- most of which flared off in the initial fireball -- cause the South World Trade Center tower to collapse in just 56 minutes?
• Why did building WTC-7 fall, though no aircraft struck it? Fire alone had never before caused a steel skyscraper to collapse.
• Why did all three buildings collapse largely into their own footprints -- in the style of a controlled demolition?
• Why did no U.S. military jet intercept the wayward aircraft?
• Why has there been no investigation of BBC reports that five of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were alive and accounted for after the event?
Our current probe-ophobia is due in part to the political landscape: When one party holds all the cards, any call to investigate an alleged abuse of power or cover-up -- no matter how valid -- will look like a partisan vendetta. Those in power never want to investigate themselves.
Maybe that's politics; he who holds the hammer drives the nails. But the outrage of 9/11 transcends party affiliation.
We need all the outstanding questions answered -- wherever the chips may fall.
Scientist: UFO caused 1908 Siberia blast
MOSCOW (AFP) - A Russian scientist has reopened the controversy over a gigantic explosion in 1908 in Siberia with a claim that he has found debris from an extraterrestrial space vehicle, or UFO, which collided with a comet.
On June 30, 1908 a colossal flash lit up the sky over Siberia, followed by an explosion with the power of a thousand atom bombs. It obliterated the taiga (forest) for hundreds of square kilometres (miles) in the basin of the river Podkamennaya Tunguska in the Krasnoyarsk region.
People living in the villages of Siberia thought there had been an earthquake. Humans and animals were thrown to the ground by the shockwave, windows were blown in.
No meteorite debris was found and scientists conclude that the core of a comet or an asteroid had exploded.
Researcher Yuri Lavbin has spent 12 years researching the mystery of the "Tunguska meteorite" and believes he has found the key to one of the great scientific enigmas of the last century, though many scientists remain sceptical.
He is president of the "Tunguska Spatial Phenomenon" Foundation in Krasnoyarsk, made up of some 15 enthusiasts, among them geologists, chemists, physicists and mineralogists, who have been organising regular expeditions to the area since 1994.
Lavbin's theory is that a comet and a mysterious flying machine collided 10 kilometres (six miles) above the earth's surface causing the explosion.
He and his team say that on an expedition to the Podkamannaya Tunguska river in July they found, between two villages, two strange black stones in the form of regular cubes with their sides measuring a metre and half (five feet).
These stones "are manifestly not of natural origin," Lavbin says. They appear to have been fired and "their material recalls an alloy used to make space rockets, while at the beginning of the 20th century only planes made of plywood existed."
He claims that the cubes are the remains of a flying machine, perhaps an extraterrestrial spaceship, while admitting that an analysis of the stones has yet to be undertaken.
He found something else: a huge white stone "the size of a peasant's hut" stuck in the top of a crag in the middle of the devastated forest.
"Local people call it the 'reindeer stone'. It is made of a crystalline matter which is not typical of this region," Lavbin said. He suggests it is part of the core of a comet.
The scientific establishment is not convinced.
"There are plenty of amateurs who organise trips to the site of the Tunguska cataclysm," said Anna Skripnik of the meteorites committee of the Academy of Sciences.
"In Siberia where oil geologists regularly work you can find a heap of fragments of various machines."
Lavbin is not deterred. He produces satellite photos of the region to back his theory which show the "footprints" of the spaceship (long marshes and lakes) and of the comet (devastated forests, charred trees and smashed rocks).
Not to mention a crater 500 metres (yards) across
9/11 ATTACKS
Avoiding the hard questions
ROBERT STEINBACK
I was 8 years old when President John Kennedy was shot to death in Dallas in 1963. If grace favors me, I'll be 62 when documents related to the assassination are released to the public, and 84 when the Warren Commission's investigative files into the tragedy are finally opened.
That's a long time to wait for a chance to evaluate the purported truth.
It's a blot on the presumed sophistication of the people of the United States that any aspect of an event so dramatic and shocking should be kept from us. Perhaps it's true, to abuse the line from A Few Good Men yet again, that we can't handle the truth. But there cannot be genuine resolution as long as such critical information remains concealed.
Transformed by 9/11
Since Kennedy's assassination, Americans have lurched between demanding to know and plugging their ears: The Pentagon Papers, My Lai, the King assassination, Watergate, Iran-contra, the savings-and-loan debacle, Monicagate. Lately, however, it would seem the public's verdict is in: Don't tell us. Keep us in the dark. We don't want to know.
This is the worst possible time for probe-ophobia to grip us. Our nation was irretrievably transformed by 9/11 -- and yet there remain troubling questions about what really happened before, during and after that day. Rather than demanding a full and fearless vetting to hone in on the truth and silence the conjecture about 9/11, many Americans remain unwilling to peer into the microscope.
An online cottage industry of theorists, theory debunkers and debunker debunkers has flourished since 9/11. Sometimes the flimsy theories are easy to spot -- come on, if the four passenger jets didn't crash where it appears they did, where did they go? More often, though, the cases aren't so obvious.
A group of experts and academicians 'devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, `letting the chips fall where they may,' '' last week accused the government of covering up evidence that the three destroyed New York City buildings were brought down that day by controlled demolition rather than structural failure. The group, called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has a website, www.st911.org.
Unanswered questions
The reflexive first reaction is incredulity -- how, one asks, could anyone even contemplate, never mind actually do such a barbaric thing? But before you shut your mind, check the resumés -- these aren't Generation X geeks subsisting on potato chips and PlayStation. Then look at the case they present.
''I am a professional philosopher who has spent 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning,'' group co-founder and University of Minnesota professor James H. Fetzer told me. ``When I come to 9/11, it's not hard for me to determine what is going on. This is a scientific question. And it is so elementary that I don't think you can find a single physicist who could disagree with the idea that this was a controlled demolition.''
The group asks, for example,
• How did a fire fed by jet fuel, which at most burns at 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit, cause the collapse of the Twin Towers, built of steel that melts at 2,800 degrees? (Most experts agree that the impact of airliners, made mostly of lightweight aluminum, should not have been enough alone to cause structural failure.) How could a single planeload of burning jet fuel -- most of which flared off in the initial fireball -- cause the South World Trade Center tower to collapse in just 56 minutes?
• Why did building WTC-7 fall, though no aircraft struck it? Fire alone had never before caused a steel skyscraper to collapse.
• Why did all three buildings collapse largely into their own footprints -- in the style of a controlled demolition?
• Why did no U.S. military jet intercept the wayward aircraft?
• Why has there been no investigation of BBC reports that five of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were alive and accounted for after the event?
Our current probe-ophobia is due in part to the political landscape: When one party holds all the cards, any call to investigate an alleged abuse of power or cover-up -- no matter how valid -- will look like a partisan vendetta. Those in power never want to investigate themselves.
Maybe that's politics; he who holds the hammer drives the nails. But the outrage of 9/11 transcends party affiliation.
We need all the outstanding questions answered -- wherever the chips may fall.
Scientist: UFO caused 1908 Siberia blast
MOSCOW (AFP) - A Russian scientist has reopened the controversy over a gigantic explosion in 1908 in Siberia with a claim that he has found debris from an extraterrestrial space vehicle, or UFO, which collided with a comet.
On June 30, 1908 a colossal flash lit up the sky over Siberia, followed by an explosion with the power of a thousand atom bombs. It obliterated the taiga (forest) for hundreds of square kilometres (miles) in the basin of the river Podkamennaya Tunguska in the Krasnoyarsk region.
People living in the villages of Siberia thought there had been an earthquake. Humans and animals were thrown to the ground by the shockwave, windows were blown in.
No meteorite debris was found and scientists conclude that the core of a comet or an asteroid had exploded.
Researcher Yuri Lavbin has spent 12 years researching the mystery of the "Tunguska meteorite" and believes he has found the key to one of the great scientific enigmas of the last century, though many scientists remain sceptical.
He is president of the "Tunguska Spatial Phenomenon" Foundation in Krasnoyarsk, made up of some 15 enthusiasts, among them geologists, chemists, physicists and mineralogists, who have been organising regular expeditions to the area since 1994.
Lavbin's theory is that a comet and a mysterious flying machine collided 10 kilometres (six miles) above the earth's surface causing the explosion.
He and his team say that on an expedition to the Podkamannaya Tunguska river in July they found, between two villages, two strange black stones in the form of regular cubes with their sides measuring a metre and half (five feet).
These stones "are manifestly not of natural origin," Lavbin says. They appear to have been fired and "their material recalls an alloy used to make space rockets, while at the beginning of the 20th century only planes made of plywood existed."
He claims that the cubes are the remains of a flying machine, perhaps an extraterrestrial spaceship, while admitting that an analysis of the stones has yet to be undertaken.
He found something else: a huge white stone "the size of a peasant's hut" stuck in the top of a crag in the middle of the devastated forest.
"Local people call it the 'reindeer stone'. It is made of a crystalline matter which is not typical of this region," Lavbin said. He suggests it is part of the core of a comet.
The scientific establishment is not convinced.
"There are plenty of amateurs who organise trips to the site of the Tunguska cataclysm," said Anna Skripnik of the meteorites committee of the Academy of Sciences.
"In Siberia where oil geologists regularly work you can find a heap of fragments of various machines."
Lavbin is not deterred. He produces satellite photos of the region to back his theory which show the "footprints" of the spaceship (long marshes and lakes) and of the comet (devastated forests, charred trees and smashed rocks).
Not to mention a crater 500 metres (yards) across
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 3 2006, 01:25 AM)
Scientist: UFO caused 1908 Siberia blast
Lol, nice one, schneibstsense.
I take it I'm bothering you whores? Good. You have seen nothing yet.
(I didn't post the ufo strawman, else I couldn't be posting this because of the 2 guest posts per 24h limit.)
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 3 2006, 01:32 AM)
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 3 2006, 01:25 AM)
Scientist: UFO caused 1908 Siberia blast
Lol, nice one, schneibstsense.
I take it I'm bothering you whores? Good. You have seen nothing yet.
(I didn't post the ufo strawman, else I couldn't be posting this because of the 2 guest posts per 24h limit.)
Yes I did... And you know I did.
Quote
D: Time once again for the Moment of Science word of the Day.
Y: Today's Word of the Day is . . . spandrel.
D: Hmmm . . . I don't think I know what a spandrel is. And yet, I know all things about science. How can this be?
Y: It's because "spandrel" is a term from architecture. Imagine a dome that is held up by four arches, the way it's done in cathedrals. When you do this you wind up with some leftover space between each arch. That's a spandrel. Nobody planned for that extra space to be there, but if you're going to put a dome on top of four arches, you will always have it. Since it was there, people started painting angels in the leftover space, and it became one of the nicest parts of many cathedrals.
D: Time once again for the Moment of Science word of the Day.
Y: Today's Word of the Day is . . . spandrel.
D: Hmmm . . . I don't think I know what a spandrel is. And yet, I know all things about science. How can this be?
Y: It's because "spandrel" is a term from architecture. Imagine a dome that is held up by four arches, the way it's done in cathedrals. When you do this you wind up with some leftover space between each arch. That's a spandrel. Nobody planned for that extra space to be there, but if you're going to put a dome on top of four arches, you will always have it. Since it was there, people started painting angels in the leftover space, and it became one of the nicest parts of many cathedrals.
Two mainstream newspaper articles in two days...
Questions remain from 9/11 report, professor says
ANNA CHANG-YEN - Daily Herald
A BYU physics professor speaking on Wednesday night implied a government cover-up of what really happened on Sept. 11, 2001, and cast doubt on the blame placed on Osama bin Laden.
Professor Steven E. Jones suggested before the attacks the Bush administration was seeking a way to increase military spending and invade Iraq. The ensuing attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan have created most of Muslims' disdain for America, he said.
He spoke at Utah Valley State College to a packed lecture room, and by video to adjacent overflow rooms, sponsored by the Center for the Study of Ethics.
Center director David Keller said, "The collapse of the World Trade Center buildings illustrates a strange convergence of physics, engineering, ethics and politics."
Jones is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a group of academics who dispute the government's account of 9/11, and has contributed to a yet-unpublished book about the issue.
Although official government explanations of why Building Seven fell seven hours after the second tower fell cite fire that melted the steel, Jones said the fire was not hot enough. The way the building fell also was not compatible with the theory, he said, and is more telling of an explosion.
"It's looking impossible to me as I look at these calculations that the official explanation could be correct. It violates the laws of physics," he said.
Instead, he said he suspects a thermite detonation from inside the building, possibly in the elevator shafts. But Jones said the steel is being disassembled and sent to Asia for recycling. While "pathological science," or destroying evidence that does not support a theory, is an offense on its own, "In this case we can call it unethical because it was a crime scene," he said.
A video tape purported to show bin Laden confessing to masterminding the attacks was a fake, Jones said, and other tapes in which bin Laden denied involvement were more likely authentic.
"They have this 'smoking gun confession tape,' but it's not him," he said.
Jones asked why fighter jets did not intercept the planes that hit the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
"Where were our defenses that day? This concerns me deeply," he said.
He was suspicious about why there was no paper trail showing how the attacks were planned, and asked why the government had not acknowledged finding three of four black boxes from the hijacked airplanes.
There is evidence the government had previous knowledge of the attacks, he said, citing changes in government employee travel plans because of security concerns.
After the second tower was hit, President George Bush sat for about 20 minutes in the classroom where he was reading to children after hearing about the attacks.
Jones asked where Bush's security officers were. "This is puzzling and disturbing in the sense it's not explained. I don't see how it can be explained unless they knew beforehand."
He also complained of more recent infractions of the Bush administration.
"We need to get back to the Constitution in law. No one should break the law with impunity," Jones said.
He cited Bush's authorization of warrantless wiretapping by the National Security Agency.
"I'm wondering, 'Why not do it legally?' The law allows this. Who's being spied on?" Jones asked. He also was troubled by the U.S. torture policy and widening executive powers, and set his sites on the dangers of pre-emptive wars.
"I think we need to question wars of aggression. I have noticed there's a sword rattling relative to Iran lately," Jones said.
After a standing ovation, Jones took questions from the audience. Jerry Owens of Midway, who heads a group called 9/11 Truth Seekers, called Jones a true American hero.
"He's putting his life on the line," Owens said. "It's time for all of us to be patriots. We have to put our lives on the line, and now is the time."
The group is circulating a petition for a 9/11 investigation headed by a citizens committee, Owens said. "This is the smoking gun where we can prove what our government's doing."
Chris Newman, a sophomore multimedia communications major at UVSC who signed the petition, is making a documentary about a possible 9/11 conspiracy.
"I used to be a hard-core Republican, pro-Bush and everything," he said. "I'm independent now. I have some major doubts about the Bush administration. Hopefully the truth will come out."
Daily Herald
Questions remain from 9/11 report, professor says
ANNA CHANG-YEN - Daily Herald
A BYU physics professor speaking on Wednesday night implied a government cover-up of what really happened on Sept. 11, 2001, and cast doubt on the blame placed on Osama bin Laden.
Professor Steven E. Jones suggested before the attacks the Bush administration was seeking a way to increase military spending and invade Iraq. The ensuing attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan have created most of Muslims' disdain for America, he said.
He spoke at Utah Valley State College to a packed lecture room, and by video to adjacent overflow rooms, sponsored by the Center for the Study of Ethics.
Center director David Keller said, "The collapse of the World Trade Center buildings illustrates a strange convergence of physics, engineering, ethics and politics."
Jones is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a group of academics who dispute the government's account of 9/11, and has contributed to a yet-unpublished book about the issue.
Although official government explanations of why Building Seven fell seven hours after the second tower fell cite fire that melted the steel, Jones said the fire was not hot enough. The way the building fell also was not compatible with the theory, he said, and is more telling of an explosion.
"It's looking impossible to me as I look at these calculations that the official explanation could be correct. It violates the laws of physics," he said.
Instead, he said he suspects a thermite detonation from inside the building, possibly in the elevator shafts. But Jones said the steel is being disassembled and sent to Asia for recycling. While "pathological science," or destroying evidence that does not support a theory, is an offense on its own, "In this case we can call it unethical because it was a crime scene," he said.
A video tape purported to show bin Laden confessing to masterminding the attacks was a fake, Jones said, and other tapes in which bin Laden denied involvement were more likely authentic.
"They have this 'smoking gun confession tape,' but it's not him," he said.
Jones asked why fighter jets did not intercept the planes that hit the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
"Where were our defenses that day? This concerns me deeply," he said.
He was suspicious about why there was no paper trail showing how the attacks were planned, and asked why the government had not acknowledged finding three of four black boxes from the hijacked airplanes.
There is evidence the government had previous knowledge of the attacks, he said, citing changes in government employee travel plans because of security concerns.
After the second tower was hit, President George Bush sat for about 20 minutes in the classroom where he was reading to children after hearing about the attacks.
Jones asked where Bush's security officers were. "This is puzzling and disturbing in the sense it's not explained. I don't see how it can be explained unless they knew beforehand."
He also complained of more recent infractions of the Bush administration.
"We need to get back to the Constitution in law. No one should break the law with impunity," Jones said.
He cited Bush's authorization of warrantless wiretapping by the National Security Agency.
"I'm wondering, 'Why not do it legally?' The law allows this. Who's being spied on?" Jones asked. He also was troubled by the U.S. torture policy and widening executive powers, and set his sites on the dangers of pre-emptive wars.
"I think we need to question wars of aggression. I have noticed there's a sword rattling relative to Iran lately," Jones said.
After a standing ovation, Jones took questions from the audience. Jerry Owens of Midway, who heads a group called 9/11 Truth Seekers, called Jones a true American hero.
"He's putting his life on the line," Owens said. "It's time for all of us to be patriots. We have to put our lives on the line, and now is the time."
The group is circulating a petition for a 9/11 investigation headed by a citizens committee, Owens said. "This is the smoking gun where we can prove what our government's doing."
Chris Newman, a sophomore multimedia communications major at UVSC who signed the petition, is making a documentary about a possible 9/11 conspiracy.
"I used to be a hard-core Republican, pro-Bush and everything," he said. "I'm independent now. I have some major doubts about the Bush administration. Hopefully the truth will come out."
Daily Herald
QUOTE
Physics Professor Steven Jones Packs Lecture Hall and Overflow Rooms
Huge Crowd Hears of 9/11 Big Lie, WTC Controlled Demolition.
Huge Crowd Hears of 9/11 Big Lie, WTC Controlled Demolition.
It's not that Jones is revealing anything all that earth shattering, as most people know that 2 + 2 = 4, and the laws of physics, gravity and reality didn't take a vacation on 9/11, as promoted by the fiary tale believers, but it's the re-confirmation that there are still a few scientists left that haven't completely lost their minds.
Of course, when the truth is finally revealed, so that everybody knows the scientists who have promoted the 9/11 scam, have committed fraud and deception, I would imagine they'll have to come up with reasons why they B.S.ed the public non stop without ceasing. Maybe they'll try to use the insanity defense, like Andrea Yates, and say "We lost our facilties and believed in Bush fairy tale"
But it's still hard to believe that these so called scientists are really that stupid as to actually believe in the magician in the cave theory, IE; Bin Laden suspended the laws of physics on 9/11. Yeah, I'm sure they are pretty stupid, but I don't think anyone can really be that stupid.
It seems to me that they are knowingly going along with the governments lie for various reasons, including but not limited to government funding, or should I say, cutting them off from government funding if they so much as peep a little truth about the physics involved in the subject at hand.
And of course there could be other reasons why they PLAY DUMB, REAL DUMB and try to convince people that the laws of phyisics took a holiday on 9/11. It could be they are seriously afraid, like a scared chicken of the ramifications of telling the truth, another words, the ignoramouses, who really are retarded might retaliate against them.
It's not that I'm against a bunch of hilbillies, with who don't have the sense God gave a banana, that buy the Bin Laden scam, after all, if their elevator doesn't go up all the way, they're not firing on all cylinders and/or playing solitare with a deck of 51 then it's hard to be too angry at them, if they're stupid, they're stupid.
But it's the people who pretend to have intelligence on one hand, while promoting one of the most ignorant and obvious BS scams of the last century.
QUOTE
posted by arthur
No Foxx, you are WRONG.
No Foxx, you are WRONG.
Your opinion, believe what you want. You don't even believe your own eyes when you see buildings explode.
In view of that I wouldn't expect you to believe anything your eyes tell you.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| posted by arthur No Foxx, you are WRONG. |
Your opinion, believe what you want. You don't even believe your own eyes when you see buildings explode.
In view of that I wouldn't expect you to believe anything your eyes tell you.
posted by arthur
LOOK at the piece the guy is standing on.
That piece is ALSO a Spandrel (as you know there are THREE in a Tree).
Its TWISTED so it LOOKS LIKE it is part of the column, but ITS NOT.
There you go again with your pope-ish proclamations emphasized with capital letters for added 'authority'.
QUOTE
Notice that the piece he is standing on is MUCH WIDER than the column with the hole in it.
Notice that there are BOLTS in the piece he is standing on, just like in the Spandrel with the two buckets on it. Columns do not have bolts on the edge like that.
Note the BOLT pattern is the same as the other spandrel.
Here is another picture of that same piece which makes it clear that the guy is standing on a Spandrel...
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4144.jpg
Notice that there are BOLTS in the piece he is standing on, just like in the Spandrel with the two buckets on it. Columns do not have bolts on the edge like that.
Note the BOLT pattern is the same as the other spandrel.
Here is another picture of that same piece which makes it clear that the guy is standing on a Spandrel...
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4144.jpg
Nice hand-waving exercise, arthur. Ok, I accept that my my original speculations may have been somewhat off-tack.
I have updated my page to reflect your 'concerns' and I thank you for your continued diligence in investigating this issue...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/core_column2.html
Below is a closer (and clearer) view of the area in question from the FEMA Online Library ...
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4144.jpg
What becomes apparent through this closer view is that the piece of steel (upon which the man has his hands ), is another spandrel... {the next lower 'floor-spandrel' that was attached to the column}.
Given this closer view, it is now called into question whether the column to which these spandrels were attached is really a 'central core column' or a 'perimeter column'.
I suppose if there was a forensic photographic expert looking at these photos, he could provide quickly, some defining measurements as to the actual size of the column in question, which might settle the question of whether the column is from the central core or the perimeter.
Anyone care to come forward (who has 'expertise' in this field) with some accurate measurements of the size of the column in question?
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4144crop1.jpg
Our un-named whistelblower (let's call him the 'Legend') who has looked extensively into these questions, assures us that the structure upon which the GZ worker has laid his hands is another spandrel.
Based upon the above photo, this seems apparent... the weld line of the spandrel to the column can readily be seen by imagining a line between the blue dots superimposed on the photo above. This would be the horizontal weld-line set 90 degrees to the column.
(These blue dots are only visible at the webpage where I am caching this info...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/core_column2.html )
So, regardless of whether the column in question is a central core column OR a perimeter column, we still need to explain the gaping hole in the column...(the elephant in the middle of the picture)...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4144crop2.jpg
It seems obvious to me that this hole was the result of some sudden action which completely compromised the structural integrity of this particular column, at that particular point. I see no evidence of bending or 'plasticization' of the steel in this area (prior to the sudden fracturing crack) which can clearly be seen at the 'top center' of this photo.
'Something' caused this 'hole' in the core column, which thereby weakened it to the point of fracture. Whatever that 'something' WAS, appears to have been a sudden 'cutting' action...
(not associated with the gradual softening bending & buckling, such as one would expect to see in a 'fire-related', steel-softening 'event').
Any 'engineers' out there care to weigh in with their opinion on this ???
QUOTE
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
Once again I ask, what is the relevance of comparing the distance debris travels to the width of the building?. Such a ratio is useless. The distance large debris such as this travels would have more to do with how high up it was when it was ejected from the building.
Would this type of ejection occur in an earthquake collapse? NO, since an earthquake collapse is due to excessive sway or subsidence of the foundation, not a collapse of vertical supports ten or more storys from the top.
Would this happen due to poor construction? Perhaps if the vertical support ten storys from the top failed but in vertical failure due to poor construction the failure usually occurs nearer the ground floor.
Are there instances in which controlled demolitions send objects flying away from the building? Yes, and in all instances those objects were very significantly smaller and lighter than the columns from the towers and of course they all originated from much lower than many of the possible origins of those columns. There are NO instances in which a controlled demolition ejected anything the size of these columns. However in those cases where something does go wrong it is more likely that ejected material was sent flying due to the gravity collapse rather than directly by the cutter/kicker charges.
I don't use UPPER CASE for added "AUTHORITY" but to EMPHASIZE something.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Ok, I accept that my my original speculations may have been somewhat off-tack.
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 06:28 AM)
I don't use UPPER CASE for added "AUTHORITY" but to EMPHASIZE something.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Ok, I accept that my my original speculations may have been somewhat off-tack.
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
adoucette: I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
What IS 'wrong' adoucette ???
Is it a mortal error to be 'wrong' in details, yet still have the overall concept 'right'?
What caused the 'hole' in the column (which led to fracturing at that spot ?)
Seems to me that you are STILL ignoring the 'elephant in the middle of the picture', and concentrating on superfluous issues (amidst great HAND-Waving)... to avoid providing an 'official' plausible explanation as to WHAT caused that 'elephant' to appear ???
HELLO !!! ....... Is anybody Out There ???
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
adoucette: I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
What IS 'wrong' adoucette ???
Is it a mortal error to be 'wrong' in details, yet still have the overall concept 'right'?
What caused the 'hole' in the column (which led to fracturing at that spot ?)
Seems to me that you are STILL ignoring the 'elephant in the middle of the picture', and concentrating on superfluous issues (amidst great HAND-Waving)... to avoid providing an 'official' plausible explanation as to WHAT caused that 'elephant' to appear ???
HELLO !!! ....... Is anybody Out There ???
Answer to Foxx.
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 2 2006, 11:30 PM)
Answer to Foxx.
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
Look at the flange on the far side of the hole. It appears to bend back on itself. This would not be consistent with an object piercing the column (wrong direction).
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
Look at the flange on the far side of the hole. It appears to bend back on itself. This would not be consistent with an object piercing the column (wrong direction).
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 3 2006, 07:55 AM)
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 2 2006, 11:30 PM)
Answer to Foxx.
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
Look at the flange on the far side of the hole. It appears to bend back on itself. This would not be consistent with an object piercing the column (wrong direction).
It would depend on the angle of impact and any further exacerbative damage caused by subsequent impacts on the already open 'wound'.
Do you know what that piece of plate steel was, and where it was supposed to be?
If it was part of the upper surface of that column, or an internal/external plate welded to the upper face (inside or out), it could have been peeled back if a steel beam-end entered near the closer edge (see the gouge on the closer vertical face?) and levered inwards and towards the farther edge.
Thankyou.
The planes cut through the outer columns like knife through butter.
So we know that the steel isn't invulnerable to penetrative damage by SOFT ALUMINUM projectiles.
Therefore high speed impacts from large, and much HARDER, STEEL BEAM projectiles during collapse could easily cause at least as much damage.
Especially if the hit was from a steel beam impacting ON-END, when the momentum energy transfer from the whole beam would be concentrated into that small impact area. Impact penetrative force is therefore MULTIPLIED many times.
So it's not beyond reason that the hole was made initially by a plane part or another steel beam.
Add weeks of fire erosion and saltwater corrosion (in rubble pile) to the initial steel or plane impact damage, and you would expect to see what you see in the photo.
Thankyou.
Look at the flange on the far side of the hole. It appears to bend back on itself. This would not be consistent with an object piercing the column (wrong direction).
It would depend on the angle of impact and any further exacerbative damage caused by subsequent impacts on the already open 'wound'.
Do you know what that piece of plate steel was, and where it was supposed to be?
If it was part of the upper surface of that column, or an internal/external plate welded to the upper face (inside or out), it could have been peeled back if a steel beam-end entered near the closer edge (see the gouge on the closer vertical face?) and levered inwards and towards the farther edge.
Thankyou.
Scientist: UFO caused 1908 Siberia blast
MOSCOW (AFP) - A Russian scientist has reopened the controversy over a gigantic explosion in 1908 in Siberia with a claim that he has found debris from an extraterrestrial space vehicle, or UFO, which collided with a comet.
On June 30, 1908 a colossal flash lit up the sky over Siberia, followed by an explosion with the power of a thousand atom bombs. It obliterated the taiga (forest) for hundreds of square kilometres (miles) in the basin of the river Podkamennaya Tunguska in the Krasnoyarsk region.
People living in the villages of Siberia thought there had been an earthquake. Humans and animals were thrown to the ground by the shockwave, windows were blown in.
No meteorite debris was found and scientists conclude that the core of a comet or an asteroid had exploded.
Researcher Yuri Lavbin has spent 12 years researching the mystery of the "Tunguska meteorite" and believes he has found the key to one of the great scientific enigmas of the last century, though many scientists remain sceptical.
He is president of the "Tunguska Spatial Phenomenon" Foundation in Krasnoyarsk, made up of some 15 enthusiasts, among them geologists, chemists, physicists and mineralogists, who have been organising regular expeditions to the area since 1994.
Lavbin's theory is that a comet and a mysterious flying machine collided 10 kilometres (six miles) above the earth's surface causing the explosion.
He and his team say that on an expedition to the Podkamannaya Tunguska river in July they found, between two villages, two strange black stones in the form of regular cubes with their sides measuring a metre and half (five feet).
These stones "are manifestly not of natural origin," Lavbin says. They appear to have been fired and "their material recalls an alloy used to make space rockets, while at the beginning of the 20th century only planes made of plywood existed."
He claims that the cubes are the remains of a flying machine, perhaps an extraterrestrial spaceship, while admitting that an analysis of the stones has yet to be undertaken.
He found something else: a huge white stone "the size of a peasant's hut" stuck in the top of a crag in the middle of the devastated forest.
"Local people call it the 'reindeer stone'. It is made of a crystalline matter which is not typical of this region," Lavbin said. He suggests it is part of the core of a comet.
The scientific establishment is not convinced.
"There are plenty of amateurs who organise trips to the site of the Tunguska cataclysm," said Anna Skripnik of the meteorites committee of the Academy of Sciences.
"In Siberia where oil geologists regularly work you can find a heap of fragments of various machines."
Lavbin is not deterred. He produces satellite photos of the region to back his theory which show the "footprints" of the spaceship (long marshes and lakes) and of the comet (devastated forests, charred trees and smashed rocks).
Not to mention a crater 500 metres (yards) across
MOSCOW (AFP) - A Russian scientist has reopened the controversy over a gigantic explosion in 1908 in Siberia with a claim that he has found debris from an extraterrestrial space vehicle, or UFO, which collided with a comet.
On June 30, 1908 a colossal flash lit up the sky over Siberia, followed by an explosion with the power of a thousand atom bombs. It obliterated the taiga (forest) for hundreds of square kilometres (miles) in the basin of the river Podkamennaya Tunguska in the Krasnoyarsk region.
People living in the villages of Siberia thought there had been an earthquake. Humans and animals were thrown to the ground by the shockwave, windows were blown in.
No meteorite debris was found and scientists conclude that the core of a comet or an asteroid had exploded.
Researcher Yuri Lavbin has spent 12 years researching the mystery of the "Tunguska meteorite" and believes he has found the key to one of the great scientific enigmas of the last century, though many scientists remain sceptical.
He is president of the "Tunguska Spatial Phenomenon" Foundation in Krasnoyarsk, made up of some 15 enthusiasts, among them geologists, chemists, physicists and mineralogists, who have been organising regular expeditions to the area since 1994.
Lavbin's theory is that a comet and a mysterious flying machine collided 10 kilometres (six miles) above the earth's surface causing the explosion.
He and his team say that on an expedition to the Podkamannaya Tunguska river in July they found, between two villages, two strange black stones in the form of regular cubes with their sides measuring a metre and half (five feet).
These stones "are manifestly not of natural origin," Lavbin says. They appear to have been fired and "their material recalls an alloy used to make space rockets, while at the beginning of the 20th century only planes made of plywood existed."
He claims that the cubes are the remains of a flying machine, perhaps an extraterrestrial spaceship, while admitting that an analysis of the stones has yet to be undertaken.
He found something else: a huge white stone "the size of a peasant's hut" stuck in the top of a crag in the middle of the devastated forest.
"Local people call it the 'reindeer stone'. It is made of a crystalline matter which is not typical of this region," Lavbin said. He suggests it is part of the core of a comet.
The scientific establishment is not convinced.
"There are plenty of amateurs who organise trips to the site of the Tunguska cataclysm," said Anna Skripnik of the meteorites committee of the Academy of Sciences.
"In Siberia where oil geologists regularly work you can find a heap of fragments of various machines."
Lavbin is not deterred. He produces satellite photos of the region to back his theory which show the "footprints" of the spaceship (long marshes and lakes) and of the comet (devastated forests, charred trees and smashed rocks).
Not to mention a crater 500 metres (yards) across
The Center for UFO Studies
Who started the Center for UFO Studies?
The Center for UFO Studies was started by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who was a professor of astronomy at Ohio State University, and later, chairman of the astronomy department at Northwestern University. During the 1950s and 1960s, he served as the astronomical consultant to the United States Air Force's Project Blue Book. Essentially, his responsibility was to determine whether there was an astronomical explanation for a UFO sighting. Professor Hynek would study a UFO report and decide if its description of the UFO suggested a known astronomical object. That is, did the witness see the planet Venus or a meteor instead of a genuine UFO?
At first, Dr. Hynek was skeptical of the whole UFO business, but after examining hundreds of UFO reports by credible witnesses, he became convinced UFOs were worthy of serious study. With the closing of Project Blue Book in 1969, he began to seriously consider forming a private, scientific UFO organization composed of scientists and other highly-trained technical experts, who would work together to solve the UFO enigma. In 1972, Hynek published his classic book, The UFO Experience: A Scientific Study, in which he presented his categories for grouping UFO sightings and coined the phrase, "Close Encounters." In 1973, he started the Center for UFO Studies and served as its scientific director until his death in 1986. Before he died, Dr. Hynek appointed Mark Rodeghier to succeed him as scientific director. The Center for UFO Studies continues to honor Hynek's legacy through its serious study and examination of the UFO phenomenon.
What does the Center for UFO Studies do?
The Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) has three principal activities. First, it maintains a library and archives of UFO-related materials. These materials include books, articles, documents, and sighting reports. Second, the Center publishes reliable information about the UFO subject through its quarterly magazine, the International UFO Reporter (IUR), and its annual scholarly publication, the Journal of UFO Studies. CUFOS also publishes books, such as Encounter at Buff Ledge and Examining the Earthlight Theory, as well as monographs that examine specific cases or other aspects of the UFO phenomenon. Third, the Center supports and conducts investigations into areas of particular interest and concern to contemporary ufology. Currently, some Center associates are investigating the alleged crash of a UFO near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947, while others are developing a psychological profile of individuals who claim to have been abducted by aliens. Of course, the Center for UFO Studies continues to investigate UFO sightings and to collect and evaluate UFO reports from around the world. This sighting information is summarized in a computer database called UFOCAT, available only to serious scholars and researchers. Some of the volunteers at CUFOS are shown below . Click on picture for transcript of interview (under construction) with staff members.
Who started the Center for UFO Studies?
The Center for UFO Studies was started by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who was a professor of astronomy at Ohio State University, and later, chairman of the astronomy department at Northwestern University. During the 1950s and 1960s, he served as the astronomical consultant to the United States Air Force's Project Blue Book. Essentially, his responsibility was to determine whether there was an astronomical explanation for a UFO sighting. Professor Hynek would study a UFO report and decide if its description of the UFO suggested a known astronomical object. That is, did the witness see the planet Venus or a meteor instead of a genuine UFO?
At first, Dr. Hynek was skeptical of the whole UFO business, but after examining hundreds of UFO reports by credible witnesses, he became convinced UFOs were worthy of serious study. With the closing of Project Blue Book in 1969, he began to seriously consider forming a private, scientific UFO organization composed of scientists and other highly-trained technical experts, who would work together to solve the UFO enigma. In 1972, Hynek published his classic book, The UFO Experience: A Scientific Study, in which he presented his categories for grouping UFO sightings and coined the phrase, "Close Encounters." In 1973, he started the Center for UFO Studies and served as its scientific director until his death in 1986. Before he died, Dr. Hynek appointed Mark Rodeghier to succeed him as scientific director. The Center for UFO Studies continues to honor Hynek's legacy through its serious study and examination of the UFO phenomenon.
What does the Center for UFO Studies do?
The Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) has three principal activities. First, it maintains a library and archives of UFO-related materials. These materials include books, articles, documents, and sighting reports. Second, the Center publishes reliable information about the UFO subject through its quarterly magazine, the International UFO Reporter (IUR), and its annual scholarly publication, the Journal of UFO Studies. CUFOS also publishes books, such as Encounter at Buff Ledge and Examining the Earthlight Theory, as well as monographs that examine specific cases or other aspects of the UFO phenomenon. Third, the Center supports and conducts investigations into areas of particular interest and concern to contemporary ufology. Currently, some Center associates are investigating the alleged crash of a UFO near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947, while others are developing a psychological profile of individuals who claim to have been abducted by aliens. Of course, the Center for UFO Studies continues to investigate UFO sightings and to collect and evaluate UFO reports from around the world. This sighting information is summarized in a computer database called UFOCAT, available only to serious scholars and researchers. Some of the volunteers at CUFOS are shown below . Click on picture for transcript of interview (under construction) with staff members.
Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 3 2006, 02:56 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 06:28 AM)
I don't use UPPER CASE for added "AUTHORITY" but to EMPHASIZE something.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
I find it easier than using BOLD.
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Ok, I accept that my my original speculations may have been somewhat off-tack.
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
adoucette: I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
What IS 'wrong' adoucette ???
Is it a mortal error to be 'wrong' in details, yet still have the overall concept 'right'?
What caused the 'hole' in the column (which led to fracturing at that spot ?)
Seems to me that you are STILL ignoring the 'elephant in the middle of the picture', and concentrating on superfluous issues (amidst great HAND-Waving)... to avoid providing an 'official' plausible explanation as to WHAT caused that 'elephant' to appear ???
HELLO !!! ....... Is anybody Out There ???
Lighten up Foxx,
You take yourself WAY to seriously.
It ain't like you are on a mission to SAVE THE WORLD, that's Frater and Newt's job.
There is no "Elephant in the middle of the picture"
There is a hole in a perimeter column.
How it got there is anybodies guess.
However, there is NOTHING UNUSUAL about the hole.
Not when you take it out of a rubble pile that resulted from the high speed impact of a jet and the subsequent collapse of a 110 story building.
Here's the bottom line.
The NIST report goes into EXCRUCIATING detail looking at the failure modes of the steel. Down to microscopic analysis. With literally hundreds of samples and coupons illustrating the damage. They will tell you that 90% of the column failures were bolt failures, except at the mechanical floors where the columns were welded, in which case the column failed, etc etc ad nauseaum.
The NIST report will tell how a large group of VERY EXPERIENCED Engineers volunteered their time to hunt through the scrap to find representative samples.
Now with ALL of this looking at the various pieces of steel NOT ONE of these people found ANY example of THERMITE DAMAGE or damage caused by High EXPLOSIVES.
NIST categorically states this is so.
Yet you PERSIST with this insanity.
WHY?
Is it POSSIBLE that ALL these people at NIST are LIARS, helping Bush/admin cover up the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens (and most likely some of their actual FRIENDS)?????
Yes its POSSIBLE, its just not PROBABLE, in fact its HIGHLY IMPROBABLE.
Yet you PERSIST with this insanity.
WHY?
When after 4 years of researching YOU CAN'T EVEN SHOW ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE EVEN ONE ASPECT OF YOUR THEORY.
When after 4 years of researching YOU are still trying to force others to disprove you by proving something DIDN'T happen.
When after 4 years of researching YOUR BASIC FACTS are shown to be in error.
When after 4 years of researching you are still spouting "FACTS", which you have been shown to be in error.
When after 4 years of researching you are still forced to TWIST the statements to make it APPEAR that you are right.
When after 4 years of researching you have to use the obscure definition of MOLTEN to mean MELTED, when you can't produce ONE picture of ANY melted steel.
All in all a monumental PATHETIC attempt at notoriety which is obviously FAILING.
Give it up Foxx.
You are wasting your time.
Arthur
I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
Arthur
adoucette: I take it that is as close as we will ever see you admit to being wrong?
What IS 'wrong' adoucette ???
Is it a mortal error to be 'wrong' in details, yet still have the overall concept 'right'?
What caused the 'hole' in the column (which led to fracturing at that spot ?)
Seems to me that you are STILL ignoring the 'elephant in the middle of the picture', and concentrating on superfluous issues (amidst great HAND-Waving)... to avoid providing an 'official' plausible explanation as to WHAT caused that 'elephant' to appear ???
HELLO !!! ....... Is anybody Out There ???
Lighten up Foxx,
You take yourself WAY to seriously.
It ain't like you are on a mission to SAVE THE WORLD, that's Frater and Newt's job.
There is no "Elephant in the middle of the picture"
There is a hole in a perimeter column.
How it got there is anybodies guess.
However, there is NOTHING UNUSUAL about the hole.
Not when you take it out of a rubble pile that resulted from the high speed impact of a jet and the subsequent collapse of a 110 story building.
Here's the bottom line.
The NIST report goes into EXCRUCIATING detail looking at the failure modes of the steel. Down to microscopic analysis. With literally hundreds of samples and coupons illustrating the damage. They will tell you that 90% of the column failures were bolt failures, except at the mechanical floors where the columns were welded, in which case the column failed, etc etc ad nauseaum.
The NIST report will tell how a large group of VERY EXPERIENCED Engineers volunteered their time to hunt through the scrap to find representative samples.
Now with ALL of this looking at the various pieces of steel NOT ONE of these people found ANY example of THERMITE DAMAGE or damage caused by High EXPLOSIVES.
NIST categorically states this is so.
Yet you PERSIST with this insanity.
WHY?
Is it POSSIBLE that ALL these people at NIST are LIARS, helping Bush/admin cover up the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens (and most likely some of their actual FRIENDS)?????
Yes its POSSIBLE, its just not PROBABLE, in fact its HIGHLY IMPROBABLE.
Yet you PERSIST with this insanity.
WHY?
When after 4 years of researching YOU CAN'T EVEN SHOW ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE EVEN ONE ASPECT OF YOUR THEORY.
When after 4 years of researching YOU are still trying to force others to disprove you by proving something DIDN'T happen.
When after 4 years of researching YOUR BASIC FACTS are shown to be in error.
When after 4 years of researching you are still spouting "FACTS", which you have been shown to be in error.
When after 4 years of researching you are still forced to TWIST the statements to make it APPEAR that you are right.
When after 4 years of researching you have to use the obscure definition of MOLTEN to mean MELTED, when you can't produce ONE picture of ANY melted steel.
All in all a monumental PATHETIC attempt at notoriety which is obviously FAILING.
Give it up Foxx.
You are wasting your time.
Arthur
Schnensible - Posted: Feb 3 2006, 02:18 PM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60886
Of course they do,,, all the time in controlled demolitions. The core columns are the first to be 'pulled'. This will collapse the perimeter columns inward at the weakest point in the building first - guess where that was.
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
This is why they like the collapse in a small area. The picture was taken on Sept 27, 2001. All the steel is already removed from WTC 7. This is unbelievable, even if you planed ahead of time, it still is amazing. In the real world, they would be deciding the best way to investigate the only steel building to totally collapse from fire.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4247.jpg
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse. In fact considering the SMALL AMOUNT of white smoke emitted, one or two elevator shafts is probably sufficient.
Look, HOLLOW does not imply WEAK, if you can come up with a better way of describing the core let me know.
But whatever definition you use it has to take into account the fact that the core included 40 elevator shafts running down to the lobby and/or various basement levels, three of which run the entire length of the towers and 8 of which run all the way to the 80th floor and 8 of which run to the 46th floor. Note, these last 16 were 50 person elevators so the shafts were OVERSIZED as were the FREIGHT elevators. The core also included all plenums for stand pipes, waste disposal, air control, electrical and three stairways. And though there were two mechanical floors, which I'm sure provided SOME interruption to the many stacked elevator shafts, there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
Arthur
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse. In fact considering the SMALL AMOUNT of white smoke emitted, one or two elevator shafts is probably sufficient.
Look, HOLLOW does not imply WEAK, if you can come up with a better way of describing the core let me know.
But whatever definition you use it has to take into account the fact that the core included 40 elevator shafts running down to the lobby and/or various basement levels, three of which run the entire length of the towers and 8 of which run all the way to the 80th floor and 8 of which run to the 46th floor. Note, these last 16 were 50 person elevators so the shafts were OVERSIZED as were the FREIGHT elevators. The core also included all plenums for stand pipes, waste disposal, air control, electrical and three stairways. And though there were two mechanical floors, which I'm sure provided SOME interruption to the many stacked elevator shafts, there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
Arthur
It was a large amount of white smoke visible miles away. In addition, smoke rises, or do we have magical smoke along with the jet fuel?
Oh BTW... the Bankers Trust was not the ONLY building to suffer damage from Amazing Flying Columns.
WFC 3 (World Financial Center 3) was also a recipient of this anomalous 'mexican jumping beans' behaviour..
The FEMA caption on this picture says...
here's a closer view of THOSE perimeter columns...
If you 'draw back' to get a better perspective and context of these Amazing Flying Columns that impaled WFC 3, it gives an idea of the trajectory upon which these Amazing Flying Columns impacted WFC 3...
(edited a lot of "Foxx Litter" out here)
...... that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
HOW does one propel a 60 Ton piece of steel approximately 400 feet laterally (according to the gravity-driven collapse scenario ??? so that it falls from the sky at actual free-fall speeds that distance AWAY from its' original position... yet other columnar trees fell closer to the base (as would be expected in a gravity-driven 'landslide collapse' scenario).
I am sure that Osama Bin Boogeyman (being the structural engineering expert that he is) had this all calculated into his 'attack'... and to Prove his magical powers (backed by allah), he decided to transport a few of these Amazing Flying Columns by Ali-Baba magic carpets to their destinations.
Is this beginning to make sense to you now?
Of course. the neo-con supporters trivialize such information with clever psyopts to represent the same damage from another perspective...
Cheers
Foxx
Deep Diving into the abyss that is made up of Foxx BS.
Foxx's originial post is shown.
Now the next image shows an overview of the collapse. WTC 1 had a long collapse axis to the WEST, and because exterior columns were found on Vesey street and damaged WTC 7, we can assume to the North as well. WTC 2 on the otherhand apparently had a long axis to the East and because of damage to the Bankers Trust building also to the South.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-7.jpg
Now from Foxx's pictures, the oblique angle that they were shot at, it gives the impression that these buildings were almost untouched and this piece was an anomaly.
But, lets look at it from a different angle:
Now these next two pictures show the WFC3 building (the same one Foxx shows the column stuck in) but from this angle its CLEAR that a LOT of the WTC fell this way. With a LOT of the WTC landing past the edge of the WFC 3 building and smashing WinterGarden
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5323.jpg
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4247.jpg
Talk about a "manufactured" tempest in a teapot.
It turns out the Column that Foxx claimed weighed a ~30 to 60 tons actually weighed ~ 5 to 7 tons and it turns out the material fell outside the buildings footprint by only 1/3 of the buildings height. And now from looking at the pictures its clear that the ONLY thing unusual about this piece is it hit the WFC3 because its clear that a many pieces from the upper part of WTC 1 went further than this piece.
And Foxx wants us to believe that this piece in WFC3 is somehow UNUSUAL.
RIGHT.
Arthur
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60886
QUOTE
Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct.
Explosions don't pull steel in
. Explosions don't pull steel in
Of course they do,,, all the time in controlled demolitions. The core columns are the first to be 'pulled'. This will collapse the perimeter columns inward at the weakest point in the building first - guess where that was.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct. Explosions don't pull steel in |
.
Of course they do,,, all the time in controlled demolitions. The core columns are the first to be 'pulled'. This will collapse the perimeter columns inward at the weakest point in the building first - guess where that was.
Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Not so... once the core columns begin to collapse in on themselves, this will pull in the perimeter columns at the weakest point in the building, The upper structure unaffected by fire (at this momentary point in time) will begin to collapse downwards as a unit until it also is compromised by sequential explosions. It would not be necessary to 'cut' the core columns at the weakest point (the site of impact damage). Even if the columns were compromised at the basement level first, still... as the building began to collapse it would seem to 'begin' (from an external view) at the weakest point in the building. There is nothing 'earth-shattering' about this section of the video which can not be explained by controlled demolition.
Now, Schneiby... how about explaining how you attached that specific 4 second clip to the Urology site? Or is the Urology site a 'spook' front?
And how about explaining the explosion from the base of the building (near the beginning of the full video - which you originally tried to leave out). This is clear from the start of the video happening moments before the beginning of the upper collapse... and is also evidenced by the testimonial evidence of many fire-fighters and others.
Of course they do,,, all the time in controlled demolitions. The core columns are the first to be 'pulled'. This will collapse the perimeter columns inward at the weakest point in the building first - guess where that was.
Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Not so... once the core columns begin to collapse in on themselves, this will pull in the perimeter columns at the weakest point in the building, The upper structure unaffected by fire (at this momentary point in time) will begin to collapse downwards as a unit until it also is compromised by sequential explosions. It would not be necessary to 'cut' the core columns at the weakest point (the site of impact damage). Even if the columns were compromised at the basement level first, still... as the building began to collapse it would seem to 'begin' (from an external view) at the weakest point in the building. There is nothing 'earth-shattering' about this section of the video which can not be explained by controlled demolition.
Now, Schneiby... how about explaining how you attached that specific 4 second clip to the Urology site? Or is the Urology site a 'spook' front?
And how about explaining the explosion from the base of the building (near the beginning of the full video - which you originally tried to leave out). This is clear from the start of the video happening moments before the beginning of the upper collapse... and is also evidenced by the testimonial evidence of many fire-fighters and others.
QUOTE (Foxx+)
And how about explaining the explosion from the base of the building (near the beginning of the full video - which you originally tried to leave out).
There is NO PROOF OF AN EXPLOSION from the base of he building. There is WHITE SMOKE.
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
There is NO PROOF OF AN EXPLOSION from the base of he building. There is WHITE SMOKE.
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 07:08 AM)
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
QUOTE
Common Sense
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
QUOTE (steve1957+Feb 3 2006, 07:26 AM)
QUOTE
Common Sense
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
This is why they like the collapse in a small area. The picture was taken on Sept 27, 2001. All the steel is already removed from WTC 7. This is unbelievable, even if you planed ahead of time, it still is amazing. In the real world, they would be deciding the best way to investigate the only steel building to totally collapse from fire.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4247.jpg
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 3 2006, 11:26 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 07:08 AM)
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse. In fact considering the SMALL AMOUNT of white smoke emitted, one or two elevator shafts is probably sufficient.
Look, HOLLOW does not imply WEAK, if you can come up with a better way of describing the core let me know.
But whatever definition you use it has to take into account the fact that the core included 40 elevator shafts running down to the lobby and/or various basement levels, three of which run the entire length of the towers and 8 of which run all the way to the 80th floor and 8 of which run to the 46th floor. Note, these last 16 were 50 person elevators so the shafts were OVERSIZED as were the FREIGHT elevators. The core also included all plenums for stand pipes, waste disposal, air control, electrical and three stairways. And though there were two mechanical floors, which I'm sure provided SOME interruption to the many stacked elevator shafts, there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 08:46 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 3 2006, 11:26 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 07:08 AM)
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Like always Foxx, you see what is convenient for you to see.
Arthur
This is the second time you have made this claim. The first time I will give you the benefit of the doubt (Ignorance) , this time you are spreading a lie. Even if the elevator shafts were continuous, they are less then 25% of the core area.
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse. In fact considering the SMALL AMOUNT of white smoke emitted, one or two elevator shafts is probably sufficient.
Look, HOLLOW does not imply WEAK, if you can come up with a better way of describing the core let me know.
But whatever definition you use it has to take into account the fact that the core included 40 elevator shafts running down to the lobby and/or various basement levels, three of which run the entire length of the towers and 8 of which run all the way to the 80th floor and 8 of which run to the 46th floor. Note, these last 16 were 50 person elevators so the shafts were OVERSIZED as were the FREIGHT elevators. The core also included all plenums for stand pipes, waste disposal, air control, electrical and three stairways. And though there were two mechanical floors, which I'm sure provided SOME interruption to the many stacked elevator shafts, there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
Arthur
It was a large amount of white smoke visible miles away. In addition, smoke rises, or do we have magical smoke along with the jet fuel?
Ah, we've all seen the videos, it was not a LARGE amount of white smoke.
Compare it for instance to the smoke coming off the top of the towers.
In comparison it was INSIGNIFICANT.
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Arthur
Compare it for instance to the smoke coming off the top of the towers.
In comparison it was INSIGNIFICANT.
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Arthur
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 1 2006, 03:59 AM)
Oh BTW... the Bankers Trust was not the ONLY building to suffer damage from Amazing Flying Columns.
WFC 3 (World Financial Center 3) was also a recipient of this anomalous 'mexican jumping beans' behaviour..
The FEMA caption on this picture says...
QUOTE
New York, NY, Sept 18, 2001 -- Ohio Task Force workers anchored this 600,000 pound beam from the World Trade Center lodged in a nearby building. Photo by Michael Rieger / FEMA News Photo.
here's a closer view of THOSE perimeter columns...
If you 'draw back' to get a better perspective and context of these Amazing Flying Columns that impaled WFC 3, it gives an idea of the trajectory upon which these Amazing Flying Columns impacted WFC 3...
(edited a lot of "Foxx Litter" out here)
...... that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
HOW does one propel a 60 Ton piece of steel approximately 400 feet laterally (according to the gravity-driven collapse scenario ??? so that it falls from the sky at actual free-fall speeds that distance AWAY from its' original position... yet other columnar trees fell closer to the base (as would be expected in a gravity-driven 'landslide collapse' scenario).
I am sure that Osama Bin Boogeyman (being the structural engineering expert that he is) had this all calculated into his 'attack'... and to Prove his magical powers (backed by allah), he decided to transport a few of these Amazing Flying Columns by Ali-Baba magic carpets to their destinations.
Is this beginning to make sense to you now?
Of course. the neo-con supporters trivialize such information with clever psyopts to represent the same damage from another perspective...
Cheers
Foxx
Deep Diving into the abyss that is made up of Foxx BS.
Foxx's originial post is shown.
Now the next image shows an overview of the collapse. WTC 1 had a long collapse axis to the WEST, and because exterior columns were found on Vesey street and damaged WTC 7, we can assume to the North as well. WTC 2 on the otherhand apparently had a long axis to the East and because of damage to the Bankers Trust building also to the South.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-7.jpg
Now from Foxx's pictures, the oblique angle that they were shot at, it gives the impression that these buildings were almost untouched and this piece was an anomaly.
But, lets look at it from a different angle:
Now these next two pictures show the WFC3 building (the same one Foxx shows the column stuck in) but from this angle its CLEAR that a LOT of the WTC fell this way. With a LOT of the WTC landing past the edge of the WFC 3 building and smashing WinterGarden
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5323.jpg
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4247.jpg
Talk about a "manufactured" tempest in a teapot.
It turns out the Column that Foxx claimed weighed a ~30 to 60 tons actually weighed ~ 5 to 7 tons and it turns out the material fell outside the buildings footprint by only 1/3 of the buildings height. And now from looking at the pictures its clear that the ONLY thing unusual about this piece is it hit the WFC3 because its clear that a many pieces from the upper part of WTC 1 went further than this piece.
And Foxx wants us to believe that this piece in WFC3 is somehow UNUSUAL.
RIGHT.
Arthur
QUOTE (Andrew Johnson+Sep 30 2005, 08:09 AM)
Dear All,
I invite everyone reading this to disprove basic Physics and Chemistry I (and many others) have presented regarding the collapse of the World Trade Centre towers.
Please look at this:
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Collap...of%20Towers.swf
Then consider if NIST is/are correct http://www.physorg.com/news3686.html.
[[ Due to website access problems, I have mirrored this file here]]:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ad.johnson/Co...of%20Towers.swf
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andrew.johnso...of%20Towers.swf
People can disagree with me for sure, but please point out the error in my Physics if you are going to do so.
Thanks for reading.
Andrew Johnson
UK
It's still a question of basic physics.
I invite everyone reading this to disprove basic Physics and Chemistry I (and many others) have presented regarding the collapse of the World Trade Centre towers.
Please look at this:
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Collap...of%20Towers.swf
Then consider if NIST is/are correct http://www.physorg.com/news3686.html.
[[ Due to website access problems, I have mirrored this file here]]:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ad.johnson/Co...of%20Towers.swf
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andrew.johnso...of%20Towers.swf
People can disagree with me for sure, but please point out the error in my Physics if you are going to do so.
Thanks for reading.
Andrew Johnson
UK
It's still a question of basic physics.
QUOTE (Foxx+Jan 31 2006, 06:51 PM)
Thanks all.
I've been sitting here reading the pages since my last visit and rolling on the floor with laughter. The more 'threatening' Schneiby becomes the more entertaining... it's like watching a Yosemite Sam cartoon.
However, it is quite apparent that gov't supporters have been thrown so far into confusion over my last posts (related to the issues of this thread) that they have fallen into thrashing & slashing mode just as I had predicted many pages ago.
This was way back on page 287...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=59252
Now anyone who has been paying attention can readily see why ol' Schneiby has fallen off the 'deep end' with his 'shoot-em-up' anger.
He first tried to compare the Bankers Trust damage to the WTC 7 alleged mythical south face damage which mysteriously ... no one has pictures of.
I'm not sure where he thought he was going to go with that, but it royally backfired for numerous reasons.
The gash in the face of Bankers Trust is very similar to the 'alleged' gash in the south face of WTC 7.
The mythical WTC 7 gash (if you twist the words of ONE Fire-fighter - Boyle) was alleged to have been twenty stories high... the gash in BT was about 16 stories high. We have absolutely NO evidence that any perimeter columns smashed through the south face of WTC 7, yet we have irrefutable proof that numerous joined perimeter columns from WTC 2 flew a minimum of 600 feet and smashed through the face of BT...
Each of these column trees weighed about 23 tons. Clearly visible are three of these columnar trees. That gives us a MINIMUM weight of some ~ 70 Tons. Attached to those columns must be others buried within BT from which the 3 columnar trees were hanging from. Obviously the three columnar trees didn't just magnetize themselves to the outside face of BT, therefore they must be attached to others. So now we have, let's say a MINIMUM of 100 Tons of solid steel structures thrown over a minimum of 600 feet from their original location.
While we don't know the original floors of WTC 2 these columns came from, we do know that they did NOT end up buried in the face of BT riding atop a landslide of debris (as gravity should dictate from a normal bilding 'collapse'). NO...They FLEW there, and from a great height - as the entrance trajectory seems to suggest. They were NOT part of a massive landslide of cascading debris, otherwise the entire face of BT would have been covered. These particular columns were forcefully blown far further than the normal heavy perimeter columns. These are truly anomalous columns. These columns were in true free-fall as they impaled Bankers Trust. I'm afraid that 'gravity-driven' collapse can not account for the flight of these Amazing Flying Columns.
Not that it's extremely relevant, but perhaps some mathematical types would like to calculate the force that 100 tons of steel falling through thin air would impart at impact with Bankers Trust.
I'm sure the forces would be huge (much higher than the same section of 'allegedly free-falling' steel would exert after 'falling' 12 feet to impact the lower structure of the WTC).
Yet even so, this massive force was arrested and did not collapse that portion of Bankers Trust right down to the ground. Noting here that the structure impacted at Bankers Trust was much lighter constructed than the corresponding structure in the towers.
This can be seen in the original FEMA library photo. Another interesting thing about the FEMA photo is the caption (added by FEMA)...
This was way back on page 287...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=59252
Now anyone who has been paying attention can readily see why ol' Schneiby has fallen off the 'deep end' with his 'shoot-em-up' anger.
He first tried to compare the Bankers Trust damage to the WTC 7 alleged mythical south face damage which mysteriously ... no one has pictures of.
I'm not sure where he thought he was going to go with that, but it royally backfired for numerous reasons.
The gash in the face of Bankers Trust is very similar to the 'alleged' gash in the south face of WTC 7.
The mythical WTC 7 gash (if you twist the words of ONE Fire-fighter - Boyle) was alleged to have been twenty stories high... the gash in BT was about 16 stories high. We have absolutely NO evidence that any perimeter columns smashed through the south face of WTC 7, yet we have irrefutable proof that numerous joined perimeter columns from WTC 2 flew a minimum of 600 feet and smashed through the face of BT...
Each of these column trees weighed about 23 tons. Clearly visible are three of these columnar trees. That gives us a MINIMUM weight of some ~ 70 Tons. Attached to those columns must be others buried within BT from which the 3 columnar trees were hanging from. Obviously the three columnar trees didn't just magnetize themselves to the outside face of BT, therefore they must be attached to others. So now we have, let's say a MINIMUM of 100 Tons of solid steel structures thrown over a minimum of 600 feet from their original location.
While we don't know the original floors of WTC 2 these columns came from, we do know that they did NOT end up buried in the face of BT riding atop a landslide of debris (as gravity should dictate from a normal bilding 'collapse'). NO...They FLEW there, and from a great height - as the entrance trajectory seems to suggest. They were NOT part of a massive landslide of cascading debris, otherwise the entire face of BT would have been covered. These particular columns were forcefully blown far further than the normal heavy perimeter columns. These are truly anomalous columns. These columns were in true free-fall as they impaled Bankers Trust. I'm afraid that 'gravity-driven' collapse can not account for the flight of these Amazing Flying Columns.
Not that it's extremely relevant, but perhaps some mathematical types would like to calculate the force that 100 tons of steel falling through thin air would impart at impact with Bankers Trust.
I'm sure the forces would be huge (much higher than the same section of 'allegedly free-falling' steel would exert after 'falling' 12 feet to impact the lower structure of the WTC).
Yet even so, this massive force was arrested and did not collapse that portion of Bankers Trust right down to the ground. Noting here that the structure impacted at Bankers Trust was much lighter constructed than the corresponding structure in the towers.
This can be seen in the original FEMA library photo. Another interesting thing about the FEMA photo is the caption (added by FEMA)...
New York, NY, September 20, 2001 -- This building was damaged by the explosions caused by terrorist attacks near the World Trade Center site. Photo by Mike Rieger / FEMA News Photo
(emphasis added)
Heh, the 'terrorists caused EXPLOSIONS at WTC' ???
I thought they just flew planes into the towers.
Little bit of a freudian slip on the part of FEMA, there. Rumsfeld must have written that caption
Just a few things to think about... I'll get back to this later.
Cheers
Foxx
edit to add - I see the legendarian has added more since I began writing the above, which I'm not addressing in this post (as I also note Brian is picking apart arthurs obfuscations quite well)
WOW, great job FOXX.
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
They are trying to drive you away from the discussion
with sheer and organized ennui.
Basic shill procedure.
I've been sitting here reading the pages since my last visit and rolling on the floor with laughter. The more 'threatening' Schneiby becomes the more entertaining... it's like watching a Yosemite Sam cartoon.
However, it is quite apparent that gov't supporters have been thrown so far into confusion over my last posts (related to the issues of this thread) that they have fallen into thrashing & slashing mode just as I had predicted many pages ago.
QUOTE
by Foxx
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch6.htm
The ol' "Guardian" strikes again
Hmmm... 'Home Office' seems to have been caught off-guard with that last post and has gone briefly silent, while they regroup...
Never fear, they will be back thrashing & slashing with their sophistry, rhetorics & obfuscations very soon...
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch6.htm
The ol' "Guardian" strikes again
Hmmm... 'Home Office' seems to have been caught off-guard with that last post and has gone briefly silent, while they regroup...
Never fear, they will be back thrashing & slashing with their sophistry, rhetorics & obfuscations very soon...
This was way back on page 287...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=59252
Now anyone who has been paying attention can readily see why ol' Schneiby has fallen off the 'deep end' with his 'shoot-em-up' anger.
He first tried to compare the Bankers Trust damage to the WTC 7 alleged mythical south face damage which mysteriously ... no one has pictures of.
I'm not sure where he thought he was going to go with that, but it royally backfired for numerous reasons.
The gash in the face of Bankers Trust is very similar to the 'alleged' gash in the south face of WTC 7.
The mythical WTC 7 gash (if you twist the words of ONE Fire-fighter - Boyle) was alleged to have been twenty stories high... the gash in BT was about 16 stories high. We have absolutely NO evidence that any perimeter columns smashed through the south face of WTC 7, yet we have irrefutable proof that numerous joined perimeter columns from WTC 2 flew a minimum of 600 feet and smashed through the face of BT...
Each of these column trees weighed about 23 tons. Clearly visible are three of these columnar trees. That gives us a MINIMUM weight of some ~ 70 Tons. Attached to those columns must be others buried within BT from which the 3 columnar trees were hanging from. Obviously the three columnar trees didn't just magnetize themselves to the outside face of BT, therefore they must be attached to others. So now we have, let's say a MINIMUM of 100 Tons of solid steel structures thrown over a minimum of 600 feet from their original location.
While we don't know the original floors of WTC 2 these columns came from, we do know that they did NOT end up buried in the face of BT riding atop a landslide of debris (as gravity should dictate from a normal bilding 'collapse'). NO...They FLEW there, and from a great height - as the entrance trajectory seems to suggest. They were NOT part of a massive landslide of cascading debris, otherwise the entire face of BT would have been covered. These particular columns were forcefully blown far further than the normal heavy perimeter columns. These are truly anomalous columns. These columns were in true free-fall as they impaled Bankers Trust. I'm afraid that 'gravity-driven' collapse can not account for the flight of these Amazing Flying Columns.
Not that it's extremely relevant, but perhaps some mathematical types would like to calculate the force that 100 tons of steel falling through thin air would impart at impact with Bankers Trust.
I'm sure the forces would be huge (much higher than the same section of 'allegedly free-falling' steel would exert after 'falling' 12 feet to impact the lower structure of the WTC).
Yet even so, this massive force was arrested and did not collapse that portion of Bankers Trust right down to the ground. Noting here that the structure impacted at Bankers Trust was much lighter constructed than the corresponding structure in the towers.
This can be seen in the original FEMA library photo. Another interesting thing about the FEMA photo is the caption (added by FEMA)...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| by Foxx http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch6.htm The ol' "Guardian" strikes again Hmmm... 'Home Office' seems to have been caught off-guard with that last post and has gone briefly silent, while they regroup... Never fear, they will be back thrashing & slashing with their sophistry, rhetorics & obfuscations very soon... |
This was way back on page 287...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=59252
Now anyone who has been paying attention can readily see why ol' Schneiby has fallen off the 'deep end' with his 'shoot-em-up' anger.
He first tried to compare the Bankers Trust damage to the WTC 7 alleged mythical south face damage which mysteriously ... no one has pictures of.
I'm not sure where he thought he was going to go with that, but it royally backfired for numerous reasons.
The gash in the face of Bankers Trust is very similar to the 'alleged' gash in the south face of WTC 7.
The mythical WTC 7 gash (if you twist the words of ONE Fire-fighter - Boyle) was alleged to have been twenty stories high... the gash in BT was about 16 stories high. We have absolutely NO evidence that any perimeter columns smashed through the south face of WTC 7, yet we have irrefutable proof that numerous joined perimeter columns from WTC 2 flew a minimum of 600 feet and smashed through the face of BT...
Each of these column trees weighed about 23 tons. Clearly visible are three of these columnar trees. That gives us a MINIMUM weight of some ~ 70 Tons. Attached to those columns must be others buried within BT from which the 3 columnar trees were hanging from. Obviously the three columnar trees didn't just magnetize themselves to the outside face of BT, therefore they must be attached to others. So now we have, let's say a MINIMUM of 100 Tons of solid steel structures thrown over a minimum of 600 feet from their original location.
While we don't know the original floors of WTC 2 these columns came from, we do know that they did NOT end up buried in the face of BT riding atop a landslide of debris (as gravity should dictate from a normal bilding 'collapse'). NO...They FLEW there, and from a great height - as the entrance trajectory seems to suggest. They were NOT part of a massive landslide of cascading debris, otherwise the entire face of BT would have been covered. These particular columns were forcefully blown far further than the normal heavy perimeter columns. These are truly anomalous columns. These columns were in true free-fall as they impaled Bankers Trust. I'm afraid that 'gravity-driven' collapse can not account for the flight of these Amazing Flying Columns.
Not that it's extremely relevant, but perhaps some mathematical types would like to calculate the force that 100 tons of steel falling through thin air would impart at impact with Bankers Trust.
I'm sure the forces would be huge (much higher than the same section of 'allegedly free-falling' steel would exert after 'falling' 12 feet to impact the lower structure of the WTC).
Yet even so, this massive force was arrested and did not collapse that portion of Bankers Trust right down to the ground. Noting here that the structure impacted at Bankers Trust was much lighter constructed than the corresponding structure in the towers.
This can be seen in the original FEMA library photo. Another interesting thing about the FEMA photo is the caption (added by FEMA)...
New York, NY, September 20, 2001 -- This building was damaged by the explosions caused by terrorist attacks near the World Trade Center site. Photo by Mike Rieger / FEMA News Photo
(emphasis added)
Heh, the 'terrorists caused EXPLOSIONS at WTC' ???
I thought they just flew planes into the towers.
Little bit of a freudian slip on the part of FEMA, there. Rumsfeld must have written that caption
Just a few things to think about... I'll get back to this later.
Cheers
Foxx
edit to add - I see the legendarian has added more since I began writing the above, which I'm not addressing in this post (as I also note Brian is picking apart arthurs obfuscations quite well)
WOW, great job FOXX.
QUOTE (steve1957+Feb 3 2006, 03:26 PM)
QUOTE
Common Sense
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Explosions don't pull steel in.
Utter nonsense!!!! Why am I even wasting my time on this Kindergarten message board?
Just watch any documentary on CONTROL DEMOLITION, and they reveal how they strategically place what they sometimes call "Cutter charges", designed to cut through steel.
And they analyze the structure in order to derive the best possible placement of the cutter charges, so that after they go off and CUT through the steel the weight of the building will then COLLAPSE WITHIN ITSELF.
Moron's every where. All you have to do is watch any basic control demolition documentary and they lay it out step by step how the end result of the steel structure will be to collapse WITHIN ITSELF. That's the goal, the objective of CDI, it's to make the collapse as clean as possible, not scattered metal all over the place, but the goal is to keep the debris as confined as possible.
Oh why do I even bother talking with brain dead nit-wits???
They are trying to drive you away from the discussion
with sheer and organized ennui.
Basic shill procedure.
WOW! Sorry everyone. I take that back. I just read where Foxx has been shown up as an impotent idiot for four years. Everything he says turns out wrong or twisted. Idiot Foxx. Are you steve1957 too? Sounds about right. Nice job Foxx1957! You waste of 4 years. If it WAS a controlled demolition, then you (as Foxx) shouldn't be bleating about debris falling all OVER the place on nearby buildings, would you? BOTH your personalities CAN'T have it their way. Get your schizo act straight, Foxx1957! Great 'jobbie' more like, Foxx1957.
The conspiracy posts on this thread are so lame only entry level Shills are needed here.
Heck, I haven't even finished Shill 101 yet.
Arthur
Heck, I haven't even finished Shill 101 yet.
Arthur
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 3 2006, 02:18 PM)
Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
FOXX is the greatest.
QUOTE (galdur+Feb 3 2006, 11:51 PM)
FOXX is the greatest.
Notice how galdar and sock puppet guest show up at the same time...
Your idol Foxx doesn't like sock puppets yet you use them all the time. Just another irony in the Niagara falls of irony by CTers.
Notice how galdar and sock puppet guest show up at the same time...
Your idol Foxx doesn't like sock puppets yet you use them all the time. Just another irony in the Niagara falls of irony by CTers.
This is all the explosives Jones thinks were necessary:
"Those towers were felled by pre-positioned U.S. military-grade explosives, that would have taken just ten men ten trips to put in place, for a controlled demolition, in the week-end prior to 9/11, when the buildings were evacuated for dozens of hours, and the power shut down to the buildings, giving the agents plenty of time to position their explosives where they would do the job, without detection by security cameras. FEMA, the national police contingent, just happened to be in NYC by the hundreds, in preparation for a "drill" scheduled for Sept. 12."
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/EmailNews3Feb2006_2.html
"Those towers were felled by pre-positioned U.S. military-grade explosives, that would have taken just ten men ten trips to put in place, for a controlled demolition, in the week-end prior to 9/11, when the buildings were evacuated for dozens of hours, and the power shut down to the buildings, giving the agents plenty of time to position their explosives where they would do the job, without detection by security cameras. FEMA, the national police contingent, just happened to be in NYC by the hundreds, in preparation for a "drill" scheduled for Sept. 12."
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/EmailNews3Feb2006_2.html
Because something COULD be done, does not PROVE it was done.
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 3 2006, 03:49 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 3 2006, 02:18 PM)
Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
This is hilarious. The shills are embarrassed to register. I can understand why truth seekers might be intimidated with no fly lists and arresting people for warring protest t-shirts. Shill’s have no excuse.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
This is hilarious. The shills are embarrassed to register. I can understand why truth seekers might be intimidated with no fly lists and arresting people for warring protest t-shirts. Shill’s have no excuse.
well. like, it's a crap-load of pages later, and although snippets were taken from my breif post, the most important points have been ignored.
IF that one panel that is stuck in banker's trust building(the oxymoron building, i like to call it) got there by 'falling', LOL, then the shill story is that it somehow had spring action, similiar to pressing down vertically on a yardstick, and then letting built up tension quickly release.
the panel('tree', -three perimeter beams with spandrels joining them), like MOST panels from the collapse, is STRAIGHT. it does not have the ability to recoil to any signifigant degree. if you bend it, it will stay bent.
well, they're all straight. the official story has them failing by buckling. yet there is no visible buckling.
the official compurter simulated fire modeling and collapse modelling have opened ended inputs that allow the user to increase the heats and loads until something gives, yet ignores the ACTUAL measurements of heat in the steel, and ignores the actual observed collapse.
and, commonsnhiebarthursense defends this to the point of LUDIOCRITY.
it is only a matter of time before actual reason (-WINK-) catches up with shill super psuedoscience.
yours truly, -WINK-
IF that one panel that is stuck in banker's trust building(the oxymoron building, i like to call it) got there by 'falling', LOL, then the shill story is that it somehow had spring action, similiar to pressing down vertically on a yardstick, and then letting built up tension quickly release.
the panel('tree', -three perimeter beams with spandrels joining them), like MOST panels from the collapse, is STRAIGHT. it does not have the ability to recoil to any signifigant degree. if you bend it, it will stay bent.
well, they're all straight. the official story has them failing by buckling. yet there is no visible buckling.
the official compurter simulated fire modeling and collapse modelling have opened ended inputs that allow the user to increase the heats and loads until something gives, yet ignores the ACTUAL measurements of heat in the steel, and ignores the actual observed collapse.
and, commonsnhiebarthursense defends this to the point of LUDIOCRITY.
it is only a matter of time before actual reason (-WINK-) catches up with shill super psuedoscience.
yours truly, -WINK-
Newton,
All your posts are ignored.
For obvious reasons.
Like not bothering to read the intervening posts.
Which is why you obviously missed the part where the Bankers Trust building got moved 350 feet closer to the WTC 2 tower?
And the part where that 100 ton piece of WTC perimeter columns went on a diet and shed over 70 tons?
Guess so.
Arthur
All your posts are ignored.
For obvious reasons.
Like not bothering to read the intervening posts.
Which is why you obviously missed the part where the Bankers Trust building got moved 350 feet closer to the WTC 2 tower?
And the part where that 100 ton piece of WTC perimeter columns went on a diet and shed over 70 tons?
Guess so.
Arthur
QUOTE (galdur+Feb 3 2006, 11:51 PM)
FOXX is the greatest.
The greatest WHAT? The greatest 'jobbie'! Right on, galdur! You called it!
WOW, now that you mention it galdur, that FOXX1957 sure DOES look like a great 'double jobbie' after the last few posts!Your greatest hero is the greatest 'double jobbie' ever slipped on. Whew! And you sure slipped on him there, galdur!
The greatest WHAT? The greatest 'jobbie'! Right on, galdur! You called it!
WOW, now that you mention it galdur, that FOXX1957 sure DOES look like a great 'double jobbie' after the last few posts!Your greatest hero is the greatest 'double jobbie' ever slipped on. Whew! And you sure slipped on him there, galdur!
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 05:18 PM)
Because something COULD be done, does not PROVE it was done.
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
Controlled demolition is self explanatory and easily would fit the total collapse of the WTC’s.
What isthe official explanation for why the steel was removed from WTC 7 in several weeks?
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
Controlled demolition is self explanatory and easily would fit the total collapse of the WTC’s.
What isthe official explanation for why the steel was removed from WTC 7 in several weeks?
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 3 2006, 10:12 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 3 2006, 05:18 PM)
Because something COULD be done, does not PROVE it was done.
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
Controlled demolition is self explanatory and easily would fit the total collapse of the WTC’s.
What it the official explanation for why the steel was removed from WTC 7 in several weeks?
CD is Self Explanatory?
Right.
Why was the WTC 7 cleaned up in two weeks?
Because the area wasn't much use as a pile of rubble.
Arthur
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
reply by adoucette to reasonwhy
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse.
the upper floors had NOT begun to collapse until AFTER the smoke ejection from the base and many fireman quotes related to explosions & brisant flashes at the lower levels BEFORE the collapse began.
BEFORE, arthur... not AFTER.
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
by arthur
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Still trying to sling the same old hash. Not only was the jet fuel supersonic, but now smoke does time travel and erupts BEFORE the collapse, because it knew beforehand the building was gonna collapse so it erupted from the lower levels to signal the building was going to start collapsing...pretty soon.
Well, can't waste any more time on this drivel tonight.
Someone let me know if we ever get an answer as to how Schneiby put that 4 second clip onto the Urology site, (or if he ever confesses that site to be a spook-front-operation).
Later
Jones offers no PROOF that 10 men carried 10 loads of explosives into the building, nor does he even offer proof that that would be sufficient and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
The progression of the collapse in no way followed that of a CD.
Arthur
Controlled demolition is self explanatory and easily would fit the total collapse of the WTC’s.
What it the official explanation for why the steel was removed from WTC 7 in several weeks?
CD is Self Explanatory?
Right.
Why was the WTC 7 cleaned up in two weeks?
Because the area wasn't much use as a pile of rubble.
Arthur
QUOTE
By adoucette
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| By adoucette Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core? |
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
reply by adoucette to reasonwhy
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse.
the upper floors had NOT begun to collapse until AFTER the smoke ejection from the base and many fireman quotes related to explosions & brisant flashes at the lower levels BEFORE the collapse began.
BEFORE, arthur... not AFTER.
QUOTE
by arthur
there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| by arthur there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement. |
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
by arthur
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Still trying to sling the same old hash. Not only was the jet fuel supersonic, but now smoke does time travel and erupts BEFORE the collapse, because it knew beforehand the building was gonna collapse so it erupted from the lower levels to signal the building was going to start collapsing...pretty soon.
Well, can't waste any more time on this drivel tonight.
Someone let me know if we ever get an answer as to how Schneiby put that 4 second clip onto the Urology site, (or if he ever confesses that site to be a spook-front-operation).
Later
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 3 2006, 11:49 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 3 2006, 02:18 PM)
Ironically (And this thread is filled with CT irony) I can use a CT site to prove the NIST report correct.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
Heh! I think you're right, look at them sworm.
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
reply by adoucette to reasonwhy
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse.
the upper floors had NOT begun to collapse until AFTER the smoke ejection from the base and many fireman quotes related to explosions & brisant flashes at the lower levels BEFORE the collapse began.
BEFORE, arthur... not AFTER.
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
by arthur
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Still trying to sling the same old hash. Not only was the jet fuel supersonic, but now smoke does time travel and erupts BEFORE the collapse, because it knew beforehand the building was gonna collapse so it erupted from the lower levels to signal the building was going to start collapsing...pretty soon.
Well, can't waste any more time on this drivel tonight.
Someone let me know if we ever get an answer as to how Schneiby put that 4 second clip onto the Urology site, (or if he ever confesses that site to be a spook-front-operation).
Later
Semantics Foxx, looking at the floor plan, to me it was largely hollow, but to be precise we QUANTIFIED it at 25%.
Do you dispute the 25% estimate?
NO ONE KNOWS EXACTLY what was happening inside the building, but NIST states it pretty well when they describe the pre-collapse situation. The towers were being overwhelmed. The key structures were beginning to fail, the fact that some things probably gave way inside prior to the final failure which was visible OUTSIDE, is not at all a surprise and one piece of the EVIDENCE for this is in fact the small amount of WHITE SMOKE that is emitted from the lower levels.
You take the firefighters quotes and try to equate it to HE at the lower levels, but clearly the towers DID NOT FAIL FROM THE BOTTOM UP, but from the TOP DOWN.
3 isn't a large number, but the EXPRESS ELEVATORS IN THE WTC were HUGE, designed to carry 50 people at a time or 10,000 lbs. So yes 3 Express elevators does represent a HUGE vertical shaft.
And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube.
Foxx, Why are you trying SO HARD to perpetuate a LIE?
You've been at it FOUR YEARS and this thread and your pathetic Web Site is ALL you have to show for it?
I guess it must REALLY burn your butt that old Jonesy from BYU baically regurgitates what is on a bunch of 9/11 conspiracy sites and then gets all the press.
Foxx, your a joke and when all is said and done you won't even rate a footnote in all this.
Talk about a HUGE waste of time and energy for no result.
The very definition of impotent.
Arthur
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
Excellent deduction, newton. That pretty much ends the fairy tale of the jet fuel path to the plaza level where fire-fighters said the majority of elevator doors were blown out.
This would include the doors of the freight elevators which ONLY ran from the subterranean levels to the ground floor plaza. These shafts did not extend above the lowest mechanical floor, therefore... absolute confirming proof that corroberates Rodriquez and the others' testimony that the explosion in subterranean levels originated below ground, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Amazing Sentient Jet-Fuel.
Even the Schneibster added to the evidence of this when he claimed (in the Amazing Thermobaric Bomb Theory)... that...
Excellent deduction, newton. That pretty much ends the fairy tale of the jet fuel path to the plaza level where fire-fighters said the majority of elevator doors were blown out.
This would include the doors of the freight elevators which ONLY ran from the subterranean levels to the ground floor plaza. These shafts did not extend above the lowest mechanical floor, therefore... absolute confirming proof that corroberates Rodriquez and the others' testimony that the explosion in subterranean levels originated below ground, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Amazing Sentient Jet-Fuel.
Even the Schneibster added to the evidence of this when he claimed (in the Amazing Thermobaric Bomb Theory)... that...
Originally posted by Schneibster
Thus, if you see things shattered by an explosion, it is most likely a high explosive; but if you see them thrown around by an explosion, it is most likely a fuel-air explosion.
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
8 tons steve1957
EIGHT TONS EACH ON EACH OF TEN TRIPS INSIDE steve1957 So Jones has it wrong!! At least according to Hoffman. Frankly of course I believe they are both out to lunch.
If it was done during that 36 hour time frame by 100 guys that means 444 pounds of explosives were loaded by each guy each hour throughout that time period. 111 pounds every 15 minutes by every guy. Marvin Bush does not look hefty enough to do this but then of course those 100 guys would need supervisors.
The dogs were removed only 5 days prior to the attacks. So much for loading explosives over weeks or months.
If the dogs were fakes then that simply begs the question ,"why remove them?" and also brings more people into a position from which they can know that there was something wrong.
The "power down" noted in this article only applies to one tower. What about the north tower?
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
8 tons steve1957
EIGHT TONS EACH ON EACH OF TEN TRIPS INSIDE steve1957 So Jones has it wrong!! At least according to Hoffman. Frankly of course I believe they are both out to lunch.
If it was done during that 36 hour time frame by 100 guys that means 444 pounds of explosives were loaded by each guy each hour throughout that time period. 111 pounds every 15 minutes by every guy. Marvin Bush does not look hefty enough to do this but then of course those 100 guys would need supervisors.
The dogs were removed only 5 days prior to the attacks. So much for loading explosives over weeks or months.
If the dogs were fakes then that simply begs the question ,"why remove them?" and also brings more people into a position from which they can know that there was something wrong.
The "power down" noted in this article only applies to one tower. What about the north tower?
It is not clear from the link if indeed it is Professor Jones who makes this claim or the author.
It is consistent with Van Romero's initial observation that explosives brought the towers down
"It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," Romero said.
Explosions don't pull steel in. Anyone can see for themselves as the perimeter columns on one floor are pulled and the collapse begins. On the link below, wait until the video is loaded then scroll to 30:00 exactly. Ignore the FEMA missile theory (Since there is a video taken IN the helicopter in question proving it was a NYC police helicopter and the passengers were just as surprised as everyone else at the collapse) and look at the left side of the split screen. You can see clear as day the perimeter columns being pulled in before ANYTHING is ejected out of the windows. In fact you can see the debris become progressively larger as the floors collapse one on top of the other as described in the pancake hypothesis. Also, if explosives cut the core columns and pulled the perimeter walls in you can predict the other perimeter columns above the explosion to pull in at the same time. This never happened.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
Video's trump pseudo forensic quackery any day.
I notice every time you post this link monkeys come out of the trees and hit you with poop. The video is powerful evidence of sagging trusses. They are left to flinging poop in the hopes we can't see through it. Monkeys will do that hou know.
Heh! I think you're right, look at them sworm.
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 3 2006, 11:04 PM)
QUOTE
By adoucette
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core?
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| By adoucette Now we KNOW the towers have a largely hollow core and we have the beginning of collapse up top, you know with maybe pieces FALLING down elevator shafts and such, but still you don't expect any SMOKE to be expelled via this core? |
The core was NOT largely hollow, and the smoke (white smoke again) ejected from the lower levels PRECEEDED the beginning of the collapse at the higher levels. FIRST ONE... THEN the OTHER. You need to go back to all the fireman quotes. You have the sequence reversed adou-baba.
reply by adoucette to reasonwhy
And 25% of the core is more than enough room to cause the expulsion of some smoke as upper floors collapse.
the upper floors had NOT begun to collapse until AFTER the smoke ejection from the base and many fireman quotes related to explosions & brisant flashes at the lower levels BEFORE the collapse began.
BEFORE, arthur... not AFTER.
QUOTE
by arthur
there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement.
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| by arthur there were still a number of large HOLLOW shafts that were CONTINUOUS all the way down to the basement. |
so you are saying 3 is a large number ?
by arthur
And a pressure pulse, like from say 1/4 of an acre of concrete falling, could EASILY cause white smoke from the DUST and small fires that had been burning in the lower levels to get expelled via the shafts out into the street, I mean considering that the fire doors and elevator doors had been blown off and the lobby glass was gone.
Still trying to sling the same old hash. Not only was the jet fuel supersonic, but now smoke does time travel and erupts BEFORE the collapse, because it knew beforehand the building was gonna collapse so it erupted from the lower levels to signal the building was going to start collapsing...pretty soon.
Well, can't waste any more time on this drivel tonight.
Someone let me know if we ever get an answer as to how Schneiby put that 4 second clip onto the Urology site, (or if he ever confesses that site to be a spook-front-operation).
Later
Semantics Foxx, looking at the floor plan, to me it was largely hollow, but to be precise we QUANTIFIED it at 25%.
Do you dispute the 25% estimate?
NO ONE KNOWS EXACTLY what was happening inside the building, but NIST states it pretty well when they describe the pre-collapse situation. The towers were being overwhelmed. The key structures were beginning to fail, the fact that some things probably gave way inside prior to the final failure which was visible OUTSIDE, is not at all a surprise and one piece of the EVIDENCE for this is in fact the small amount of WHITE SMOKE that is emitted from the lower levels.
You take the firefighters quotes and try to equate it to HE at the lower levels, but clearly the towers DID NOT FAIL FROM THE BOTTOM UP, but from the TOP DOWN.
3 isn't a large number, but the EXPRESS ELEVATORS IN THE WTC were HUGE, designed to carry 50 people at a time or 10,000 lbs. So yes 3 Express elevators does represent a HUGE vertical shaft.
And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube.
Foxx, Why are you trying SO HARD to perpetuate a LIE?
You've been at it FOUR YEARS and this thread and your pathetic Web Site is ALL you have to show for it?
I guess it must REALLY burn your butt that old Jonesy from BYU baically regurgitates what is on a bunch of 9/11 conspiracy sites and then gets all the press.
Foxx, your a joke and when all is said and done you won't even rate a footnote in all this.
Talk about a HUGE waste of time and energy for no result.
The very definition of impotent.
Arthur
I disagree, Mr Adoucette. I think Mr Foxx1957 and his slimy groupwankers will forever be remembered in a footnote to my ongoing Physorgforum Chronicles; as the most pathetic and devious group waste of bandwidth ever, by a country mile! That MMC might even rate a mention; but I think he and galdur deserve a footnote of their own, probably. As prime examples of juvenile delinquents who have yet to grow out of their stupidity. Don't you agree?
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 4 2006, 01:07 AM)
This is all the explosives Jones thinks were necessary:
"Those towers were felled by pre-positioned U.S. military-grade explosives, that would have taken just ten men ten trips to put in place, for a controlled demolition, in the week-end prior to 9/11, when the buildings were evacuated for dozens of hours, and the power shut down to the buildings, giving the agents plenty of time to position their explosives where they would do the job, without detection by security cameras. FEMA, the national police contingent, just happened to be in NYC by the hundreds, in preparation for a "drill" scheduled for Sept. 12."
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/EmailNews3Feb2006_2.html
A professional CD company takes weeks to set all the explosives in much smaller buildings. They also often weaken the strongest columns before the 'shoot'.
However, if Jones wants to stick by this then how can he and Hoffamn ever get along. Hoffman calculates and 'energy deficit' that would need to be satisfied (according to Hoffman) in order to produce the results seen on 9/11 at the tower collapses. The equivalent explosive quantity required to supply that 'deficit' amounts to hundreds of tons of C4 or RDX. (about 800 tons of C4) Now 10 guys , ten trips each and 800 tons would mean that each guy carried 8 tons each trip.
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
"Those towers were felled by pre-positioned U.S. military-grade explosives, that would have taken just ten men ten trips to put in place, for a controlled demolition, in the week-end prior to 9/11, when the buildings were evacuated for dozens of hours, and the power shut down to the buildings, giving the agents plenty of time to position their explosives where they would do the job, without detection by security cameras. FEMA, the national police contingent, just happened to be in NYC by the hundreds, in preparation for a "drill" scheduled for Sept. 12."
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/EmailNews3Feb2006_2.html
A professional CD company takes weeks to set all the explosives in much smaller buildings. They also often weaken the strongest columns before the 'shoot'.
However, if Jones wants to stick by this then how can he and Hoffamn ever get along. Hoffman calculates and 'energy deficit' that would need to be satisfied (according to Hoffman) in order to produce the results seen on 9/11 at the tower collapses. The equivalent explosive quantity required to supply that 'deficit' amounts to hundreds of tons of C4 or RDX. (about 800 tons of C4) Now 10 guys , ten trips each and 800 tons would mean that each guy carried 8 tons each trip.
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 4 2006, 01:48 AM)
Newton,
All your posts are ignored.
For obvious reasons.
Like not bothering to read the intervening posts.
Which is why you obviously missed the part where the Bankers Trust building got moved 350 feet closer to the WTC 2 tower?
And the part where that 100 ton piece of WTC perimeter columns went on a diet and shed over 70 tons?
Guess so.
Arthur
my posts are ignored?
that's funny, because i noticed you've started admitting that the mechanical floors would break up the 'continuous elevator shafts', and that really there are only three continuous elevator shafts.
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
anyway, the weight is irrelevent in my argument, and you know it, ob-fu-schk8r.
the argument is about the lack of deformity in the perimeter columns that are lying around everywhere, and the new make it up as you go along mechanism for tossing that 'tree' that far from the towers.
All your posts are ignored.
For obvious reasons.
Like not bothering to read the intervening posts.
Which is why you obviously missed the part where the Bankers Trust building got moved 350 feet closer to the WTC 2 tower?
And the part where that 100 ton piece of WTC perimeter columns went on a diet and shed over 70 tons?
Guess so.
Arthur
my posts are ignored?
that's funny, because i noticed you've started admitting that the mechanical floors would break up the 'continuous elevator shafts', and that really there are only three continuous elevator shafts.
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
anyway, the weight is irrelevent in my argument, and you know it, ob-fu-schk8r.
the argument is about the lack of deformity in the perimeter columns that are lying around everywhere, and the new make it up as you go along mechanism for tossing that 'tree' that far from the towers.
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 4 2006, 04:32 AM)
I disagree, Mr Adoucette. I think Mr Foxx1957 and his slimy groupwankers will forever be remembered in a footnote to my ongoing Physorgforum Chronicles; as the most pathetic and devious group waste of bandwidth ever, by a country mile! That MMC might even rate a mention; but I think he and galdur deserve a footnote of their own, probably. As prime examples of juvenile delinquents who have yet to grow out of their stupidity. Don't you agree?
I've noticed they've been here since sept (The CTers) and they haven't been able to convert one physorg member. Not one. Heh!
They just loaded up the clown car from these sites and spilled out here...
http://control-alt-delete.ca/v-web/bulleti...php?t=4760x%25x
http://www.gnn.tv/threads/11166/How_to_Ove..._the_Government
http://cortez.gnn.tv/blogs/9731/NIST_shill...m_physics_board
http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=146052
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...showtopic=75524
http://www.libertyforum.org/postlist.php?C...Board=consp_911
I've noticed they've been here since sept (The CTers) and they haven't been able to convert one physorg member. Not one. Heh!
They just loaded up the clown car from these sites and spilled out here...
http://control-alt-delete.ca/v-web/bulleti...php?t=4760x%25x
http://www.gnn.tv/threads/11166/How_to_Ove..._the_Government
http://cortez.gnn.tv/blogs/9731/NIST_shill...m_physics_board
http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=146052
http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...showtopic=75524
http://www.libertyforum.org/postlist.php?C...Board=consp_911
QUOTE
yesitdid
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 4 2006, 12:32 AM)
I disagree, Mr Adoucette. I think Mr Foxx1957 and his slimy groupwankers will forever be remembered in a footnote to my ongoing Physorgforum Chronicles; as the most pathetic and devious group waste of bandwidth ever, by a country mile! That MMC might even rate a mention; but I think he and galdur deserve a footnote of their own, probably. As prime examples of juvenile delinquents who have yet to grow out of their stupidity. Don't you agree?
Add newton to that group of juveniles and I'm in total agreement.
Arthur
Add newton to that group of juveniles and I'm in total agreement.
Arthur
QUOTE (newton+)
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
Gordon:
Did you get the email address of the mech engineer that I sent you? He is willing to look over your research, and possibly help you, also.
Did you get the email address of the mech engineer that I sent you? He is willing to look over your research, and possibly help you, also.
QUOTE
Originally posted by newton - Posted: Feb 4 2006, 06:24 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=61090
my posts are ignored?
that's funny, because i noticed you've started admitting that the mechanical floors would break up the 'continuous elevator shafts', and that really there are only three continuous elevator shafts.
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=61090
my posts are ignored?
that's funny, because i noticed you've started admitting that the mechanical floors would break up the 'continuous elevator shafts', and that really there are only three continuous elevator shafts.
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
Excellent deduction, newton. That pretty much ends the fairy tale of the jet fuel path to the plaza level where fire-fighters said the majority of elevator doors were blown out.
This would include the doors of the freight elevators which ONLY ran from the subterranean levels to the ground floor plaza. These shafts did not extend above the lowest mechanical floor, therefore... absolute confirming proof that corroberates Rodriquez and the others' testimony that the explosion in subterranean levels originated below ground, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Amazing Sentient Jet-Fuel.
Even the Schneibster added to the evidence of this when he claimed (in the Amazing Thermobaric Bomb Theory)... that...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by newton - Posted: Feb 4 2006, 06:24 AM http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=61090 my posts are ignored? that's funny, because i noticed you've started admitting that the mechanical floors would break up the 'continuous elevator shafts', and that really there are only three continuous elevator shafts. so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below. this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below. |
Excellent deduction, newton. That pretty much ends the fairy tale of the jet fuel path to the plaza level where fire-fighters said the majority of elevator doors were blown out.
This would include the doors of the freight elevators which ONLY ran from the subterranean levels to the ground floor plaza. These shafts did not extend above the lowest mechanical floor, therefore... absolute confirming proof that corroberates Rodriquez and the others' testimony that the explosion in subterranean levels originated below ground, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Amazing Sentient Jet-Fuel.
Even the Schneibster added to the evidence of this when he claimed (in the Amazing Thermobaric Bomb Theory)... that...
Originally posted by Schneibster
Thus, if you see things shattered by an explosion, it is most likely a high explosive; but if you see them thrown around by an explosion, it is most likely a fuel-air explosion.
.
The plaza lobby windows (3" thick) were 'shattered'. The concrete basement car-park walls were 'shattered' and turned to rubble, a fire-proof door was blown off its hinges and was crumpled like a piece of tin-foil, and a subterranean machine shop was turned to rubble.
All MORE evidence (according to Schneibys statement) that the underground explosion was "most likely a high explosive".
More nonsense from Home Office. Another 'proclamation' that the core was a 'hollow shaft'. Nothing is proved by the above statement (which he provides no references to) other than some banks of elevators were housed in common shaftways.
Here's a look at the NIST schematic diagram for elevators...
and another color-coded; (for less intelligent types from Home Office...)
The Mechanical floors (upon which the hoist equipment was housed for lower elevator zones) interrupted the shaftways. The majority of shafts DID NOT extend continuously from the plaza level to the roof. As can be seen ONLY the Express Elevators were in continuous shafts (and even those express elevators to the 44th & 78th floor sky-lobbies did not extend continuously to the top of the building. All the local elevator shafts terminated at the mechanical floors above that zone, and were further separated from lower shafts by the sky-lobbies.
The above diagram is direct evidence from NIST that the majority of the elevator shafts were NOT continuous, yet you keep wanting to state that they were. Quit lying.
There may have been no 'walls' between the shaftways for the local zone elevators whereby the survivor {noted above}, was able to get from one elevator to the top of another in THAT bank of elevators, but these were NOT connected in ANY way to the express elevator shafts.
The FACT that doors were blown off freight elevator shafts (that ONLY extended from the subterranean levels to the plaza level) is confirming proof that the explosion in the basement ORIGINATED from the basement just as Rodriquez and others reported as having come from BELOW them.
And remember, folks that both Rodriquez & Pecararo were present during the '93 bombing, so they both had PRIOR experience to what a bomb in the basement sounds and feels like. Who is More Likely to know what they are talking about in this regard... Rodriguez 'et al' --- OR the ob-fu-sk8ting shills who call these people 'liars'?...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...635&#entry44998
The plaza lobby windows (3" thick) were 'shattered'. The concrete basement car-park walls were 'shattered' and turned to rubble, a fire-proof door was blown off its hinges and was crumpled like a piece of tin-foil, and a subterranean machine shop was turned to rubble.
All MORE evidence (according to Schneibys statement) that the underground explosion was "most likely a high explosive".
QUOTE
by adoucette Posted: Feb 4 2006, 08:09 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=61105
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=61105
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
More nonsense from Home Office. Another 'proclamation' that the core was a 'hollow shaft'. Nothing is proved by the above statement (which he provides no references to) other than some banks of elevators were housed in common shaftways.
Here's a look at the NIST schematic diagram for elevators...
and another color-coded; (for less intelligent types from Home Office...)
The Mechanical floors (upon which the hoist equipment was housed for lower elevator zones) interrupted the shaftways. The majority of shafts DID NOT extend continuously from the plaza level to the roof. As can be seen ONLY the Express Elevators were in continuous shafts (and even those express elevators to the 44th & 78th floor sky-lobbies did not extend continuously to the top of the building. All the local elevator shafts terminated at the mechanical floors above that zone, and were further separated from lower shafts by the sky-lobbies.
The above diagram is direct evidence from NIST that the majority of the elevator shafts were NOT continuous, yet you keep wanting to state that they were. Quit lying.
There may have been no 'walls' between the shaftways for the local zone elevators whereby the survivor {noted above}, was able to get from one elevator to the top of another in THAT bank of elevators, but these were NOT connected in ANY way to the express elevator shafts.
The FACT that doors were blown off freight elevator shafts (that ONLY extended from the subterranean levels to the plaza level) is confirming proof that the explosion in the basement ORIGINATED from the basement just as Rodriquez and others reported as having come from BELOW them.
And remember, folks that both Rodriquez & Pecararo were present during the '93 bombing, so they both had PRIOR experience to what a bomb in the basement sounds and feels like. Who is More Likely to know what they are talking about in this regard... Rodriguez 'et al' --- OR the ob-fu-sk8ting shills who call these people 'liars'?...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...635&#entry44998
Foxx has apparently rendered the question redundant but -
The Legend has it -
"And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube."
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
The Legend has it -
"And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube."
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
QUOTE (brian+Feb 4 2006, 11:33 AM)
Foxx has apparently rendered the question redundant but -
The Legend has it -
"And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube."
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
No, we are talking about two different events.
In the FIRST event we are dealing with an aircraft impact, fuel atomization and Fuel/Air mixing burning in the shaft.
In the Second event we are dealing with the Tube analogy as burning material FALLS down the shafts and later falling material creates air movement out of the the shafts.
Of course this is just speculation on my part, but the point is its fairly reasonable and doesn't require explosives in the basement.
Since you have NO EVIDENCE of explosives in the basement, your conclusion that the smoke is evidence of same is pretty lame.
Arthur
The Legend has it -
"And no Foxx, the air in a shaft doesn't have to travel the length of the shaft to expell air out the other end, it works BY PRESSURE. Try it with a LONG tube or hose. Blow a puff of air in one end and VOILA a puff of air comes out the other end, and guess what, it doesn't require the time for the puff of air to actually travel the length of the tube."
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
No, we are talking about two different events.
In the FIRST event we are dealing with an aircraft impact, fuel atomization and Fuel/Air mixing burning in the shaft.
In the Second event we are dealing with the Tube analogy as burning material FALLS down the shafts and later falling material creates air movement out of the the shafts.
Of course this is just speculation on my part, but the point is its fairly reasonable and doesn't require explosives in the basement.
Since you have NO EVIDENCE of explosives in the basement, your conclusion that the smoke is evidence of same is pretty lame.
Arthur
QUOTE (steve1957+Feb 4 2006, 07:24 AM)
QUOTE
yesitdid
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
8 tons steve1957
EIGHT TONS EACH ON EACH OF TEN TRIPS INSIDE steve1957 So Jones has it wrong!! At least according to Hoffman. Frankly of course I believe they are both out to lunch.
If it was done during that 36 hour time frame by 100 guys that means 444 pounds of explosives were loaded by each guy each hour throughout that time period. 111 pounds every 15 minutes by every guy. Marvin Bush does not look hefty enough to do this but then of course those 100 guys would need supervisors.
The dogs were removed only 5 days prior to the attacks. So much for loading explosives over weeks or months.
If the dogs were fakes then that simply begs the question ,"why remove them?" and also brings more people into a position from which they can know that there was something wrong.
The "power down" noted in this article only applies to one tower. What about the north tower?
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 4 2006, 05:51 PM)
QUOTE (steve1957+Feb 4 2006, 07:24 AM)
QUOTE
yesitdid
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
I think guys big enough to do this would have been noticed
Marvin P. Bush
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats.
But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower.
This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."
8 tons steve1957
EIGHT TONS EACH ON EACH OF TEN TRIPS INSIDE steve1957 So Jones has it wrong!! At least according to Hoffman. Frankly of course I believe they are both out to lunch.
If it was done during that 36 hour time frame by 100 guys that means 444 pounds of explosives were loaded by each guy each hour throughout that time period. 111 pounds every 15 minutes by every guy. Marvin Bush does not look hefty enough to do this but then of course those 100 guys would need supervisors.
The dogs were removed only 5 days prior to the attacks. So much for loading explosives over weeks or months.
If the dogs were fakes then that simply begs the question ,"why remove them?" and also brings more people into a position from which they can know that there was something wrong.
The "power down" noted in this article only applies to one tower. What about the north tower?
It is not clear from the link if indeed it is Professor Jones who makes this claim or the author.
It is consistent with Van Romero's initial observation that explosives brought the towers down
"It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," Romero said.
Keep posting those NIST diagrams of the elevator banks, it just shows how STUPID you are.
NIST used them as LOGICAL representations of the elevator banks,
They DO SHOW on the OVERHEAD view of the floor layouts the elevators at a few floors but you have to do some research to find out the Elevator Scheme.
As to basement service, the parking garage was in the basement so its reasonable to assume that a number of the elevators ran down to these levels without requiring people to switch at the lobby level. Unfortunately basement elevators are not marked on my diagram (but I'm sure I'll eventually find this info as well).
As to the continuity.
Yes the mechanical floors provided SOME separation, BUT the EXPRESS elevators to each Zone OVERLAPPED with the elevators serving that Zone. Thus they RAN THROUGH the mechanical floors.
There were also 3 large express interzone elevators, running from the lower skylobby to the upper skylobby, so all of these passed through the mechanical floors.
In total there were at least 101 elevators in each WTC tower, while your "diagram" shows just 15 shafts (and doesn't even show the interzone elevators).
This is what the elevators REALLY were layed out as:
There were EIGHT 10,000 lb (50 passenger) EXPRESS elevators (Elev #s 12-15 & 20-23) that ran from the lobby (or lower) up to the skylobby on the 78th floor and there they had ADJACENT shafts to the TWENTY FOUR 8,500 lb (30 passenger) elevators that serviced the upper zone.
6 Elevs #s 75-80 serviced 78 & flr 80-86
6 Elevs #s 81-86 serviced 78 & flr 87-93
6 Elevs #s 87-92 serviced 78 & flr 94-99
6 Elevs #s 93-98 serviced 78 & flr 100-107
In addition there were THREE 10,000b lb (50 passenger) INTERZONE elevators (Elevs # 16, 18 and 19) that ran between the skylobby on the 44th floor to the skylobby on the 78th floor.
Adjacent to these 3 are the EIGHT 10,000 lb Zone 2 elevators (Elev #s 1-4 & 8-11)that run from the lobby (or lower) to the skylobby on the 44th floor.
Then there are the 2 Express elevators (labeled OBS 1 and OBS 2) and one 1 freight elevator that ran the length of the towers. All three of these are the huge 50 passenger jobbies.
So WHAT shafts ran from the lobby (or lower) up to the fire floors?
Besides the 2 shafts that we know ran in one continuous shaft from the top to the lobby and the 1 that ran to the top from the basement.
We have 12 shafts running from the fire floors to the skylobby on the 78th floor where they meet with 8 shafts that run to at least the lobby and 3 shafts that go to the 44th floor skylobby
At the 44th skylobby they meet up with an additional 8 shafts that run to the lobby or lower.
So at NO TIME are there less than 3 continuous shafts and 11 overlapping shafts that run from the fire floors to the lobby or lower, and most of these are the HUGE 50 passenger shafts.
Arthur
NIST used them as LOGICAL representations of the elevator banks,
They DO SHOW on the OVERHEAD view of the floor layouts the elevators at a few floors but you have to do some research to find out the Elevator Scheme.
As to basement service, the parking garage was in the basement so its reasonable to assume that a number of the elevators ran down to these levels without requiring people to switch at the lobby level. Unfortunately basement elevators are not marked on my diagram (but I'm sure I'll eventually find this info as well).
As to the continuity.
Yes the mechanical floors provided SOME separation, BUT the EXPRESS elevators to each Zone OVERLAPPED with the elevators serving that Zone. Thus they RAN THROUGH the mechanical floors.
There were also 3 large express interzone elevators, running from the lower skylobby to the upper skylobby, so all of these passed through the mechanical floors.
In total there were at least 101 elevators in each WTC tower, while your "diagram" shows just 15 shafts (and doesn't even show the interzone elevators).
This is what the elevators REALLY were layed out as:
There were EIGHT 10,000 lb (50 passenger) EXPRESS elevators (Elev #s 12-15 & 20-23) that ran from the lobby (or lower) up to the skylobby on the 78th floor and there they had ADJACENT shafts to the TWENTY FOUR 8,500 lb (30 passenger) elevators that serviced the upper zone.
6 Elevs #s 75-80 serviced 78 & flr 80-86
6 Elevs #s 81-86 serviced 78 & flr 87-93
6 Elevs #s 87-92 serviced 78 & flr 94-99
6 Elevs #s 93-98 serviced 78 & flr 100-107
In addition there were THREE 10,000b lb (50 passenger) INTERZONE elevators (Elevs # 16, 18 and 19) that ran between the skylobby on the 44th floor to the skylobby on the 78th floor.
Adjacent to these 3 are the EIGHT 10,000 lb Zone 2 elevators (Elev #s 1-4 & 8-11)that run from the lobby (or lower) to the skylobby on the 44th floor.
Then there are the 2 Express elevators (labeled OBS 1 and OBS 2) and one 1 freight elevator that ran the length of the towers. All three of these are the huge 50 passenger jobbies.
So WHAT shafts ran from the lobby (or lower) up to the fire floors?
Besides the 2 shafts that we know ran in one continuous shaft from the top to the lobby and the 1 that ran to the top from the basement.
We have 12 shafts running from the fire floors to the skylobby on the 78th floor where they meet with 8 shafts that run to at least the lobby and 3 shafts that go to the 44th floor skylobby
At the 44th skylobby they meet up with an additional 8 shafts that run to the lobby or lower.
So at NO TIME are there less than 3 continuous shafts and 11 overlapping shafts that run from the fire floors to the lobby or lower, and most of these are the HUGE 50 passenger shafts.
Arthur
I CAN SAY THE WINGTV ARTICLE IS bs BECAUSE I WAS THERE.
HAVE A NICE DAY
SENTINEL
HAVE A NICE DAY
SENTINEL
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 4 2006, 08:09 AM)
QUOTE (newton+)
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
you're strangley talking about breaks between adjacent shafts, when i am clearly talking about breaks between floors.
strangley your comprehension is sometimes excellent, and sometimes non-existent, or perhaps it is some kind of willful ignorance defense mechanism that protects you from seeing the ugly truth of 911.
Reply by Arthurian Legends...
Reply by Arthurian Legends...
No, we are talking about two different events.
Soooo.... are we to assume that you still adhere to the Amazing Super-Sonic Jet-Fuel theory then ???
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
you're strangley talking about breaks between adjacent shafts, when i am clearly talking about breaks between floors.
strangley your comprehension is sometimes excellent, and sometimes non-existent, or perhaps it is some kind of willful ignorance defense mechanism that protects you from seeing the ugly truth of 911.
yesitdid,
The article about Marvin P. Bush may not show EXACTLY HOW THEY DID IT, all it shows it the STRANGE COINCIDENCE that little bush's brother was in charge of the security, and that THERE WERE VERY STRANGE THINGS HAPPENING, just prior to 9/11.
WE ALREADY KNOW EXPLOSIVES WERE USED IN ALL 3 TOWERS, there's no debate about that whatsoever, the only issue is how and when, and I don't claim to know exactly when or by who, or how many people it took or what types of explosives were used.
But OBVIOUSLY EXPLOSIVES WERE BROUGHT INTO THE BUILDINGS, and seeings how little bush's brother was in charge of security then that should turn a few light bulbs on in some peoples minds, of course you first need a mind in order to have a light bulb turn on.
The article about Marvin P. Bush may not show EXACTLY HOW THEY DID IT, all it shows it the STRANGE COINCIDENCE that little bush's brother was in charge of the security, and that THERE WERE VERY STRANGE THINGS HAPPENING, just prior to 9/11.
WE ALREADY KNOW EXPLOSIVES WERE USED IN ALL 3 TOWERS, there's no debate about that whatsoever, the only issue is how and when, and I don't claim to know exactly when or by who, or how many people it took or what types of explosives were used.
But OBVIOUSLY EXPLOSIVES WERE BROUGHT INTO THE BUILDINGS, and seeings how little bush's brother was in charge of security then that should turn a few light bulbs on in some peoples minds, of course you first need a mind in order to have a light bulb turn on.
Some of the Schneibs identities...
Common Sense joined 25 Dec 2005
Most active in - Physics General
360 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
******And******
Commen sense joined 25 Dec 2005
Most active in - Physics General
17 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
He got caught by forgetting to keep the identities separate, got barred for a time and changed names to variations of 'Sensable'
SensAble joined 17 Jan 2006
Most active in - Physics General
155 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
****And**********
SensIble joined 28 Jan 2006
Most active in - Physics General
1 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
As 'Sensable' & 'Sensible' he made the same mistake again here...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=58946
Posted: Jan 28 2006, 12:36 AM
Sensible quote: "Imagine that.. Heh!"
---------------- Immediately followed by
Sensable - http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=58949
Posted: Jan 28 2006, 12:41 AM
Sensable quote :
It's not like we don't already know you guys are morons, you don't have to drive the point home with every post. Heh!
*********************
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
Common Sense joined 25 Dec 2005
Most active in - Physics General
360 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
******And******
Commen sense joined 25 Dec 2005
Most active in - Physics General
17 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
He got caught by forgetting to keep the identities separate, got barred for a time and changed names to variations of 'Sensable'
SensAble joined 17 Jan 2006
Most active in - Physics General
155 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
****And**********
SensIble joined 28 Jan 2006
Most active in - Physics General
1 posts in this forum
( 100% of this member's active posts )
As 'Sensable' & 'Sensible' he made the same mistake again here...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=58946
Posted: Jan 28 2006, 12:36 AM
Sensible quote: "Imagine that.. Heh!"
---------------- Immediately followed by
Sensable - http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=58949
Posted: Jan 28 2006, 12:41 AM
Sensable quote :
It's not like we don't already know you guys are morons, you don't have to drive the point home with every post. Heh!
*********************
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
QUOTE
Originally posted by brian
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded?
Reply by Arthurian Legends...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by brian The question - would the air coming out the end of the tube be of the same mixture blown in the other end? IE is the supersonic jet fuel theory now abandonded? |
Reply by Arthurian Legends...
No, we are talking about two different events.
Soooo.... are we to assume that you still adhere to the Amazing Super-Sonic Jet-Fuel theory then ???
QUOTE
Originally posted by Schneibster
He {Rodriguez}CONCLUDES from the fact that he heard and felt the shock AFTER the explosion that the explosion preceded the impact; however, this CONCLUSION is incorrect. In fact, the shock of impact took over a second to make it from the impact site on the upper floors through the material of the building to the basement; the fuel explosion, however, made it in less than a second. Thus, the fuel explosion shockwave arrived and blew the doors off the elevator shaft before the impact shockwave did.
He {Rodriguez}CONCLUDES from the fact that he heard and felt the shock AFTER the explosion that the explosion preceded the impact; however, this CONCLUSION is incorrect. In fact, the shock of impact took over a second to make it from the impact site on the upper floors through the material of the building to the basement; the fuel explosion, however, made it in less than a second. Thus, the fuel explosion shockwave arrived and blew the doors off the elevator shaft before the impact shockwave did.
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 4 2006, 01:58 AM)
QUOTE (galdur+Feb 3 2006, 11:51 PM)
FOXX is the greatest.
The greatest WHAT? The greatest 'jobbie'! Right on, galdur! You called it!
WOW, now that you mention it galdur, that FOXX1957 sure DOES look like a great 'double jobbie' after the last few posts!Your greatest hero is the greatest 'double jobbie' ever slipped on. Whew! And you sure slipped on him there, galdur!
Foxx is diligent, factual, educational and
her/his patience with the intellectually challenged
shills here is very commendable. I love Foxx.
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
Foxx,
This looks related to the Guest_Sentinel post of a few days ago. The poster identified himself as Paul Isaac, Jr. who I believe is a fire officer with FDNY. If I have this right, Paul was indicating that this Wing-TV article:
www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
is factually incorrect. (A link to this article was given in a lengthy post many moons ago.) In particular, the article quotes Paul as saying “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”. The Loose Change 2nd edition shows the video of the exchange between Paul and the WING-TV crew at the 2005 911 memorial service. After seeing that, I cannot believe that Paul said anything like the above quote, at least not to Victor Thorn and gang.
Anyway, that is how I decipher this somewhat cryptic post. If sentinel comes back, he/she can indicate whether this is correct or not.
Lon
The greatest WHAT? The greatest 'jobbie'! Right on, galdur! You called it!
WOW, now that you mention it galdur, that FOXX1957 sure DOES look like a great 'double jobbie' after the last few posts!Your greatest hero is the greatest 'double jobbie' ever slipped on. Whew! And you sure slipped on him there, galdur!
Foxx is diligent, factual, educational and
her/his patience with the intellectually challenged
shills here is very commendable. I love Foxx.
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 4 2006, 08:35 PM)
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
Foxx,
This looks related to the Guest_Sentinel post of a few days ago. The poster identified himself as Paul Isaac, Jr. who I believe is a fire officer with FDNY. If I have this right, Paul was indicating that this Wing-TV article:
www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
is factually incorrect. (A link to this article was given in a lengthy post many moons ago.) In particular, the article quotes Paul as saying “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”. The Loose Change 2nd edition shows the video of the exchange between Paul and the WING-TV crew at the 2005 911 memorial service. After seeing that, I cannot believe that Paul said anything like the above quote, at least not to Victor Thorn and gang.
Anyway, that is how I decipher this somewhat cryptic post. If sentinel comes back, he/she can indicate whether this is correct or not.
Lon
QUOTE (newton+Feb 4 2006, 03:15 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 4 2006, 08:09 AM)
QUOTE (newton+)
so, you also inadvertently admit that all the elevator doors in the lobby shouldn't have been blown out by fireballs, because they had no pathway for transmission through air, except from down below.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
you're strangley talking about breaks between adjacent shafts, when i am clearly talking about breaks between floors.
strangley your comprehension is sometimes excellent, and sometimes non-existent, or perhaps it is some kind of willful ignorance defense mechanism that protects you from seeing the ugly truth of 911.
Newton,
Do you not realize that the 8 EXPRESS Elevators went from the LOBBY UP TO THE 78th floor and the local zone elevators (24 of them for zone 3), 12 of them went from the 78th floor through the fire zone.
Thus for these elevators the mechanical floor is IRRELEVANT. The Express elevators and the Zone 3 elevators all service the COMMON 78th floor.
Additionally, we have learned from the rescue that the express elevator shafts ran at least 2 floors above the 78th floor, so we know that for at least 3 floors the express elevator shafts were on the same floors as the Zone 3 elevators.
Arthur
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
Foxx,
This looks related to the Guest_Sentinel post of a few days ago. The poster identified himself as Paul Isaac, Jr. who I believe is a fire officer with FDNY. If I have this right, Paul was indicating that this Wing-TV article:
www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
is factually incorrect. (A link to this article was given in a lengthy post many moons ago.) In particular, the article quotes Paul as saying “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”. The Loose Change 2nd edition shows the video of the exchange between Paul and the WING-TV crew at the 2005 911 memorial service. After seeing that, I cannot believe that Paul said anything like the above quote, at least not to Victor Thorn and gang.
Anyway, that is how I decipher this somewhat cryptic post. If sentinel comes back, he/she can indicate whether this is correct or not.
Lon
Thanks Lon.
I see that 'Guest-Sentinel' claimed he was Paul Isaac Jr. Maybe it was?
Since that post was made, I see that someone has signed up a membership as 'Sentinel'. Just another one of those 'coincidences' ... maybe.
I'd have to see more of 'Sentinels' posts to determine whether we are just dealing with another psychotic incarnation of the Schneib... or perhaps a 'real' Paul Isaac Jr. As 'Sentinel' has taken the time to sign up, I expect we will see more of his posts.
Interesting... either way, (from my point of view).
Personally, I don't follow diligently the 'CT' sites (although I have run across many in my searches). I try to stick to 'official sources' for references, (to avoid easy 'attack the messenger' replies, which are meant really to just ignore the real issues and to muddy the waters)... not to mention that I believe some of these CT sites are deliberate disinformation by gov't agents and it's sometimes very difficult to discern the real who's-who. I always try to verify information from various sources.
Galdur... authority, drug loonies, spooks, CIA and Schneibster lawsuits do not 'rattle my cage' nor phase me one little bit.
On the other hand, your bold profession of 'love' has caused me to start bolting my doors. You are not one of those cyber-stalkers, are you?
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
Oldest trick in the book. set up an e-mail address... if someone responds and asks, "is that YOU?", of course the reply is always..."Yes, it's ME"
Idiot
On the other hand, if you have an official NYFD website and it lists his e-mail address as the same, I may be more swayed to email him and ask numerous questions... the first being, "Did YOU post on a forum at Psyorg?" Matter of fact, I am searching to see if the REAL Paul Isaac can be reached for comment and/or confirmation on that question.
Soooo.... are we to assume that you still adhere to the Amazing Super-Sonic Jet-Fuel theory then ???
If by this you mean do I believe that forces involved in the collision of a high speed fuel laden jet with WTC 1 was sufficient to breach several of the elevator shafts and cause high speed dispersal and atomization of kerosene, with significant quantities being forced into said shafts and then be ignited, thus generating a supersonic shock wave within the shafts that blew doors off all the way to the basement and burnt people standing near elevator doors from the near the collison floor, the upper skylobby, the main Concourse and all the way to the basement as well as damaging the basement machine shop and blowing out the lobby windows?
If that's what you mean then the answer is YES.
Arthur
Arthur, I know this is hard to accept, but Santa Clause is dead and the things you believed in are not true.
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email.
this corroberates rodriguez' story of explosions from below.
No newton, the shafts would not have had continuous interior walls between them.
This was PROVED by the description of the rescue of some people trapped in one elevator as they climbed up through the roof hatch of the damaged elevator and ACROSS to another elevator's roof. They COULDN'T have done that had there been a WALL between the elevator shafts.
Arthur
you're strangley talking about breaks between adjacent shafts, when i am clearly talking about breaks between floors.
strangley your comprehension is sometimes excellent, and sometimes non-existent, or perhaps it is some kind of willful ignorance defense mechanism that protects you from seeing the ugly truth of 911.
Newton,
Do you not realize that the 8 EXPRESS Elevators went from the LOBBY UP TO THE 78th floor and the local zone elevators (24 of them for zone 3), 12 of them went from the 78th floor through the fire zone.
Thus for these elevators the mechanical floor is IRRELEVANT. The Express elevators and the Zone 3 elevators all service the COMMON 78th floor.
Additionally, we have learned from the rescue that the express elevator shafts ran at least 2 floors above the 78th floor, so we know that for at least 3 floors the express elevator shafts were on the same floors as the Zone 3 elevators.
Arthur
QUOTE (Lon Waters+Feb 4 2006, 11:34 PM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 4 2006, 08:35 PM)
Once again forgetting to keep his identities separate.
Now I see we have a new 'Sen' signed up ---'SEN' tinel'.
Hard to say yet whether this is just another incarnation from the mind of the Schneiby?
'Sentinel'... what is this Wing TV reference you keep trying to dispel ? Did Rove have anything to do with it? Are they a CT site soliciting donations which makes you sick? Do they smell? Are they trying to hide the REAL Conspiracy? Are you related to 'CHUCKLES'? How's the lawsuit coming?
Please give us the link to the article you keep babbling about.. and... Puhlease don't tell us it is coming from the Urology site.
Foxx,
This looks related to the Guest_Sentinel post of a few days ago. The poster identified himself as Paul Isaac, Jr. who I believe is a fire officer with FDNY. If I have this right, Paul was indicating that this Wing-TV article:
www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
is factually incorrect. (A link to this article was given in a lengthy post many moons ago.) In particular, the article quotes Paul as saying “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”. The Loose Change 2nd edition shows the video of the exchange between Paul and the WING-TV crew at the 2005 911 memorial service. After seeing that, I cannot believe that Paul said anything like the above quote, at least not to Victor Thorn and gang.
Anyway, that is how I decipher this somewhat cryptic post. If sentinel comes back, he/she can indicate whether this is correct or not.
Lon
Thanks Lon.
I see that 'Guest-Sentinel' claimed he was Paul Isaac Jr. Maybe it was?
Since that post was made, I see that someone has signed up a membership as 'Sentinel'. Just another one of those 'coincidences' ... maybe.
I'd have to see more of 'Sentinels' posts to determine whether we are just dealing with another psychotic incarnation of the Schneib... or perhaps a 'real' Paul Isaac Jr. As 'Sentinel' has taken the time to sign up, I expect we will see more of his posts.
Interesting... either way, (from my point of view).
Personally, I don't follow diligently the 'CT' sites (although I have run across many in my searches). I try to stick to 'official sources' for references, (to avoid easy 'attack the messenger' replies, which are meant really to just ignore the real issues and to muddy the waters)... not to mention that I believe some of these CT sites are deliberate disinformation by gov't agents and it's sometimes very difficult to discern the real who's-who. I always try to verify information from various sources.
Galdur... authority, drug loonies, spooks, CIA and Schneibster lawsuits do not 'rattle my cage' nor phase me one little bit.
On the other hand, your bold profession of 'love' has caused me to start bolting my doors. You are not one of those cyber-stalkers, are you?
QUOTE
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM)
QUOTE
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
Oldest trick in the book. set up an e-mail address... if someone responds and asks, "is that YOU?", of course the reply is always..."Yes, it's ME"
Idiot
On the other hand, if you have an official NYFD website and it lists his e-mail address as the same, I may be more swayed to email him and ask numerous questions... the first being, "Did YOU post on a forum at Psyorg?" Matter of fact, I am searching to see if the REAL Paul Isaac can be reached for comment and/or confirmation on that question.
Both WTC 6 and WTC 7 were evacuated within minutes of Flight 11 striking WTC 1 - this didn't happen in the twin towers.
and they call him a hero
There were no evacuation announcements in WTC 1 following the plane strike, and workers were encouraged to stay in their building...
When GW was in the National Guard, which he joined to get out of going to Vietnam. He was a pilot in Texas until his flight status was revoked for refusing to take medical exams. For at least eight months, he didn't even show up for duty.
and they call him president
the Madrid fire burned all night
and it didn't collapse
The towers only burned for about an hour, yet they completely disintegrated
Thick heavy steel
Completely disintegrates and collapses at near free fall speed
And they say professor Jones is nuts?
and they call him a hero
There were no evacuation announcements in WTC 1 following the plane strike, and workers were encouraged to stay in their building...
When GW was in the National Guard, which he joined to get out of going to Vietnam. He was a pilot in Texas until his flight status was revoked for refusing to take medical exams. For at least eight months, he didn't even show up for duty.
and they call him president
the Madrid fire burned all night
and it didn't collapse
The towers only burned for about an hour, yet they completely disintegrated
Thick heavy steel
Completely disintegrates and collapses at near free fall speed
And they say professor Jones is nuts?
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 4 2006, 04:54 PM)
Soooo.... are we to assume that you still adhere to the Amazing Super-Sonic Jet-Fuel theory then ???
If by this you mean do I believe that forces involved in the collision of a high speed fuel laden jet with WTC 1 was sufficient to breach several of the elevator shafts and cause high speed dispersal and atomization of kerosene, with significant quantities being forced into said shafts and then be ignited, thus generating a supersonic shock wave within the shafts that blew doors off all the way to the basement and burnt people standing near elevator doors from the near the collison floor, the upper skylobby, the main Concourse and all the way to the basement as well as damaging the basement machine shop and blowing out the lobby windows?
If that's what you mean then the answer is YES.
Arthur
Nah Foxx, it's not that kind of love.
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
QUOTE
Soooo.... are we to assume that you still adhere to the Amazing Super-Sonic Jet-Fuel theory then ???
If by this you mean do I believe that forces involved in the collision of a high speed fuel laden jet with WTC 1 was sufficient to breach several of the elevator shafts and cause high speed dispersal and atomization of kerosene, with significant quantities being forced into said shafts and then be ignited, thus generating a supersonic shock wave within the shafts that blew doors off all the way to the basement and burnt people standing near elevator doors from the near the collison floor, the upper skylobby, the main Concourse and all the way to the basement as well as damaging the basement machine shop and blowing out the lobby windows?
If that's what you mean then the answer is YES.
If by this you mean do I believe that forces involved in the collision of a high speed fuel laden jet with WTC 1 was sufficient to breach several of the elevator shafts and cause high speed dispersal and atomization of kerosene, with significant quantities being forced into said shafts and then be ignited, thus generating a supersonic shock wave within the shafts that blew doors off all the way to the basement and burnt people standing near elevator doors from the near the collison floor, the upper skylobby, the main Concourse and all the way to the basement as well as damaging the basement machine shop and blowing out the lobby windows?
If that's what you mean then the answer is YES.
Arthur, I know this is hard to accept, but Santa Clause is dead and the things you believed in are not true.
I have to chase down all these website because the story that wingtv had wrote about the ground zero memorial and the false article writen about is completely false.
There was never any statements made to these people.
Because one good burn deserves another:
Google: "Lisa Guliani calls FBI on revere radio Network"
Two things can be deduced from this,
[Post edited by Moderators to remove material that is a violation of our TOS]
Just like to say the article is false.
Fetch it Timmy
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://www.caves.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=6259&
Paul Isaac Jr link
These people (wingtv) are so full of BS it stinks. The story they wrote about the WTC Memorial is BS. The story about the Fireman(Me) is total BS. The secondary story about calling my home after I had given them the notice for removal of false article is BS. They did call my home so they can take that as a harrassment statement.
Also, be aware of the Loosechange crowd, they act very much like a controlled Mind F*ck tactic. They were also at the Memorial spouting there "I can make a hundred more lines" (jason bermas) without any regard for respecting the memorial. It was funny how afterwards Dylan Avery requested an interview at 10/10 firestation for his video chopshop special. He states that he had copies of the memorial fiasco and that he was going to give me copies to bury wingtv but the man is full of BS too. Hes a bit of an arrogant little dweeb to say the least.
The man was invited to my home and then needed help to get out to penn. I help these people only to be disapointed in their actions. Then when I called him a week later to find out where the tapes were He tells me he too busy eating and he would call me later, Mind you this is already two weeks after the initial request and promis of the video. This makes him a burn artist who plays bait and switch games.
I ask that these people get a serious background because upon doing the trace there is an inconssistancy in dylans background. He states he out of the DC area, but upon further investigation the is background from Pheonix Ariz. theat he never mentions. Why?
Becareful out there
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/320531.shtml
By Sentinel - Jan 3rd, 2006 at 6:25 pm EST
I'm sorry, but there is proof that fire could not have been the reason behind the collapse nor the planes.
If these buildings had been of true truss developement there would have been an instant collapse on impact.
On Febuary 13 1975 there was a fire in the North Tower that was clearly a hotter fire do to lack of sprinklers systemns as well as no proper ventillation.
30 firemen were hospitalized for heat and smoke inhulation. Fire was blowing out the the windows of the BF Goodwrich company. The fire took out six floors plus there was heavy fire damage to the interior supustructure but there was no collapse from this fire.
I have copies of the two Newspaper articles if anyone is interested in the research, no charge.
P.s The WingTV article about me at ground zero is false, there were never anystatement made about the subject they speak about. "fireman Admits again 911 inside Job" Total BS.
God bless and Happy New Year too all.
Be Safe
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://www.campusprogress.org/page/communi...inson.eric/CLLG
Dylan Avery is a spook. He renigs on agreement then steals other peoples research to make a buck off the misery of the victims.
Tell me how a chopshop specialist has now become a researcher?
Its not his work, it belongs to the researchers who discovered the anomollies, not Dylan.
I used to respect him, but now hes a *** Celebraty feeding off the dead.
DROP DEAD DYLAN, your a *** good little spook.
Who really knows this guy?
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
Paul Isaac Jr | 01.03.06 - 5:41 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it really showing respect to the families when you go to ground zero to sell your ***?
If I were attend your families memorial to sell DVDs and other Bullshit wouldn't I be a *** hipocrit?
If I went there to insult your families in their time of grieving to insult them and the other attendies, do you really think I showed respect for your family?
Are you that stupid that you would actualy believe Government snitches (WingTv) over someone who actually went through 911?
If you don't believe me about Wingtv the Google: "wingtv calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and see how back in July 05 just two *** months before the aniversary these people called the FBI or someone to harrass the RRN. Why did you do that Lisa.
What was so funy is Dylan went on his own blog to anounce that their story was bullshit then he turned around and did the very same spook *** by playing the bait and switch game to get me to speak on the issue, then turned around and RENIG.
Hey DYLAN, ENIGS RENIGS
GoFuckyourself.com.org whatever,LOL
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
Paul Isaac Jr | 01.03.06 - 5:50 pm | #
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/...66322803109158/
Imagine that, Foxx is wrong again...
There was never any statements made to these people.
Because one good burn deserves another:
Google: "Lisa Guliani calls FBI on revere radio Network"
Two things can be deduced from this,
[Post edited by Moderators to remove material that is a violation of our TOS]
Just like to say the article is false.
Fetch it Timmy
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://www.caves.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=6259&
Paul Isaac Jr link
These people (wingtv) are so full of BS it stinks. The story they wrote about the WTC Memorial is BS. The story about the Fireman(Me) is total BS. The secondary story about calling my home after I had given them the notice for removal of false article is BS. They did call my home so they can take that as a harrassment statement.
Also, be aware of the Loosechange crowd, they act very much like a controlled Mind F*ck tactic. They were also at the Memorial spouting there "I can make a hundred more lines" (jason bermas) without any regard for respecting the memorial. It was funny how afterwards Dylan Avery requested an interview at 10/10 firestation for his video chopshop special. He states that he had copies of the memorial fiasco and that he was going to give me copies to bury wingtv but the man is full of BS too. Hes a bit of an arrogant little dweeb to say the least.
The man was invited to my home and then needed help to get out to penn. I help these people only to be disapointed in their actions. Then when I called him a week later to find out where the tapes were He tells me he too busy eating and he would call me later, Mind you this is already two weeks after the initial request and promis of the video. This makes him a burn artist who plays bait and switch games.
I ask that these people get a serious background because upon doing the trace there is an inconssistancy in dylans background. He states he out of the DC area, but upon further investigation the is background from Pheonix Ariz. theat he never mentions. Why?
Becareful out there
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/320531.shtml
By Sentinel - Jan 3rd, 2006 at 6:25 pm EST
I'm sorry, but there is proof that fire could not have been the reason behind the collapse nor the planes.
If these buildings had been of true truss developement there would have been an instant collapse on impact.
On Febuary 13 1975 there was a fire in the North Tower that was clearly a hotter fire do to lack of sprinklers systemns as well as no proper ventillation.
30 firemen were hospitalized for heat and smoke inhulation. Fire was blowing out the the windows of the BF Goodwrich company. The fire took out six floors plus there was heavy fire damage to the interior supustructure but there was no collapse from this fire.
I have copies of the two Newspaper articles if anyone is interested in the research, no charge.
P.s The WingTV article about me at ground zero is false, there were never anystatement made about the subject they speak about. "fireman Admits again 911 inside Job" Total BS.
God bless and Happy New Year too all.
Be Safe
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
http://www.campusprogress.org/page/communi...inson.eric/CLLG
Dylan Avery is a spook. He renigs on agreement then steals other peoples research to make a buck off the misery of the victims.
Tell me how a chopshop specialist has now become a researcher?
Its not his work, it belongs to the researchers who discovered the anomollies, not Dylan.
I used to respect him, but now hes a *** Celebraty feeding off the dead.
DROP DEAD DYLAN, your a *** good little spook.
Who really knows this guy?
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
Paul Isaac Jr | 01.03.06 - 5:41 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it really showing respect to the families when you go to ground zero to sell your ***?
If I were attend your families memorial to sell DVDs and other Bullshit wouldn't I be a *** hipocrit?
If I went there to insult your families in their time of grieving to insult them and the other attendies, do you really think I showed respect for your family?
Are you that stupid that you would actualy believe Government snitches (WingTv) over someone who actually went through 911?
If you don't believe me about Wingtv the Google: "wingtv calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and see how back in July 05 just two *** months before the aniversary these people called the FBI or someone to harrass the RRN. Why did you do that Lisa.
What was so funy is Dylan went on his own blog to anounce that their story was bullshit then he turned around and did the very same spook *** by playing the bait and switch game to get me to speak on the issue, then turned around and RENIG.
Hey DYLAN, ENIGS RENIGS
GoFuckyourself.com.org whatever,LOL
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@Yahoo.com
Paul Isaac Jr | 01.03.06 - 5:50 pm | #
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/...66322803109158/
Imagine that, Foxx is wrong again...
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM)
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him?
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email.
QUOTE (galdur+Feb 5 2006, 12:41 AM)
Nah Foxx, it's not that kind of love.
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
While you're there galdur, tell Foxx how planes can't fly in ground effect for ANY distance at all. And then tell him that all his models of ground effect FLYING planes don't mean a thing because YOU DON'T BELIEVE HIM when he says that planes CAN fly near the ground. Idiot and idioter, galdur and his hero.
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
While you're there galdur, tell Foxx how planes can't fly in ground effect for ANY distance at all. And then tell him that all his models of ground effect FLYING planes don't mean a thing because YOU DON'T BELIEVE HIM when he says that planes CAN fly near the ground. Idiot and idioter, galdur and his hero.
QUOTE (newton+Feb 5 2006, 12:48 AM)
[QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM]
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email.
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez...
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email.
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez...
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 12:55 AM)
[QUOTE=newton,Feb 5 2006, 12:48 AM] [QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM]
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email. [/QUOTE]
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez...
it's your email account?
i don't know. MAYBE it's the actual guy, but a yahoo account could be labelled 'godzilla@yahoo.com'. does that mean i'm typing to the 'real' godzilla?
moron? man, you use that word lightly, lol.
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email. [/QUOTE]
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez...
it's your email account?
i don't know. MAYBE it's the actual guy, but a yahoo account could be labelled 'godzilla@yahoo.com'. does that mean i'm typing to the 'real' godzilla?
moron? man, you use that word lightly, lol.
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 5 2006, 12:55 AM)
QUOTE (galdur+Feb 5 2006, 12:41 AM)
Nah Foxx, it's not that kind of love.
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
While you're there galdur, tell Foxx how planes can't fly in ground effect for ANY distance at all. And then tell him that all his models of ground effect FLYING planes don't mean a thing because YOU DON'T BELIEVE HIM when he says that planes CAN fly near the ground. Idiot and idioter, galdur and his hero.
Ridiculous.
It's relative to the speed of the wing.
Probably a massive concept for those who
have no clue about what makes flight of
planes possible in the first place and you are
probably in that class.
[QUOTE=newton,Feb 5 2006, 01:01 AM] [QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:55 AM] [QUOTE=newton,Feb 5 2006, 12:48 AM] [QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM]
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email. [/QUOTE]
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez... [/QUOTE]
it's your email account?
i don't know. MAYBE it's the actual guy, but a yahoo account could be labelled 'godzilla@yahoo.com'. does that mean i'm typing to the 'real' godzilla?
moron? man, you use that word lightly, lol. [/QUOTE]
You got me! I created a time machine and posted all over the internet with the same yahoo account then went forward in time so I could use those posts to pretend I'm someone else...
You guys are the dumbest bunch of clowns on the internet.
You got me! I created a time machine and posted all over the internet with the same yahoo account then went forward in time so I could use those posts to pretend I'm someone else...
You guys are the dumbest bunch of clowns on the internet.
well, plausibly 'you' have been working for 'rove' for four yrs. or more, genius.
Reaally. You post a number of 'alternative' forums as 'evidence'???
There is nothing whatsever stopping me from signing up at forums and calling myself George Washington. The fact that I can also set-up a Yahoo e-mail account under the name of George Washington@yahoo.com means nothing... unless you believe you can still reach your first president at Yahoo. Do you?
You seem to have a vested interest now Schneiby in proving that 'Paul Isaac Jr' (at Yahoo.com) is the REAL WTC fire-fighter. Got any links to NYFD which show Mr. Paul Isaacs email as the above?
To me it looks as real as the Urology link.
There is really ONLY one of two plausible explainations for your actions and shenanigans on this thread, Schneiby... either...
1 - You have serious emotional & psychological problems
OR
2 - You ARE a gov't disinformationalist SPOOK.
PS - How's the lawsuit coming?
It's just that common figure of speech
so to say.
While you're there galdur, tell Foxx how planes can't fly in ground effect for ANY distance at all. And then tell him that all his models of ground effect FLYING planes don't mean a thing because YOU DON'T BELIEVE HIM when he says that planes CAN fly near the ground. Idiot and idioter, galdur and his hero.
Ridiculous.
It's relative to the speed of the wing.
Probably a massive concept for those who
have no clue about what makes flight of
planes possible in the first place and you are
probably in that class.
[QUOTE=newton,Feb 5 2006, 01:01 AM] [QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:55 AM] [QUOTE=newton,Feb 5 2006, 12:48 AM] [QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 5 2006, 12:19 AM]
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
Again The wingtv article is false.[/QUOTE]
At least he gives his actual e-mail. Why don't you clowns e-mail him? [/QUOTE]
where's your common sense? 'yahoo.com' is not a 'real' email. [/QUOTE]
What is it then you moron. It may not be to his ISP but it's a REAL e-mail and you don't have to PM him. Geez... [/QUOTE]
it's your email account?
i don't know. MAYBE it's the actual guy, but a yahoo account could be labelled 'godzilla@yahoo.com'. does that mean i'm typing to the 'real' godzilla?
moron? man, you use that word lightly, lol. [/QUOTE]
You got me! I created a time machine and posted all over the internet with the same yahoo account then went forward in time so I could use those posts to pretend I'm someone else...
You guys are the dumbest bunch of clowns on the internet.
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 01:04 AM)
You got me! I created a time machine and posted all over the internet with the same yahoo account then went forward in time so I could use those posts to pretend I'm someone else...
You guys are the dumbest bunch of clowns on the internet.
well, plausibly 'you' have been working for 'rove' for four yrs. or more, genius.
QUOTE
Originally posted by Schneiby
Imagine that, Foxx is wrong again...
Imagine that, Foxx is wrong again...
Reaally. You post a number of 'alternative' forums as 'evidence'???
There is nothing whatsever stopping me from signing up at forums and calling myself George Washington. The fact that I can also set-up a Yahoo e-mail account under the name of George Washington@yahoo.com means nothing... unless you believe you can still reach your first president at Yahoo. Do you?
You seem to have a vested interest now Schneiby in proving that 'Paul Isaac Jr' (at Yahoo.com) is the REAL WTC fire-fighter. Got any links to NYFD which show Mr. Paul Isaacs email as the above?
To me it looks as real as the Urology link.
There is really ONLY one of two plausible explainations for your actions and shenanigans on this thread, Schneiby... either...
1 - You have serious emotional & psychological problems
OR
2 - You ARE a gov't disinformationalist SPOOK.
PS - How's the lawsuit coming?
You can e-mail the real COMMON SENCE at:
commonsence@rove.com
commonsence@rove.com
As I said when I first posted the thing I didn't know if it was true or not. Only that his e-mail gives it credibility. Unlike you I don't believe everthing I read. Even when it supports my views.
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 5 2006, 01:14 AM)
You can e-mail the real COMMON SENCE at:
commonsence@rove.com
That's an oxymoron. We have enough of you CT morons thank you very much.
commonsence@rove.com
That's an oxymoron. We have enough of you CT morons thank you very much.
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 01:15 AM)
As I said when I first posted the thing I didn't know if it was true or not. Only that his e-mail gives it credibility.
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
I really couldn't care less about the Wing TV story, (which I had never heard about before) and is meaningless (to me) whether it's true or not.
The whole issue has nothing to do with this thread... just another Schneiby-Doo ob-fu-sk8tion...
like the constant ravings about rove, and 'smelly' things.
De-rail the topic, spread lies, attack the messenger, create straw-men, slander, swear & curse...
anything to muddy the waters.
Pure disinformationalist stuff there.
How's the lawsuit coming?
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
I really couldn't care less about the Wing TV story, (which I had never heard about before) and is meaningless (to me) whether it's true or not.
The whole issue has nothing to do with this thread... just another Schneiby-Doo ob-fu-sk8tion...
like the constant ravings about rove, and 'smelly' things.
De-rail the topic, spread lies, attack the messenger, create straw-men, slander, swear & curse...
anything to muddy the waters.
Pure disinformationalist stuff there.
How's the lawsuit coming?
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 5 2006, 01:24 AM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 5 2006, 01:15 AM)
As I said when I first posted the thing I didn't know if it was true or not. Only that his e-mail gives it credibility.
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
I really couldn't care less about the Wing TV story, (which I had never heard about before) and is meaningless (to me) whether it's true or not.
The whole issue has nothing to do with this thread... just another Schneiby-Doo ob-fu-sk8tion...
like the constant ravings about rove, and 'smelly' things.
De-rail the topic, spread lies, attack the messenger, create straw-men, slander, swear & curse...
anything to muddy the waters.
Pure disinformationalist stuff there.
How's the lawsuit coming?
You stupid fu<k, it was you CTers that brought up the quote. Let me guess, now we are creating CT puppets right?... Will the lunacy ever end...
Actually, upon reflection ... the above traits seem to be the same character abnormalities anyway.
Actually, upon reflection ... the above traits seem to be the same character abnormalities anyway.
by Schneiby
Will the lunacy ever end...
Apparently not as long as you keep posting here.
Again, Why don't you e-mail him and ask him for his phone number. Maybe he'll give it to you and you can set up a meeting.
Anyway, you can't find a single credible source for the quote. That also lends his story credibility.
I really couldn't care less about the Wing TV story, (which I had never heard about before) and is meaningless (to me) whether it's true or not.
The whole issue has nothing to do with this thread... just another Schneiby-Doo ob-fu-sk8tion...
like the constant ravings about rove, and 'smelly' things.
De-rail the topic, spread lies, attack the messenger, create straw-men, slander, swear & curse...
anything to muddy the waters.
Pure disinformationalist stuff there.
How's the lawsuit coming?
You stupid fu<k, it was you CTers that brought up the quote. Let me guess, now we are creating CT puppets right?...
Will the lunacy ever end...
QUOTE
Originally posted by Foxx
There is really ONLY one of two plausible explainations for your actions and shenanigans on this thread, Schneiby... either...
1 - You have serious emotional & psychological problems
OR
2 - You ARE a gov't disinformationalist SPOOK.
There is really ONLY one of two plausible explainations for your actions and shenanigans on this thread, Schneiby... either...
1 - You have serious emotional & psychological problems
OR
2 - You ARE a gov't disinformationalist SPOOK.
Actually, upon reflection ... the above traits seem to be the same character abnormalities anyway.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by Foxx There is really ONLY one of two plausible explainations for your actions and shenanigans on this thread, Schneiby... either... 1 - You have serious emotional & psychological problems OR 2 - You ARE a gov't disinformationalist SPOOK. |
Actually, upon reflection ... the above traits seem to be the same character abnormalities anyway.
by Schneiby
Will the lunacy ever end...
Apparently not as long as you keep posting here.
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.