If one looks at recent history, it's pretty clear that America was steered to this point, we're on the verge of accepting perpetual war.
Looking back over recent history and exposing...
the REAL conspiracy.
To those who believe that Bush Jr. is the power (ie- the head conspirator) behind the conspiracy that we all now know exists, I would remind... that this conspiracy has very little to do with politics.
9/11 (IMHO) would have happened even if Kerry (or any other puppet) had been 'elected'. The USofA is no longer a country run by the constitution of its forefathers.
In our lifetimes we can look back over recent history and see with clear hindsight how the USofA has been taken over by powerful and evil forces, who have no regard whatsoever for human life & dignity.
In 1961, President Eisenhower warned sternly in his farewell address to ward against the military-industrial complex gaining unrighteous power and influence, lest it destroy democracy.
How prophetic of him. I remember the speech well, but being young, did not understand what he meant at the time.
http://wmass.indymedia.org/usermedia/appli...ke-truelies.mp3
In January of 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff came up with Operation Northwoods to stage a terror attack and blame it on Cuban terrorists, which would then precipitate an invasion of Cuba.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/northwoods001.html
In March of 1962 Kennedy rejected Operation Northwoods.
In July of 1963, Kennedy says, "The United States, as the world knows, will NEVER start a war"...
http://www.radio4all.net/pub/files/benfran...cglue-never.mp3
and states "Not just peace for all Americans, but peace for ALL men and women, Not peace for our time, but peace for ALL time"...
http://www.radio4all.net/pub/files/benfran...k-eofm-rise.mp3
JFK ordered a withdrawal from Vietnam...
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/exit.htm
In November 1963 Kennedy was assassinated, and LBJ rescinded that withdrawal order...
http://www.k12.nf.ca/gc/SocialStudies/whis...rbulentterm.htm
Then Malcom X, Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. were all shot, coincidentally these assassinations of people fighting for justice were all perpetrated by 'lone wackos'. There were absolutely no corporations or wealthy people that would stand to lose billions of dollars had JFK, MLK and others been able to bring about real justice for all. Of course it's just a crazy conspiracy theory to suggest that Profit could ever be the motive of such evil.
The military-industrial complex has been pulling the strings ever since then.
Democrats...Republicans... those who hold real power couldn't care less who the puppet represents in the political spectrum, so don't be fooled by those who claim the real conspiracy is just related to Bush Jr and Iraq.
The evil of the real conspiracy goes far beyond. Anyone who has studied the Watergate Issue knows that the conspiracy there, wasn't simply Nixon and his band of merry break-in artists.
The REAL perps behind that conspiracy chose to dispense with tricky-dicky to cover their own butts from exposure... had full impeachment proceedings gone forward against Nixon they would have been exposed and we would not be where we are today.
Iran-Contra... the Central American excursions, (and brutal terrorism carried out against CA peasants by US spook forces acting in concert with evil men)... and on... and on... and on.
http://www.lossless-audio.com/usa/index6.php
So, when someone says there is no conspiracy... funded, orchestrated, and ordered by the US military-industrial complex...
OR claims that the 'conspiracy' is a political issue... they are liars, or simply have not understood the recent history in which we have lived our lifetimes.
Peace
Foxx
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (newton+Mar 15 2006, 03:34 AM)
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
QUOTE
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break... |
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
QUOTE
Coincidences happen moron.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 15 2006, 10:23 PM)
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 15 2006, 10:04 PM)
CSpam, remember the parameters: FALL TIME, SYMMETRY, BEHAVOIR DURING COLLAPSE.
Spam is not cutting it. You can not pick and choose which firemans accounts you will use to bolster your argument. Physics based on observation please.
Hi Rove's!
As I said to newton, I am waiting for the NIST report (and all you guys from both 'sides' posting info about it) before I feel comfortable making any observations/hypotheses about WTC7 collapse.
However, I AM curious to find out NOW if I can:
- Did WTC 7 have any 'core-like' structure at all?
- Did it have any 'straight-through' internal/distributed support columns from "top to bedrock" at all?
- What strength were the outer walls....and were they merely veneer/facade or did they carry significant loads...and what was their design/materials?
- How much damage to that outer-wall integrity did the TOWER debris/widespread-fires do....and how LOW down was that damage?
- Did the tremendous "earthquake-like" VIBRATIONS from towers collapses cause any 'foundation' and/or low-support structures compromise/damage at all?
- What exactly WAS contained in the lower floors/basement of WTC7 that could contribute to fuel/fire explosive/heat distortion/weakening etc damage?
Does anyone recall? I can't seem to 'surf' this thread as easily as I used to be able to because some pages make my system quit. Can anybody answer/inform the above queries? I'll be back later today. Thanks.
PS: I remind all that I can only view "jpeg" and "mpeg" images/video. Ta.
RC.
.
RC, there was a huge 20 story hole in the center of the south side.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/mag...e/gz/boyle.html
You can see a video made at the time video here...
It's obvious there was sever trauma to the building. FEMA had a short PDF which shows a diagram of a large hole in the center of the south side. They think it severed some columns at the center of the building.
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
We all know that CSpams posts often, inadvertantly support demolition. Like he's not reading his own spam harvests, or perhaps he doesn't understand. Then there is always just the old "obscure with volume tactic. Absorbtion of mass forum page w/kark (yes, I'm labeling, for the good)
Now he's posting evidence of telepathy and mind control to try to change the subject.
The concrete core enables free fall and total pulverization just as we saw. There are many photos of it at various stages of the demolition.
3,000 Americans did die that day, the patriot act removes our rights and freedoms, 2 wars ilegally waged, hundreds of thousands of people killed and CSpam wants to everyone to talk about the secrets being kept about our mental potentials.
We stay with the Twin Towers, no evasions will go un noted. There is a question you've evaded over and over.
Why are none of the 47, 1.300 steel core columns seen in these images?
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
"Evidence that is 'spectral' in nature"
HA!
Man, if that doesn't describe most of the CT "evidence" to a tee!
I'm constantly accused of attacking the messenger when some lunatic posts nonsense on these threads.
Attacking the messenger is perfectly valid when the messenger is obviously delusional. Look at the people and ideas that we've seen on this thread alone.
Indian shamans controlling the minds of the populace through telepathy and hypnosis. OK....
Christ visiting the Americas to preach to the Amerinds. Sure...
Ex-con religious nuts trying to hustle up a couple of bucks.
Now newton is folding dollar bills and using rap album covers to prove conspiracy.
MI Complex/Illuminati/Bildenberg Group. Whatever...
It just goes on and on.....
Since I stumbled into this nonsense, I've watched people like Foxx progress from being a semi-rational poster with a few questions, to full blown delusional paranoia. It's only recently that he has become willing to lie in order to support his delusion. It's interesting to watch but kind of sad. I suspect that chronic THC abuse is one of the common denominators with the CT crowd that are not already completely insane.
Anyway, I think this thread is finally hitting the point that the others eventually hit. As legitimate anomalies are addressed rationally, the CT's turn to fantasy and lunacy to support the delusion that they have so much invested in.
This is far and away the best thread that I've seen on the subject. I've learned quite a bit and been greatly entertained.
Sorry I haven't contributed more but it gets tiresome. After awhile, ridicule seems to be the best tool with these people. Sometimes, realizing that they are being laughed at will snap them back into reality.
Spam is not cutting it. You can not pick and choose which firemans accounts you will use to bolster your argument. Physics based on observation please.
Hi Rove's!
As I said to newton, I am waiting for the NIST report (and all you guys from both 'sides' posting info about it) before I feel comfortable making any observations/hypotheses about WTC7 collapse.
However, I AM curious to find out NOW if I can:
- Did WTC 7 have any 'core-like' structure at all?
- Did it have any 'straight-through' internal/distributed support columns from "top to bedrock" at all?
- What strength were the outer walls....and were they merely veneer/facade or did they carry significant loads...and what was their design/materials?
- How much damage to that outer-wall integrity did the TOWER debris/widespread-fires do....and how LOW down was that damage?
- Did the tremendous "earthquake-like" VIBRATIONS from towers collapses cause any 'foundation' and/or low-support structures compromise/damage at all?
- What exactly WAS contained in the lower floors/basement of WTC7 that could contribute to fuel/fire explosive/heat distortion/weakening etc damage?
Does anyone recall? I can't seem to 'surf' this thread as easily as I used to be able to because some pages make my system quit. Can anybody answer/inform the above queries? I'll be back later today. Thanks.
PS: I remind all that I can only view "jpeg" and "mpeg" images/video. Ta.
RC.
.
RC, there was a huge 20 story hole in the center of the south side.
QUOTE
So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post.
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/mag...e/gz/boyle.html
You can see a video made at the time video here...
It's obvious there was sever trauma to the building. FEMA had a short PDF which shows a diagram of a large hole in the center of the south side. They think it severed some columns at the center of the building.
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 10:37 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (newton+Mar 15 2006, 03:34 AM)
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
QUOTE
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break... |
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
QUOTE
Coincidences happen moron.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 15 2006, 05:59 PM)
CSpam, arthur, YID, RC,
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 15 2006, 10:49 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 10:37 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (newton+Mar 15 2006, 03:34 AM)
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
QUOTE
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break... |
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
QUOTE
Coincidences happen moron.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 11:18 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 15 2006, 10:49 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 10:37 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (newton+Mar 15 2006, 03:34 AM)
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
QUOTE
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break... |
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
QUOTE
Coincidences happen moron.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
HEHEHEHE!!!!
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 12:08 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 11:18 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 15 2006, 10:49 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 10:37 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:15 PM)
QUOTE (newton+Mar 15 2006, 03:34 AM)
two hours before it fell. doesn't fit with, 'they decided to pull it, and then we watched the tower fall'.
who are 'they' that 'knew' the tower was going to fall?
this amazing foreknowledge of collapse only applies to tower seven. not one and two. those were BIG SURPRISES to EVERYONE(except of course , 'the coup' gang in tower seven)
that album cover came out in august 2001.
---source...http://www.enterprisemission.com/weblog/weblog.htm
CSpam thinks he's adressed the Coup post of Newts. No way.
The graphic specificity of Coups album cover is proof of unconscious knowledge utiized consciously for one reason, actually existing for another. And in the case of 9-11 the knowledge was removed because it was too indicative of an unconscious connection to the Muslim aspect of 9-11. Coup didn't want that, but the sources of the knowledge did, so the album came out a couple months before 9-11. Was 9-11 a political coup?
Who remembers F 9-11 and gwb after he heard the second plane had hit?
He began a subtle nodding, eyes fixed straight forward. This went on for a long time. It is very possible he was revisiting an original hypnotic state. That he was getting ready to act on post hypnotically activated information. Conditional instructions can effect this as we saw
There is a good chance that Coup gained their information through unconscious means, acted on it in time to conditions we do not know of and gwb was reacting to conditions we do know of that he knew unconsciously prior to 9-11, learned by his unconscious which is why he reacted as he did.
What is a secret? If the information is unconscious, is it better than a secret?
QUOTE
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break...
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If they hit the empire state you would have said the writers of independence day knew about the attack. Give me a break... |
An outright distortion minimizing the significance of 3,00 dead, innocent Americans, supporting a lie.
But the plane didn’t and there was no name like “Coup” associated with what may be an American Coup. To ask for a break implies you are entitled to one. You are not. You are abusing your ability to communicate.
I guess the writer of the Spider-man trailer also know about it...
A little bit more distortion in support of lies hiding murder and the subversion of our constitution. A shabby attempt at minimizing the significance of 3,000 dead by associating the famous building, and the loss of our rights, freedoms and democracy with a commercial film showing the same building.
QUOTE
Coincidences happen moron.
Your last pitiful distortion of labeling, as a sick expression of your agenda of ignorance and death is quite ridiculous if you NOW what I mean.
Whatever, You think the building had a concrete core so whatever you think is laughable.
This message utilizes reference to what are called "cognitive distortions", by behavioral psychologists. They are intended to be applied to a person distorting their own reasoning to justify their behaviors or beliefs and patterns of behavior. In this case, the phenomena leads to a behavior where an individuals distortions are applied to socialization in an effort to induce others to distort in response to any cognitive dissonance they may perceive.
CSpam writes, “Whatever”, used as a distortion through a indirect generalization applicable to anything. Then, uses good information supported by hard evidence within a suggested distortion called,
1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.
CSpams distortions are intended to create a mental filter in a person who might have reasons to think that there is more to 9-11 than government told them,
3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
The primary goal is to minimize the credibility of what ever CSpams opponent shares.
4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
A lot of good Americans died that day. I feel for those firefighters, they put so much on the line. Don't even mention the children whose parents died.
Your activity here is akin to vandalism, or graffiti, or some other form of sacrilegious activity to human existence, supporting its destruction and subjugation by supporting a dark and terrifying lie.
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
We all know that CSpams posts often, inadvertantly support demolition. Like he's not reading his own spam harvests, or perhaps he doesn't understand. Then there is always just the old "obscure with volume tactic. Absorbtion of mass forum page w/kark (yes, I'm labeling, for the good)
Now he's posting evidence of telepathy and mind control to try to change the subject.
The concrete core enables free fall and total pulverization just as we saw. There are many photos of it at various stages of the demolition.
3,000 Americans did die that day, the patriot act removes our rights and freedoms, 2 wars ilegally waged, hundreds of thousands of people killed and CSpam wants to everyone to talk about the secrets being kept about our mental potentials.
We stay with the Twin Towers, no evasions will go un noted. There is a question you've evaded over and over.
Why are none of the 47, 1.300 steel core columns seen in these images?
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 12:08 AM)
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
"Evidence that is 'spectral' in nature"
HA!
Man, if that doesn't describe most of the CT "evidence" to a tee!
I'm constantly accused of attacking the messenger when some lunatic posts nonsense on these threads.
Attacking the messenger is perfectly valid when the messenger is obviously delusional. Look at the people and ideas that we've seen on this thread alone.
Indian shamans controlling the minds of the populace through telepathy and hypnosis. OK....
Christ visiting the Americas to preach to the Amerinds. Sure...
Ex-con religious nuts trying to hustle up a couple of bucks.
Now newton is folding dollar bills and using rap album covers to prove conspiracy.
MI Complex/Illuminati/Bildenberg Group. Whatever...
It just goes on and on.....
Since I stumbled into this nonsense, I've watched people like Foxx progress from being a semi-rational poster with a few questions, to full blown delusional paranoia. It's only recently that he has become willing to lie in order to support his delusion. It's interesting to watch but kind of sad. I suspect that chronic THC abuse is one of the common denominators with the CT crowd that are not already completely insane.
Anyway, I think this thread is finally hitting the point that the others eventually hit. As legitimate anomalies are addressed rationally, the CT's turn to fantasy and lunacy to support the delusion that they have so much invested in.
This is far and away the best thread that I've seen on the subject. I've learned quite a bit and been greatly entertained.
Sorry I haven't contributed more but it gets tiresome. After awhile, ridicule seems to be the best tool with these people. Sometimes, realizing that they are being laughed at will snap them back into reality.
mind control PATENTS(look'em up, if you think it's TINFOIL HAT crap)
more on mind control using HAARP...numbskull?
MORON mind control...(heh)....yes, master
"A new class of weapons, based on electromagnetic fields, has been added to the muscles of the military organism. The C3I [Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence] doctrine is still growing and expanding. It would appear that the military may yet be able to completely control the minds of the civilian population."7
The targeting of civilian populations by the military is a significant departure from its history. In the past, the military has used persuasion through real information rather than using deliberate deception and mind manipulation to win populations over.
"A decoy and deception concept presently being considered is to remotely create the perception of noise in the heads of personnel by exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves. When people are illuminated with properly modulated low power microwaves the sensation is reported as a buzzing, clicking, or hissing which seems to originate (regardless of the person's position in the field) within or just behind the head. The phenomena occurs [sic] at average power densities as low as microwatts per square centimeter with carrier frequencies from 0.4 to 3.0 GHz. By proper choice of pulse characteristics, intelligible speech may be created. Before this technique may be extended and used for military applications, an understanding of the basic principles must be developed. Such an understanding is not only required to optimize the use of the concept for camouflage, decoy and deception operations but is required to properly assess safety factors of such microwave exposure."8
Actual testing of certain systems has proven "that movements, sensations, emotions, desires, ideas, and a variety of psychological phenomena may be induced, inhibited, or modified by electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain. These facts have changed the classical philosophical concept that the mind was beyond experimental reach."
source, nexus magazine
more on mind control using HAARP...numbskull?
MORON mind control...(heh)....yes, master
"A new class of weapons, based on electromagnetic fields, has been added to the muscles of the military organism. The C3I [Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence] doctrine is still growing and expanding. It would appear that the military may yet be able to completely control the minds of the civilian population."7
The targeting of civilian populations by the military is a significant departure from its history. In the past, the military has used persuasion through real information rather than using deliberate deception and mind manipulation to win populations over.
"A decoy and deception concept presently being considered is to remotely create the perception of noise in the heads of personnel by exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves. When people are illuminated with properly modulated low power microwaves the sensation is reported as a buzzing, clicking, or hissing which seems to originate (regardless of the person's position in the field) within or just behind the head. The phenomena occurs [sic] at average power densities as low as microwatts per square centimeter with carrier frequencies from 0.4 to 3.0 GHz. By proper choice of pulse characteristics, intelligible speech may be created. Before this technique may be extended and used for military applications, an understanding of the basic principles must be developed. Such an understanding is not only required to optimize the use of the concept for camouflage, decoy and deception operations but is required to properly assess safety factors of such microwave exposure."8
Actual testing of certain systems has proven "that movements, sensations, emotions, desires, ideas, and a variety of psychological phenomena may be induced, inhibited, or modified by electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain. These facts have changed the classical philosophical concept that the mind was beyond experimental reach."
source, nexus magazine
Condi Rice is currently giving a press conference in Sydney.
Our gagged media is giving her a nice thorough arse lick as we speak.
(: hereward
Our gagged media is giving her a nice thorough arse lick as we speak.
(: hereward
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 15 2006, 10:53 PM)
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 15 2006, 05:59 PM)
CSpam, arthur, YID, RC,
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
You forgot to say MORON.
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
"Evidence that is 'spectral' in nature"
HA!
Man, if that doesn't describe most of the CT "evidence" to a tee!
I'm constantly accused of attacking the messenger when some lunatic posts nonsense on these threads.
Attacking the messenger is perfectly valid when the messenger is obviously delusional. Look at the people and ideas that we've seen on this thread alone.
Indian shamans controlling the minds of the populace through telepathy and hypnosis. OK....
Christ visiting the Americas to preach to the Amerinds. Sure...
Ex-con religious nuts trying to hustle up a couple of bucks.
Now newton is folding dollar bills and using rap album covers to prove conspiracy.
MI Complex/Illuminati/Bildenberg Group. Whatever...
It just goes on and on.....
Since I stumbled into this nonsense, I've watched people like Foxx progress from being a semi-rational poster with a few questions, to full blown delusional paranoia. It's only recently that he has become willing to lie in order to support his delusion. It's interesting to watch but kind of sad. I suspect that chronic THC abuse is one of the common denominators with the CT crowd that are not already completely insane.
Anyway, I think this thread is finally hitting the point that the others eventually hit. As legitimate anomalies are addressed rationally, the CT's turn to fantasy and lunacy to support the delusion that they have so much invested in.
This is far and away the best thread that I've seen on the subject. I've learned quite a bit and been greatly entertained.
Sorry I haven't contributed more but it gets tiresome. After awhile, ridicule seems to be the best tool with these people. Sometimes, realizing that they are being laughed at will snap them back into reality.
Working with CSpam to try and change the subject will not make the fact that a secret element of government murdered 3,000 Americans in a strange and impossible seeming series of explosions.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
You forgot to say MORON.
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 01:03 AM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 12:08 AM)
You guys have to read this, It's hysterical!!!
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp2.jpeg
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/telehyp3.jpeg
This guys a total LOON!!! HAHAHA!!!
Wheres HEH!? Heh!
"Evidence that is 'spectral' in nature"
HA!
Man, if that doesn't describe most of the CT "evidence" to a tee!
I'm constantly accused of attacking the messenger when some lunatic posts nonsense on these threads.
Attacking the messenger is perfectly valid when the messenger is obviously delusional. Look at the people and ideas that we've seen on this thread alone.
Indian shamans controlling the minds of the populace through telepathy and hypnosis. OK....
Christ visiting the Americas to preach to the Amerinds. Sure...
Ex-con religious nuts trying to hustle up a couple of bucks.
Now newton is folding dollar bills and using rap album covers to prove conspiracy.
MI Complex/Illuminati/Bildenberg Group. Whatever...
It just goes on and on.....
Since I stumbled into this nonsense, I've watched people like Foxx progress from being a semi-rational poster with a few questions, to full blown delusional paranoia. It's only recently that he has become willing to lie in order to support his delusion. It's interesting to watch but kind of sad. I suspect that chronic THC abuse is one of the common denominators with the CT crowd that are not already completely insane.
Anyway, I think this thread is finally hitting the point that the others eventually hit. As legitimate anomalies are addressed rationally, the CT's turn to fantasy and lunacy to support the delusion that they have so much invested in.
This is far and away the best thread that I've seen on the subject. I've learned quite a bit and been greatly entertained.
Sorry I haven't contributed more but it gets tiresome. After awhile, ridicule seems to be the best tool with these people. Sometimes, realizing that they are being laughed at will snap them back into reality.
Working with CSpam to try and change the subject will not make the fact that a secret element of government murdered 3,000 Americans in a strange and impossible seeming series of explosions.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
Interesting article newton.
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/fireSTthermite01.html
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
QUOTE
Because nanometal provides a higher concentration of energy while requiring fewer raw materials, the overall cost of these weapons would drop, according to Kevin Walter, vice president of technical business development at nanometals manufacturer Nanoscale Technologies.
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/fireSTthermite01.html
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 01:41 AM)
Interesting article newton.
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
From what I understand. There would be C4 between the floor panel corrugations and the concrete. What does C4 look like when its burning?
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
QUOTE
Because nanometal provides a higher concentration of energy while requiring fewer raw materials, the overall cost of these weapons would drop, according to Kevin Walter, vice president of technical business development at nanometals manufacturer Nanoscale Technologies.
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
From what I understand. There would be C4 between the floor panel corrugations and the concrete. What does C4 look like when its burning?
QUOTE (newton+Mar 16 2006, 01:09 AM)
mind control PATENTS(look'em up, if you think it's TINFOIL HAT crap)
more on mind control using HAARP...numbskull?
MORON mind control...(heh)....yes, master
"A new class of weapons, based on electromagnetic fields, has been added to the muscles of the military organism. The C3I [Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence] doctrine is still growing and expanding. It would appear that the military may yet be able to completely control the minds of the civilian population."7
The targeting of civilian populations by the military is a significant departure from its history. In the past, the military has used persuasion through real information rather than using deliberate deception and mind manipulation to win populations over.
"A decoy and deception concept presently being considered is to remotely create the perception of noise in the heads of personnel by exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves. When people are illuminated with properly modulated low power microwaves the sensation is reported as a buzzing, clicking, or hissing which seems to originate (regardless of the person's position in the field) within or just behind the head. The phenomena occurs [sic] at average power densities as low as microwatts per square centimeter with carrier frequencies from 0.4 to 3.0 GHz. By proper choice of pulse characteristics, intelligible speech may be created. Before this technique may be extended and used for military applications, an understanding of the basic principles must be developed. Such an understanding is not only required to optimize the use of the concept for camouflage, decoy and deception operations but is required to properly assess safety factors of such microwave exposure."8
Actual testing of certain systems has proven "that movements, sensations, emotions, desires, ideas, and a variety of psychological phenomena may be induced, inhibited, or modified by electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain. These facts have changed the classical philosophical concept that the mind was beyond experimental reach."
source, nexus magazine
You spend entirely to much time on conspiracy web sites...
Living in NY I learned at a very young age that people can use 99% truth to fabricate 100% lies. (Faux) They do it in religion, politics and conspiracy sites. That's why I always double check everything and wasn't convinced with Colin Powell's UN presentation at the time. You'll learn...
more on mind control using HAARP...numbskull?
MORON mind control...(heh)....yes, master
"A new class of weapons, based on electromagnetic fields, has been added to the muscles of the military organism. The C3I [Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence] doctrine is still growing and expanding. It would appear that the military may yet be able to completely control the minds of the civilian population."7
The targeting of civilian populations by the military is a significant departure from its history. In the past, the military has used persuasion through real information rather than using deliberate deception and mind manipulation to win populations over.
"A decoy and deception concept presently being considered is to remotely create the perception of noise in the heads of personnel by exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves. When people are illuminated with properly modulated low power microwaves the sensation is reported as a buzzing, clicking, or hissing which seems to originate (regardless of the person's position in the field) within or just behind the head. The phenomena occurs [sic] at average power densities as low as microwatts per square centimeter with carrier frequencies from 0.4 to 3.0 GHz. By proper choice of pulse characteristics, intelligible speech may be created. Before this technique may be extended and used for military applications, an understanding of the basic principles must be developed. Such an understanding is not only required to optimize the use of the concept for camouflage, decoy and deception operations but is required to properly assess safety factors of such microwave exposure."8
Actual testing of certain systems has proven "that movements, sensations, emotions, desires, ideas, and a variety of psychological phenomena may be induced, inhibited, or modified by electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain. These facts have changed the classical philosophical concept that the mind was beyond experimental reach."
source, nexus magazine
You spend entirely to much time on conspiracy web sites...
Living in NY I learned at a very young age that people can use 99% truth to fabricate 100% lies. (Faux) They do it in religion, politics and conspiracy sites. That's why I always double check everything and wasn't convinced with Colin Powell's UN presentation at the time. You'll learn...
QUOTE (replicant+Mar 16 2006, 01:38 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 15 2006, 10:53 PM)
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 15 2006, 05:59 PM)
CSpam, arthur, YID, RC,
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
You forgot to say MORON.
May I arthur?
Ehem... MORON..
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Ever been to a Gallagher performance??
You spend entirely to much time on conspiracy web sites...
Living in NY I learned at a very young age that people can use 99% truth to fabricate 100% lies. (Faux) They do it in religion, politics and conspiracy sites. That's why I always double check everything and wasn't convinced with Colin Powell's UN presentation at the time. You'll learn...
well then, double check this....
US PATENT --4,717,343 --METHOD OF CHANGING A PERSON'S BEHAVIOR
US PATENT 5,270,800 --SUBLIMINAL MESSAGE GENERATOR
US PATENT 5,123,899 --METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ALTERING CONSCIOUSNESS
US PATENT 4,877,027--HEARING SYSTEM
US PATENT 6,011,991--COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD INCLUDING BRAIN WAVE ANALYSIS AND/OR USE OF BRAIN ACTIVITY
US PATENT 3,951,134 - APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REMOTELY MONITORING AND ALTERING BRAIN WAVES
US PATENT 5,159,703 - SILENT SUBLIMINAL PRESENTATION SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,507,291- METHOD AND AN ASSOCIATED APPARATUS FOR REMOTELY DETERMINING INFORMATION AS TO A PERSON'S EMOTIONAL STATE
i wonder what's in the 'patent pending' box?
US PATENT 5,539,705 - ULTRASONIC SPEECH TRANSLATOR AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,629,678 - PERSONAL TRACKING AND RECOVERY SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,760,692 - INTRA-ORAL TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 5,905,461 - GLOBAL POSITIONING SATELLITE TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 5,935,054 - MAGNETIC EXCITATION OF SENSORY RESONANCES
US PATENT 5,952,600 -ENGINE DISABLING WEAPON
US PATENT 6,006,188 - SPEECH SIGNAL PROCESSING FOR DETERMINING PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS USING A KNOWLEDGE BASE
US PATENT 6,014,080 - BODY WORN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 6,017,302 - SUBLIMINAL ACOUSTIC MANIPULATION OF NERVOUS SYSTEMS
US PATENT 6,051,594 - METHODS AND FORMULATIONS FOR MODULATING THE HUMAN SEXUAL RESPONSE
US PATENT 6,052,336 - APPARATUS AND METHOD OF BROADCASTING AUDIBLE SOUND USING ULTRASONIC SOUND AS A CARRIER
The real paper I want to see come from you guys is 'How I rationalized becoming a Coward and a Traitor' or 'How I sleep at night after watching US troops taking sniper rounds to the throat on TV' or even 'Why I feel good about blaming the 'evil sandniggas' for something they didn't do and why they should die.'
Really what's the justification? Someone have a picture of you getting drilled by a goat? Volvo payment? Bigot?
I'd really be interested to find out why a person sells his family out like this. Start the thread and I'll be reading.
Translation,
I have no rational argument to make so I thought I'd throw out some insults instead.
Arthur
You forgot to say MORON.
May I arthur?
Ehem... MORON..
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 01:40 AM)
Working with CSpam to try and change the subject will not make the fact that a secret element of government murdered 3,000 Americans in a strange and impossible seeming series of explosions.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
Doing to Bush what he did in the UN doesn't make those people come back. Creating a laughable theory to split the democratic party isn't helping those families. Repeating nonsense on this thread doesn't do a damn thing. Insulting me by calling me CSpam doesn't do a damn thing to help those people. What WILL help those people is staying away from this issue completely because nobody takes a loon seriously.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
Doing to Bush what he did in the UN doesn't make those people come back. Creating a laughable theory to split the democratic party isn't helping those families. Repeating nonsense on this thread doesn't do a damn thing. Insulting me by calling me CSpam doesn't do a damn thing to help those people. What WILL help those people is staying away from this issue completely because nobody takes a loon seriously.
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 01:41 AM)
Interesting article newton.
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/fireSTthermite01.html
Ooooh, a metal rectangle... The flames looks like the Virgin Mary to me...
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001. When you consider the potential of this technology it is amazing. The Superthermite is already in production and the next step (if it hasn't already been accomplished in the black holes of hell) is the development of suit-case nukes... why do I get the feeling '007' doesn't already have a few? Check it out...
QUOTE
Because nanometal provides a higher concentration of energy while requiring fewer raw materials, the overall cost of these weapons would drop, according to Kevin Walter, vice president of technical business development at nanometals manufacturer Nanoscale Technologies.
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
"You get a little better bang for your buck," Walter says.
The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.
Nanotechnology "could completely change the face of weaponry," according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane's Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing "mini-nuke" devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.
Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size "they blur the line with conventional weapons," Oppenheimer says.
The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is "politically contentious" because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.
The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.
"(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control," Oppenheimer says. "Everything gets more dangerous."
{Page 2}
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p1.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/w...105,318,p2.html
Even if the nuke suit-case bombs are as yet unavailable, the superthermite bomb can already be placed in a suitcase, or even much smaller sized packages.
Does this anomaly (which NIST has already concluded is a "metal fire") appear to have an unusual rectangular shape? Doesn't really look like it could be a magnesium wheel on fire to me.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/040thermZM.jpg
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/fireSTthermite01.html
Ooooh, a metal rectangle... The flames looks like the Virgin Mary to me...
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 01:40 AM)
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Ever been to a Gallagher performance??
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 01:55 AM)
You spend entirely to much time on conspiracy web sites...
Living in NY I learned at a very young age that people can use 99% truth to fabricate 100% lies. (Faux) They do it in religion, politics and conspiracy sites. That's why I always double check everything and wasn't convinced with Colin Powell's UN presentation at the time. You'll learn...
well then, double check this....
US PATENT --4,717,343 --METHOD OF CHANGING A PERSON'S BEHAVIOR
US PATENT 5,270,800 --SUBLIMINAL MESSAGE GENERATOR
US PATENT 5,123,899 --METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ALTERING CONSCIOUSNESS
US PATENT 4,877,027--HEARING SYSTEM
US PATENT 6,011,991--COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD INCLUDING BRAIN WAVE ANALYSIS AND/OR USE OF BRAIN ACTIVITY
US PATENT 3,951,134 - APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REMOTELY MONITORING AND ALTERING BRAIN WAVES
US PATENT 5,159,703 - SILENT SUBLIMINAL PRESENTATION SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,507,291- METHOD AND AN ASSOCIATED APPARATUS FOR REMOTELY DETERMINING INFORMATION AS TO A PERSON'S EMOTIONAL STATE
i wonder what's in the 'patent pending' box?
US PATENT 5,539,705 - ULTRASONIC SPEECH TRANSLATOR AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,629,678 - PERSONAL TRACKING AND RECOVERY SYSTEM
US PATENT 5,760,692 - INTRA-ORAL TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 5,905,461 - GLOBAL POSITIONING SATELLITE TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 5,935,054 - MAGNETIC EXCITATION OF SENSORY RESONANCES
US PATENT 5,952,600 -ENGINE DISABLING WEAPON
US PATENT 6,006,188 - SPEECH SIGNAL PROCESSING FOR DETERMINING PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS USING A KNOWLEDGE BASE
US PATENT 6,014,080 - BODY WORN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE TRACKING DEVICE
US PATENT 6,017,302 - SUBLIMINAL ACOUSTIC MANIPULATION OF NERVOUS SYSTEMS
US PATENT 6,051,594 - METHODS AND FORMULATIONS FOR MODULATING THE HUMAN SEXUAL RESPONSE
US PATENT 6,052,336 - APPARATUS AND METHOD OF BROADCASTING AUDIBLE SOUND USING ULTRASONIC SOUND AS A CARRIER
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 02:04 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 01:40 AM)
Working with CSpam to try and change the subject will not make the fact that a secret element of government murdered 3,000 Americans in a strange and impossible seeming series of explosions.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
Doing to Bush what he did in the UN doesn't make those people come back. Creating a laughable theory to split the democratic party isn't helping those families. Repeating nonsense on this thread doesn't do a damn thing. Insulting me by calling me CSpam doesn't do a damn thing to help those people. What WILL help those people is staying away from this issue completely because nobody takes a loon seriously.
This from a supporter of the AIR CORE as if the towers had no core. If that is not the case, back up your assertion that there were 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns inside the core area. If they existed they would be seen in all 3 images below.
You will be surprised at how much help the truth provides.
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Ever been to a Gallagher performance??
Coastal, have you sent your findings to the NIST? I think you really got something there. Your research is really coming together nicely.
Notice the concrete hammer?
I think it's conclusive, don't you?
Notice the concrete hammer?
I think it's conclusive, don't you?
ARGHH!!
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Spend a moment considering what the loved ones of those who died need for closure. Consider that we need our rights and freedoms to protect our childrens futures. Consider the lie you are supporting threatens all we cherish.
EYEWITNESS AT WTC
For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.
Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.
A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.
Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness
Doing to Bush what he did in the UN doesn't make those people come back. Creating a laughable theory to split the democratic party isn't helping those families. Repeating nonsense on this thread doesn't do a damn thing. Insulting me by calling me CSpam doesn't do a damn thing to help those people. What WILL help those people is staying away from this issue completely because nobody takes a loon seriously.
This from a supporter of the AIR CORE as if the towers had no core. If that is not the case, back up your assertion that there were 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns inside the core area. If they existed they would be seen in all 3 images below.
You will be surprised at how much help the truth provides.
The CT'ers are now posting total fantasy.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 02:08 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 01:40 AM)
Interesting that you would sacrifice your credibility to try and marginalize a person of the stature you assign to me rather than discuss why that building has plumes of high velocity concrete jetting up from it.
Ever been to a Gallagher performance??
Coastal, have you sent your findings to the NIST? I think you really got something there. Your research is really coming together nicely.
Notice the concrete hammer?
I think it's conclusive, don't you?
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 16 2006, 02:15 AM)
The CT'ers are now posting total fantasy.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
You'll be missed but I don't blame you. Believe me, I know the amount of time this little hobby takes.
You've shown great patience and persistence and I've learned a lot from your posts.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
You'll be missed but I don't blame you. Believe me, I know the amount of time this little hobby takes.
You've shown great patience and persistence and I've learned a lot from your posts.
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 16 2006, 02:15 AM)
The CT'ers are now posting total fantasy.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Don't worry Arthur, I'll hold it down. As Secular proves there are still people who are undecided and could be swayed by these lies.
Later
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Don't worry Arthur, I'll hold it down. As Secular proves there are still people who are undecided and could be swayed by these lies.
Later
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 AM)
Notice the concrete hammer?
I think it's conclusive, don't you?
ARGHH!!
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 01:41 AM)
Interesting article newton.
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001.
Hey Foxx!!
Remember that stock I gave you last year??
The one that you scoffed at that went up 350% in a couple of months......
.....Nanotech.
(cue twilight zone music.)
Amazing stuff is available to black opts today. Did you read the article on Superthermite?
Apparently the military was working on this nanotechnology for weaponry long before 2001.
Hey Foxx!!
Remember that stock I gave you last year??
The one that you scoffed at that went up 350% in a couple of months......
.....Nanotech.
(cue twilight zone music.)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 02:24 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 16 2006, 02:15 AM)
The CT'ers are now posting total fantasy.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Don't worry Arthur, I'll hold it down. As Secular proves there are still people who are undecided and could be swayed by these lies.
Later
Hi CS. Arthur's right. For my part I've been neglecting the real physics topics (and especially the Cosmology Special Project) for far too long. This thread seems to have morphed into nothing but a political/mystical/conspiracy slanging match in the absence of any real objective physics/science relevant to the impact/fire/collapse physics/chemistry etc.
I too, as a Physorg member before this farce of a thread came along, feel that it is no longer necessary to point out the bleedin' obvious to each and every newbie who thinks they have something momentous but which has already been covered more than once. It seems that stage has been reached where newbies should be directed to read through the thread before posting something 'old' as 'new'....if only so you won't then be forced to repeat-post the same answers of many pages back, heh?
Why is it that all repetition by CTers is OK, but NOT so for YOU answering those repetitions? Must be a "CTer" thiung, I guess.
Anyhow, good luck CS! I'll see you on the real physics threads from time to time, I hope; because I've enjoyed your own posts here. Heh!
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
.
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
Well well well, Coastal. And I was only 'funnin'-hypothesising....as I haven't done the 'rounds' of those sites like you guys (on both 'sides') seem to have done.
BTW, Ive heard mention once or twice (by someone here many pages back) of "ApolloHoax" forum/site (I think that was it).
Can you or anyone else tell me the 'state of play' in THAT forum/conspiracy-theory, please?....as I can't easily access/navigate all those CTer/Hoax/UFO sites like all you lucky b*st*rds can, hehehe. Thanks.
RC.
.
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
My guess would be that it depends on the type and mixture of thermite and the type of Magnesium alloy. I found an interesting post when looking for thermite Burn Rate Modifiers:
“I 've seen a thermite paste used before, it basically adheres the thermite to a surface that will be burned through, like a steel plate. (the place I saw it used was cutting through the hull of a boat) I'm curious what medium was used for the paste.”
Thermite paste would be the answer for cutting on a vertical surface .
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
as i was literally skipping through reality check's extreme brilliance, i stopped upon this very interesting post.
and i thought to myself, (didn't shnibby the clown promise to leave MULTIPLE times?) and then i thought, "maybe my mosquitio net(frank martini, DISAPPEARED 911, 2001) analogy doesn't account for preplanted explosives?".
watch out, because toner cartridges may suddenly turn into thermobaric termites in a hot crunchy goodness chaos, while completely ignoring ART('cause stickin' together's what good cartridges do) from the month's and years before the event(something they should have done).
maybe frank martini's still alive?
coup nows?
(i've just edited this to include a space. while i'm here, i would like to admit to doing vogon poetry while pounding back cheep beer. cheers.)
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Don't worry Arthur, I'll hold it down. As Secular proves there are still people who are undecided and could be swayed by these lies.
Later
Hi CS. Arthur's right. For my part I've been neglecting the real physics topics (and especially the Cosmology Special Project) for far too long. This thread seems to have morphed into nothing but a political/mystical/conspiracy slanging match in the absence of any real objective physics/science relevant to the impact/fire/collapse physics/chemistry etc.
I too, as a Physorg member before this farce of a thread came along, feel that it is no longer necessary to point out the bleedin' obvious to each and every newbie who thinks they have something momentous but which has already been covered more than once. It seems that stage has been reached where newbies should be directed to read through the thread before posting something 'old' as 'new'....if only so you won't then be forced to repeat-post the same answers of many pages back, heh?
Why is it that all repetition by CTers is OK, but NOT so for YOU answering those repetitions? Must be a "CTer" thiung, I guess.
Anyhow, good luck CS! I'll see you on the real physics threads from time to time, I hope; because I've enjoyed your own posts here. Heh!
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
.
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 16 2006, 02:46 AM)
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 02:52 AM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 16 2006, 02:46 AM)
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
Well well well, Coastal. And I was only 'funnin'-hypothesising....as I haven't done the 'rounds' of those sites like you guys (on both 'sides') seem to have done.
BTW, Ive heard mention once or twice (by someone here many pages back) of "ApolloHoax" forum/site (I think that was it).
Can you or anyone else tell me the 'state of play' in THAT forum/conspiracy-theory, please?....as I can't easily access/navigate all those CTer/Hoax/UFO sites like all you lucky b*st*rds can, hehehe. Thanks.
RC.
.
I'm starting to think you guys are right. Maybe we should just sit back and watch them implode further.
HEEEEEEEHH!!!!!!!!!
HEEEEEEEHH!!!!!!!!!
well. it's official.
the "anti-CT" platoon has identified the US patent office as a source of "kook disinfo".
that's a wrap folks.
they have also identified the reality that information can not only travel backwards in time, but can 'imprint' on the consciousness of artists.
this thread is getting very educational.
here's an idea, all you honourable protectors of truth who defend the government's right to hide everything from joe public. let this thread die, then. go away. leave it alone.
(here's a list, the honour roll, as it were, just to be clear:
common sense and his big band of sock puppets
reality check(no offence, mate)
arthur
coastal
yes it did)
it's like you're hanging out in an insane asylum, trying to explain to complete wigouts how crazy they are. okay, leave us alone to talk amongst ourselves. i dare you.
the "anti-CT" platoon has identified the US patent office as a source of "kook disinfo".
that's a wrap folks.
they have also identified the reality that information can not only travel backwards in time, but can 'imprint' on the consciousness of artists.
this thread is getting very educational.
here's an idea, all you honourable protectors of truth who defend the government's right to hide everything from joe public. let this thread die, then. go away. leave it alone.
(here's a list, the honour roll, as it were, just to be clear:
common sense and his big band of sock puppets
reality check(no offence, mate)
arthur
coastal
yes it did)
it's like you're hanging out in an insane asylum, trying to explain to complete wigouts how crazy they are. okay, leave us alone to talk amongst ourselves. i dare you.
How do they make Nanoaluminum:
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
Deleted Post
QUOTE (newton+Mar 16 2006, 03:10 AM)
well. it's official.
the "anti-CT" platoon has identified the US patent office as a source of "kook disinfo".
that's a wrap folks.
they have also identified the reality that information can not only travel backwards in time, but can 'imprint' on the consciousness of artists.
this thread is getting very educational.
here's an idea, all you honourable protectors of truth who defend the government's right to hide everything from joe public. let this thread die, then. go away. leave it alone.
(here's a list, the honour roll, as it were, just to be clear:
common sense and his big band of sock puppets
reality check(no offence, mate)
arthur
coastal
yes it did)
it's like you're hanging out in an insane asylum, trying to explain to complete wigouts how crazy they are. okay, leave us alone to talk amongst ourselves. i dare you.
Hi newt! I could say "make up your mind(s)". Wasn't it not long ago that you or some other Cters chastised and questioned the motives of non-CTers because they wasted so much time in this thread "talking to idiots"? And now that they wish to stop doing so you seem to be upset about it and "dare" them to stop....after they already decided to stop?
What's your CT "take" on the fact that I and others want to stop talking to CTer "idiots"? Another clever reverse-psychology "psy-opt conspiracy" tactic, perhaps?
I for one am perfectly prepared to leave this thread alone now (because it has run its course of "Physics" input) unless forced to return because a CTer wishes it; by addressing a post to me or otherwise referring to me by name, thus requiring a response. Does all this suit your "dare" conditions, mate?
If I don't 'speak' with you again, it's been interesting "corresponding/discussing" with you, newton! Cheers and good luck in your reality! (sincerely).
Bye.
RealityCheck.
the "anti-CT" platoon has identified the US patent office as a source of "kook disinfo".
that's a wrap folks.
they have also identified the reality that information can not only travel backwards in time, but can 'imprint' on the consciousness of artists.
this thread is getting very educational.
here's an idea, all you honourable protectors of truth who defend the government's right to hide everything from joe public. let this thread die, then. go away. leave it alone.
(here's a list, the honour roll, as it were, just to be clear:
common sense and his big band of sock puppets
reality check(no offence, mate)
arthur
coastal
yes it did)
it's like you're hanging out in an insane asylum, trying to explain to complete wigouts how crazy they are. okay, leave us alone to talk amongst ourselves. i dare you.
Hi newt! I could say "make up your mind(s)". Wasn't it not long ago that you or some other Cters chastised and questioned the motives of non-CTers because they wasted so much time in this thread "talking to idiots"? And now that they wish to stop doing so you seem to be upset about it and "dare" them to stop....after they already decided to stop?
What's your CT "take" on the fact that I and others want to stop talking to CTer "idiots"? Another clever reverse-psychology "psy-opt conspiracy" tactic, perhaps?
I for one am perfectly prepared to leave this thread alone now (because it has run its course of "Physics" input) unless forced to return because a CTer wishes it; by addressing a post to me or otherwise referring to me by name, thus requiring a response. Does all this suit your "dare" conditions, mate?
If I don't 'speak' with you again, it's been interesting "corresponding/discussing" with you, newton! Cheers and good luck in your reality! (sincerely).
Bye.
RealityCheck.
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 05:48 PM)
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
QUOTE (Common Sense+Mar 16 2006, 03:10 AM)
I'm starting to think you guys are right. Maybe we should just sit back and watch them implode further.
HEEEEEEEHH!!!!!!!!!
Truly, I wonder what WOULD happen to these people if they had no-one to build up their paranoid conspiracies against? Would they just sit around mumbling to themselves until some poor sucker who thinks he's stumbled on a real physics thread turns up all unsuspecting and gets lambasted with all their pent-up "shill", Schneibster", "murderer" and "obfuscator" rants before they knew what hit them? I pity that next 'newbie' non-CTer!
CS. Please accept this invitation to visit the Cosmology Special Project TOE and associated threads whenever you feel you want to contribute. I shall be resuming in-depth activity there again since I have enough time for either this thread or real physics threads...and the time has come for me to again choose real physics threads to spend my time on, hehehe. Cheers!.....and see ya round, CS!
PS: I have also wound down my participation in the creation/evolution threads...again, the discussions there seem to have reached a point of "agree to disagree", hehehe. Neither I nor any other atheist/agnostic there before the religion 'push' came along have been 'converted'/'saved' by the INTELLIGENT DESIGN and CREATIONIST "SCIENCE" proselytisers; and they appear to have given up trying to do so; and those that remain are really just too reasonable and polite and respectful to REALLY 'have a go at' or to 'unsettle' their faith too much...so it looks like its 'back to physics pure' for me! No more conspiracy/religion distractions for a while, I hope, hehehe. Toodles, mate.
RC.
.
HEEEEEEEHH!!!!!!!!!
Truly, I wonder what WOULD happen to these people if they had no-one to build up their paranoid conspiracies against? Would they just sit around mumbling to themselves until some poor sucker who thinks he's stumbled on a real physics thread turns up all unsuspecting and gets lambasted with all their pent-up "shill", Schneibster", "murderer" and "obfuscator" rants before they knew what hit them? I pity that next 'newbie' non-CTer!
CS. Please accept this invitation to visit the Cosmology Special Project TOE and associated threads whenever you feel you want to contribute. I shall be resuming in-depth activity there again since I have enough time for either this thread or real physics threads...and the time has come for me to again choose real physics threads to spend my time on, hehehe. Cheers!.....and see ya round, CS!
PS: I have also wound down my participation in the creation/evolution threads...again, the discussions there seem to have reached a point of "agree to disagree", hehehe. Neither I nor any other atheist/agnostic there before the religion 'push' came along have been 'converted'/'saved' by the INTELLIGENT DESIGN and CREATIONIST "SCIENCE" proselytisers; and they appear to have given up trying to do so; and those that remain are really just too reasonable and polite and respectful to REALLY 'have a go at' or to 'unsettle' their faith too much...so it looks like its 'back to physics pure' for me! No more conspiracy/religion distractions for a while, I hope, hehehe. Toodles, mate.
RC.
.
Reality Check,
I would like to clarify a few things from my point of view. I have not read the entire thread, I doubt that is himanly possible, but I did read a large continuous part of it at the beginning.
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were couteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
2) The main thrust of the original thread was the proposition that the WTC towers collapsed too rapidly to be explained by sequential structural failure. The argument was presented by Andrew in the form of a powerpoint presentation.
3) Pretty soon the thread degraded into name calling from both sides. From time to time however there has been some interesting discussion. I found some of your theories interesting even if I don't agree with them. I'm also skeptical of a number of CT propositions.
4) The point of this thread however is not to prove exactly what happened and the mechanism by which that was achieved. These are things we can only speculate on. The point is to evaulate scientifically what we DO know, and see if that matches with the Oficial NIST/FEMA Government story. One of the few pieces of solid information we have is the collapse duration, and other visual clues such as the symmetrical nature of the collapses.
5) These simple, humble facts, are there for all to see, and they don't fit very well at all with the notion that essentiall chaotic forces were at work. There is evidence of "intelligent design" in this event. But I'm not invoking GOD here ... that would be your call, since you deny that humans engineered the collapses.
6) The debate will continue whether you go or not. Most of the people posting here do so because they are passionate about finding out the truth. That will continue.
7) I'm not clear in my mind about your own motives in posting here. Perhaps you are as you say, a sincere maverick skeptic who operates according to his inner principles, but I think your hypotheses about various events have a strained and convoluted logic which seems to be driven by a priori assumptions. In particular, your theories regarding the behaviour jet fuel in elevator shafts strike me as ridiculous, yet you seem intelligent in other ways. This gives the impression that you are an "agent" of some kind, perhaps unwitting. I dunno ...
cheers
(: hereward
I would like to clarify a few things from my point of view. I have not read the entire thread, I doubt that is himanly possible, but I did read a large continuous part of it at the beginning.
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were couteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
2) The main thrust of the original thread was the proposition that the WTC towers collapsed too rapidly to be explained by sequential structural failure. The argument was presented by Andrew in the form of a powerpoint presentation.
3) Pretty soon the thread degraded into name calling from both sides. From time to time however there has been some interesting discussion. I found some of your theories interesting even if I don't agree with them. I'm also skeptical of a number of CT propositions.
4) The point of this thread however is not to prove exactly what happened and the mechanism by which that was achieved. These are things we can only speculate on. The point is to evaulate scientifically what we DO know, and see if that matches with the Oficial NIST/FEMA Government story. One of the few pieces of solid information we have is the collapse duration, and other visual clues such as the symmetrical nature of the collapses.
5) These simple, humble facts, are there for all to see, and they don't fit very well at all with the notion that essentiall chaotic forces were at work. There is evidence of "intelligent design" in this event. But I'm not invoking GOD here ... that would be your call, since you deny that humans engineered the collapses.
6) The debate will continue whether you go or not. Most of the people posting here do so because they are passionate about finding out the truth. That will continue.
7) I'm not clear in my mind about your own motives in posting here. Perhaps you are as you say, a sincere maverick skeptic who operates according to his inner principles, but I think your hypotheses about various events have a strained and convoluted logic which seems to be driven by a priori assumptions. In particular, your theories regarding the behaviour jet fuel in elevator shafts strike me as ridiculous, yet you seem intelligent in other ways. This gives the impression that you are an "agent" of some kind, perhaps unwitting. I dunno ...
cheers
(: hereward
QUOTE (hereward+Mar 16 2006, 04:35 AM)
Reality Check,
I would like to clarify a few things from my point of view. I have not read the entire thread, I doubt that is himanly possible, but I did read a large continuous part of it at the beginning.
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were couteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
2) The main thrust of the original thread was the proposition that the WTC towers collapsed too rapidly to be explained by sequential structural failure. The argument was presented by Andrew in the form of a powerpoint presentation.
3) Pretty soon the thread degraded into name calling from both sides. From time to time however there has been some interesting discussion. I found some of your theories interesting even if I don't agree with them. I'm also skeptical of a number of CT propositions.
4) The point of this thread however is not to prove exactly what happened and the mechanism by which that was achieved. These are things we can only speculate on. The point is to evaulate scientifically what we DO know, and see if that matches with the Oficial NIST/FEMA Government story. One of the few pieces of solid information we have is the collapse duration, and other visual clues such as the symmetrical nature of the collapses.
5) These simple, humble facts, are there for all to see, and they don't fit very well at all with the notion that essentiall chaotic forces were at work. There is evidence of "intelligent design" in this event. But I'm not invoking GOD here ... that would be your call, since you deny that humans engineered the collapses.
6) The debate will continue whether you go or not. Most of the people posting here do so because they are passionate about finding out the truth. That will continue.
7) I'm not clear in my mind about your own motives in posting here. Perhaps you are as you say, a sincere maverick skeptic who operates according to his inner principles, but I think your hypotheses about various events have a strained and convoluted logic which seems to be driven by a priori assumptions. In particular, your theories regarding the behaviour jet fuel in elevator shafts strike me as ridiculous, yet you seem intelligent in other ways. This gives the impression that you are an "agent" of some kind, perhaps unwitting. I dunno ...
cheers
(: hereward
Hi hereward. Believe it or not, YOU are ONE person I still have respect for, and shall miss most (and that has nothing to do with the fact you're an Aussie, hehehe).
However, knowing NOW all the faults/abuses of position/trust that Jones et al are guilty of, I TOO have to think of YOU (as you do of me) as an 'unwitting agent' for THEIR scams and/or studied incompetence.
As to the thread(s), I strongly suggest that IF you really are 'genuine' and 'dedicated' to balanced information/debate, you will find the time to peruse the whole of these thread more than once....for only then can you get a proper perspective about the CTers and non-Cters who have posted here.
Speaking of which, NO-ONE has yet refuted the 'Basic Physics' posted by Schneibster re the 'fall' time and the 'fire/energy' available. And whether you think the jet-fuel-air down/up the shafts is plausible or not, you must allow that the planes exploded in the building, and sustained black smoke thereafter indicated excess-fuel fires starting all over the place. Moreover, if the jetfuel explosions drove some unburnt fuel out the windows to burn as 'fireballs' as they 'expanded' and 'mixed' with ambient air out there, then what's so incredible about some unburnt fuel being forced up/down the impact-sheared shafts/conduits etc......also to mix with the air in there and 'explode' into fireballs while driven at MUCH HIGHER VELOCITIES because they are being forced along 'enclosed channels' rather than free atmosphere outside the windows (you know of the fluid dynamics principles which dictate the conversion of pressure to velocity in going from wider to tighter and tighter spaces/channels?..eg, Venturi Effect etc.).
Anyway, all I've tried to do was my 'self-appointed' task as "RealityCheck"...a 'function' I had here at Physorg long before these threads came along. I gladly and humbly accept whatever criticism you may have of the 'adequacy' of my 'performance' in that role insofar as these threads go....but I will not take lying down any criticism of the 'independence' of my 'motives' for doing so. But having said that, you and all the others are entitled to your opinions...as long as you know that your opinions have no bearing on whether I sleep at night or not. My conscience is clear....as only the conscience of a TRUE INDEPENDENT OBSERVER can be in the end.
Really, hereward, I wish only the best of luck to you and all genuine truthseekers (of whatever kind). Farewell and good luck in your reality.
BTW: "hereward":....are you any relation to "Hereward the Wake" of anti-Norman-conquest fame? Or is it just that you admire same? Cheers and Toodles, mate!
Your friend in science and reason: RealityCheck.
.
I would like to clarify a few things from my point of view. I have not read the entire thread, I doubt that is himanly possible, but I did read a large continuous part of it at the beginning.
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were couteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
2) The main thrust of the original thread was the proposition that the WTC towers collapsed too rapidly to be explained by sequential structural failure. The argument was presented by Andrew in the form of a powerpoint presentation.
3) Pretty soon the thread degraded into name calling from both sides. From time to time however there has been some interesting discussion. I found some of your theories interesting even if I don't agree with them. I'm also skeptical of a number of CT propositions.
4) The point of this thread however is not to prove exactly what happened and the mechanism by which that was achieved. These are things we can only speculate on. The point is to evaulate scientifically what we DO know, and see if that matches with the Oficial NIST/FEMA Government story. One of the few pieces of solid information we have is the collapse duration, and other visual clues such as the symmetrical nature of the collapses.
5) These simple, humble facts, are there for all to see, and they don't fit very well at all with the notion that essentiall chaotic forces were at work. There is evidence of "intelligent design" in this event. But I'm not invoking GOD here ... that would be your call, since you deny that humans engineered the collapses.
6) The debate will continue whether you go or not. Most of the people posting here do so because they are passionate about finding out the truth. That will continue.
7) I'm not clear in my mind about your own motives in posting here. Perhaps you are as you say, a sincere maverick skeptic who operates according to his inner principles, but I think your hypotheses about various events have a strained and convoluted logic which seems to be driven by a priori assumptions. In particular, your theories regarding the behaviour jet fuel in elevator shafts strike me as ridiculous, yet you seem intelligent in other ways. This gives the impression that you are an "agent" of some kind, perhaps unwitting. I dunno ...
cheers
(: hereward
Hi hereward. Believe it or not, YOU are ONE person I still have respect for, and shall miss most (and that has nothing to do with the fact you're an Aussie, hehehe).
However, knowing NOW all the faults/abuses of position/trust that Jones et al are guilty of, I TOO have to think of YOU (as you do of me) as an 'unwitting agent' for THEIR scams and/or studied incompetence.
As to the thread(s), I strongly suggest that IF you really are 'genuine' and 'dedicated' to balanced information/debate, you will find the time to peruse the whole of these thread more than once....for only then can you get a proper perspective about the CTers and non-Cters who have posted here.
Speaking of which, NO-ONE has yet refuted the 'Basic Physics' posted by Schneibster re the 'fall' time and the 'fire/energy' available. And whether you think the jet-fuel-air down/up the shafts is plausible or not, you must allow that the planes exploded in the building, and sustained black smoke thereafter indicated excess-fuel fires starting all over the place. Moreover, if the jetfuel explosions drove some unburnt fuel out the windows to burn as 'fireballs' as they 'expanded' and 'mixed' with ambient air out there, then what's so incredible about some unburnt fuel being forced up/down the impact-sheared shafts/conduits etc......also to mix with the air in there and 'explode' into fireballs while driven at MUCH HIGHER VELOCITIES because they are being forced along 'enclosed channels' rather than free atmosphere outside the windows (you know of the fluid dynamics principles which dictate the conversion of pressure to velocity in going from wider to tighter and tighter spaces/channels?..eg, Venturi Effect etc.).
Anyway, all I've tried to do was my 'self-appointed' task as "RealityCheck"...a 'function' I had here at Physorg long before these threads came along. I gladly and humbly accept whatever criticism you may have of the 'adequacy' of my 'performance' in that role insofar as these threads go....but I will not take lying down any criticism of the 'independence' of my 'motives' for doing so. But having said that, you and all the others are entitled to your opinions...as long as you know that your opinions have no bearing on whether I sleep at night or not. My conscience is clear....as only the conscience of a TRUE INDEPENDENT OBSERVER can be in the end.
Really, hereward, I wish only the best of luck to you and all genuine truthseekers (of whatever kind). Farewell and good luck in your reality.
BTW: "hereward":....are you any relation to "Hereward the Wake" of anti-Norman-conquest fame? Or is it just that you admire same? Cheers and Toodles, mate!
Your friend in science and reason: RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Mar 16 2006, 03:52 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 05:48 PM)
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 09:14 PM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Mar 16 2006, 03:52 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 05:48 PM)
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
My guess would be that it depends on the type and mixture of thermite and the type of Magnesium alloy. I found an interesting post when looking for thermite Burn Rate Modifiers:
“I 've seen a thermite paste used before, it basically adheres the thermite to a surface that will be burned through, like a steel plate. (the place I saw it used was cutting through the hull of a boat) I'm curious what medium was used for the paste.”
Thermite paste would be the answer for cutting on a vertical surface .
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Mar 16 2006, 03:10 AM)
How do they make Nanoaluminum:
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
Hi reasonwhy. Thanks for that post - finally some intelligent input.
For those of us who are 'aware' that the buildings could NOT have 'Just-Fallen-Down' according to the physics of 'progressive-collapse' the questions presented by gravity-driven collapse supporters are for the most part straw man nonsense and appeals to disbelief that advanced weaponry is available. Usually detractors make wails of incredulity and references to science fiction as 'evidence' that such devices do NOT exist in the arsenals of dark cover miltary-industrial organizations.
They seem to feel that if it is not shown on the nightly news, that the absence of that evidence IS THEREFORE evidence that advanced weaponry such as we have as never heard of DOES NOT EXIST.
In my opinion, this is a true fairy tale belief.
I would admit that the detractors DO have a semi-valid point that (as yet) we can not offer substantive proof that such weaponry was utilized in the destruction of the towers, nevertheless neither can they 'prove' through science or physics that such advanced weaponry was NOT used.
All we have to go on factually is that it is impossible due to the engineering principles of resistance that the buildings could have collapsed as quickly, and symmetrically as they did. Gordon has addressed this more than adequately (to those of us who have any understanding of engineering principles). That is a fact... regardless of the 100's of pages in this thread devoted to 'debunking' free-fall or close to free-fall aspects.
It's not quite scientific or realistic to state simply that free-fall speed is X... so, IF the buildings fell ANY slower, (than if they were falling through thin air), THEN that 'proves' they fell through "progressive or gravity-driven collapse".
Pure bunk.
Anyone who can not fathom that simple fact shouldn't be wasting their time here.
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
Many of us are already well beyond understanding that simple fact and now have progressed to trying to determine a plausible source of energy input which CAN account for such an engineering phenomenom. Jet-fuel and piddly fires can't account for this, as has been proven over and over on this thread.
Anyway getting to that link you provided to the thermobarics... very plausible in my opinion. I followed some of the links from your original link and found that one of the typical effects on humans is damage to lung tissue. It doesn't take much research to find that many of the initial burn patients from the ground floors suffered just that tell-tale sign.
The link to Janes Intelligence Group turned up a very interesting video of the damage a simple Russian shoulder fired thermobaric weapon could do when employed against a building...
the RPO-A Schmel explosion... shows great similarity to the lateral (and upwards trajectories) of debris ejected from the WTC towers from such a blast (not to mention the centre column of smoke lingering AFTER the explosion)...
http://warfare.ru/?catid=278&linkid=1847&video=true
Again, thanks for the link and input. Most of us (who are here to discuss the scientific aspects of these 'collapses'), appreciate the efforts put in to contribute valid information.
100 pages of discussing Larrys 'pull-it' statement is just strawman stuff that's just a waste of bandwidth and goes no-where.
Cheers... (mate)
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
Hi reasonwhy. Thanks for that post - finally some intelligent input.
For those of us who are 'aware' that the buildings could NOT have 'Just-Fallen-Down' according to the physics of 'progressive-collapse' the questions presented by gravity-driven collapse supporters are for the most part straw man nonsense and appeals to disbelief that advanced weaponry is available. Usually detractors make wails of incredulity and references to science fiction as 'evidence' that such devices do NOT exist in the arsenals of dark cover miltary-industrial organizations.
They seem to feel that if it is not shown on the nightly news, that the absence of that evidence IS THEREFORE evidence that advanced weaponry such as we have as never heard of DOES NOT EXIST.
In my opinion, this is a true fairy tale belief.
I would admit that the detractors DO have a semi-valid point that (as yet) we can not offer substantive proof that such weaponry was utilized in the destruction of the towers, nevertheless neither can they 'prove' through science or physics that such advanced weaponry was NOT used.
All we have to go on factually is that it is impossible due to the engineering principles of resistance that the buildings could have collapsed as quickly, and symmetrically as they did. Gordon has addressed this more than adequately (to those of us who have any understanding of engineering principles). That is a fact... regardless of the 100's of pages in this thread devoted to 'debunking' free-fall or close to free-fall aspects.
It's not quite scientific or realistic to state simply that free-fall speed is X... so, IF the buildings fell ANY slower, (than if they were falling through thin air), THEN that 'proves' they fell through "progressive or gravity-driven collapse".
Pure bunk.
Anyone who can not fathom that simple fact shouldn't be wasting their time here.
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
Many of us are already well beyond understanding that simple fact and now have progressed to trying to determine a plausible source of energy input which CAN account for such an engineering phenomenom. Jet-fuel and piddly fires can't account for this, as has been proven over and over on this thread.
Anyway getting to that link you provided to the thermobarics... very plausible in my opinion. I followed some of the links from your original link and found that one of the typical effects on humans is damage to lung tissue. It doesn't take much research to find that many of the initial burn patients from the ground floors suffered just that tell-tale sign.
The link to Janes Intelligence Group turned up a very interesting video of the damage a simple Russian shoulder fired thermobaric weapon could do when employed against a building...
the RPO-A Schmel explosion... shows great similarity to the lateral (and upwards trajectories) of debris ejected from the WTC towers from such a blast (not to mention the centre column of smoke lingering AFTER the explosion)...
http://warfare.ru/?catid=278&linkid=1847&video=true
Again, thanks for the link and input. Most of us (who are here to discuss the scientific aspects of these 'collapses'), appreciate the efforts put in to contribute valid information.
100 pages of discussing Larrys 'pull-it' statement is just strawman stuff that's just a waste of bandwidth and goes no-where.
Cheers... (mate)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 05:14 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Mar 16 2006, 03:52 AM)
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 15 2006, 05:48 PM)
Niether thermite or magnesium would burn for the length of time indicated.
Christophera,
I am curious why you think they could not burn for this length of time?
Thermite burns nearly as fast as high explosives expands and magnesium burns very quickly as well.
At 1738 kilos per cubic meter, the wheels might weigh 150 kilos, about 1 10th of a cubic meter. It might burn for 10 minutes.
as i was literally skipping through reality check's extreme brilliance, i stopped upon this very interesting post.
and i thought to myself, (didn't shnibby the clown promise to leave MULTIPLE times?) and then i thought, "maybe my mosquitio net(frank martini, DISAPPEARED 911, 2001) analogy doesn't account for preplanted explosives?".
watch out, because toner cartridges may suddenly turn into thermobaric termites in a hot crunchy goodness chaos, while completely ignoring ART('cause stickin' together's what good cartridges do) from the month's and years before the event(something they should have done).
maybe frank martini's still alive?
coup nows?
(i've just edited this to include a space. while i'm here, i would like to admit to doing vogon poetry while pounding back cheep beer. cheers.)
feeling rather proseful, i be thinked, ...
you know when you were in class, back in the day, and the bozos would hover and ask IDIOTIC questions that kept you from your REAL WORK?
just curious.
here's tae us.
you know when you were in class, back in the day, and the bozos would hover and ask IDIOTIC questions that kept you from your REAL WORK?
just curious.
here's tae us.
QUOTE (hereward+Mar 16 2006, 04:35 AM)
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were courteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 06:12 AM)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Mar 16 2006, 03:10 AM)
How do they make Nanoaluminum:
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
Hi reasonwhy. Thanks for that post - finally some intelligent input.
For those of us who are 'aware' that the buildings could NOT have 'Just-Fallen-Down' according to the physics of 'progressive-collapse' the questions presented by gravity-driven collapse supporters are for the most part straw man nonsense and appeals to disbelief that advanced weaponry is available. Usually detractors make wails of incredulity and references to science fiction as 'evidence' that such devices do exist in the arsenals of dark cover miltary-industrial organizations.
They seem to feel that if it is not shown on the nightly news, that the absence of that evidence IS THERFORE evidence that advanced weaponry such as we have as never heard of DOES NOT EXIST. In my opinion, this is a true fairy tale belief.
I would admit that the detractors DO have a semi-valid point that (as yet) we can not offer substantive proof that such weaponry was utilized in the destruction of the towers, nevertheless neither can they 'prove' through science or physics that such advanced weaponry was NOT used.
All we have to go on factually is that it is impossible due to the engineering principles of resistance that the buildings could have collapsed as quickly, and symmetrically as they did. Gordon has addressed this more than adequately (to those of us who have any understanding of engineering principles). That is a fact... regardless of the 100's of pages in this thread devoted to 'debunking' free-fall or close to free-fall aspects.
It's not quite scientific or realistic to state simply that free-fall speed is X... so, IF the buildings fell ANY slower, that if they were falling through thin air, THEN that 'proves' they fell through "progressive or gravity-driven collapse".
Pure bunk.
Anyone who can not fathom that simple fact shouldn't be wasting their time here.
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
Many of us are already well beyond understanding that simple fact and now have progressed to trying to determine a plausible source of energy input which CAN account for such an engineering phenomenom. Jet-fuel and piddly fires can't account for this, as has been proven over and over on this thread.
Anyway getting to that link you provided to the thermobarics... very plausible in my opinion. I followed some of the links from your original link and found that one of the typical effects on humans is damage to lung tissue. It doesn't take much research to find that many of the initial burn patients from the ground floors suffered just that tell-tale sign.
The link to Janes Intelligence Group turned up a very interesting video of the damage a simple Russian shoulder fired thermobaric weapon could do when employed against a building...
the RPO-A Schmel explosion... shows great similarity to the lateral (and upwards trajectories) of debris ejected from the WTC towers from such a blast (not to mention the centre column of smoke lingering AFTER the explosion)...
http://warfare.ru/?catid=278&linkid=1847&video=true
Again, thanks for the link and input. Most of us (who are here to discuss the scientific aspects of these 'collapses'), appreciate the efforts put in to contribute valid information.
100 pages of discussing Larrys 'pull-it' statement is just strawman stuff that's just a waste of bandwidth and goes no-where.
Cheers... (mate)
Hi Foxx! I was just checking to see if hereward answered my question regarding his non de plume, when I noticed both your "Cheers....(mate)" and newton's allusion to realitycheck (Hi newt! Missing me already?). I DID warn you all that I would respond if addressed/alluded to, didn't I? So don't blame me if I was forced to post this, hehehe.
Foxx, like Hoffman is now doing, I suggest you TOO re-do your calculations. This time, try to use the ACCELERATION of gravity to calculate what SPEED/MOMENTUM/IMPULSE those 5-floors would have after ACCELERATING through 110 story height....and therefore what fraction-of-second TIME they would only need to rip through the lower/lowest 5-floor sections by that time. Your 'selected average' for the START of a collapse of 5 floors 'only' is invalid unless you also take into account the FINISHING rate after 110 stories and THEN 'average out'. Either you knew that before you posted, or you know nothing of real physics and are just a simplistic thinker....perfect for being a CTer and very little else.
By the way, the collapse was basically INTERNAL because of the floors pancaking WITHIN the outer tube....so the outer tube rate of destruction 'tracks' slightly behind the 'internal pancaking' rate of collapse destruction....so it's not strictly true to say the outer tube 'collapsed', but that the outer tube was 'destroyed and expelled piecemeal' as the side-pressure of the internal pancaking rubble 'plug' broke it off progressively. In short, the outer walls didn't 'fall' from the 'pristine state; they only fell as 'pieces' already destroyed by the INTERNAL fall rate of the pancaking floors and eventually disintegrating top section & hat truss.
Cheers, mate! Heh! and Ciao to boot...plus hehehe.
RC.
.
PLASMA PROCESS FOR PARTICLES
COULD FUEL EXPLOSIVE GROWTH
May 6, 2002 – With a $6.4 million investment announced Friday and a promising production process in its IP arsenal, Nanotechnologies Inc. of Austin, Texas, plans to make nanopowders of very precise and consistent particle sizes.
Nanoaluminum, one of the particles the company can produce with in its plasma reactor, is an excellent ingredient in "energetic materials" such as solid-fuel rocket propellant or high-tech explosives like the new generation of "thermobaric" bombs used in Afghanistan to destroy caves or underground facilities.
The company's plasma process is its trade secret weapon. In a few thousandths of a second, a reactor zaps a rod of solid material with a massive pulse of electrical energy, heating it to 50,000 degrees Celsius.
In another blink of the eye, the gas of vaporized material cools. This rapid cooling, or quenching, is how the company controls the size of the resulting nanoparticles and ensures that the most particles are close to the desired dimensions.
How the company collects the nanoparticles, which it can make in a range from 10 to 100 nanometers, is a trade secret.
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display...84&keyword=hami
A good example of the overpressure of Thermobarics VS normal high explosive:
Thermobarics aren't just a more powerful version of normal high explosive. The term encompasses a range of different types of warhead from fuel-air explosives, which release a cloud of flammable material and detonate it, to metallized explosives whose expanding fireball takes in oxygen from the air. What they have in common is that they produce blast which has a lower overpressure but a longer duration than normal condensed explosives. In effect it is a shove rather than a punch: a thermobaric explosion does not smash a hole in a wall, it pushes the wall over. An instantaneous explosive overpressure of 50 psi [pounds per square inch] is needed to kill. But one sustained for a fraction of a second at 10 psi is also lethal. That’s how thermobarics kill.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_am..._munitions.html
Hi reasonwhy. Thanks for that post - finally some intelligent input.
For those of us who are 'aware' that the buildings could NOT have 'Just-Fallen-Down' according to the physics of 'progressive-collapse' the questions presented by gravity-driven collapse supporters are for the most part straw man nonsense and appeals to disbelief that advanced weaponry is available. Usually detractors make wails of incredulity and references to science fiction as 'evidence' that such devices do exist in the arsenals of dark cover miltary-industrial organizations.
They seem to feel that if it is not shown on the nightly news, that the absence of that evidence IS THERFORE evidence that advanced weaponry such as we have as never heard of DOES NOT EXIST. In my opinion, this is a true fairy tale belief.
I would admit that the detractors DO have a semi-valid point that (as yet) we can not offer substantive proof that such weaponry was utilized in the destruction of the towers, nevertheless neither can they 'prove' through science or physics that such advanced weaponry was NOT used.
All we have to go on factually is that it is impossible due to the engineering principles of resistance that the buildings could have collapsed as quickly, and symmetrically as they did. Gordon has addressed this more than adequately (to those of us who have any understanding of engineering principles). That is a fact... regardless of the 100's of pages in this thread devoted to 'debunking' free-fall or close to free-fall aspects.
It's not quite scientific or realistic to state simply that free-fall speed is X... so, IF the buildings fell ANY slower, that if they were falling through thin air, THEN that 'proves' they fell through "progressive or gravity-driven collapse".
Pure bunk.
Anyone who can not fathom that simple fact shouldn't be wasting their time here.
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
Many of us are already well beyond understanding that simple fact and now have progressed to trying to determine a plausible source of energy input which CAN account for such an engineering phenomenom. Jet-fuel and piddly fires can't account for this, as has been proven over and over on this thread.
Anyway getting to that link you provided to the thermobarics... very plausible in my opinion. I followed some of the links from your original link and found that one of the typical effects on humans is damage to lung tissue. It doesn't take much research to find that many of the initial burn patients from the ground floors suffered just that tell-tale sign.
The link to Janes Intelligence Group turned up a very interesting video of the damage a simple Russian shoulder fired thermobaric weapon could do when employed against a building...
the RPO-A Schmel explosion... shows great similarity to the lateral (and upwards trajectories) of debris ejected from the WTC towers from such a blast (not to mention the centre column of smoke lingering AFTER the explosion)...
http://warfare.ru/?catid=278&linkid=1847&video=true
Again, thanks for the link and input. Most of us (who are here to discuss the scientific aspects of these 'collapses'), appreciate the efforts put in to contribute valid information.
100 pages of discussing Larrys 'pull-it' statement is just strawman stuff that's just a waste of bandwidth and goes no-where.
Cheers... (mate)
Hi Foxx! I was just checking to see if hereward answered my question regarding his non de plume, when I noticed both your "Cheers....(mate)" and newton's allusion to realitycheck (Hi newt! Missing me already?). I DID warn you all that I would respond if addressed/alluded to, didn't I? So don't blame me if I was forced to post this, hehehe.
Foxx, like Hoffman is now doing, I suggest you TOO re-do your calculations. This time, try to use the ACCELERATION of gravity to calculate what SPEED/MOMENTUM/IMPULSE those 5-floors would have after ACCELERATING through 110 story height....and therefore what fraction-of-second TIME they would only need to rip through the lower/lowest 5-floor sections by that time. Your 'selected average' for the START of a collapse of 5 floors 'only' is invalid unless you also take into account the FINISHING rate after 110 stories and THEN 'average out'. Either you knew that before you posted, or you know nothing of real physics and are just a simplistic thinker....perfect for being a CTer and very little else.
By the way, the collapse was basically INTERNAL because of the floors pancaking WITHIN the outer tube....so the outer tube rate of destruction 'tracks' slightly behind the 'internal pancaking' rate of collapse destruction....so it's not strictly true to say the outer tube 'collapsed', but that the outer tube was 'destroyed and expelled piecemeal' as the side-pressure of the internal pancaking rubble 'plug' broke it off progressively. In short, the outer walls didn't 'fall' from the 'pristine state; they only fell as 'pieces' already destroyed by the INTERNAL fall rate of the pancaking floors and eventually disintegrating top section & hat truss.
Cheers, mate! Heh! and Ciao to boot...plus hehehe.
RC.
.
QUOTE (Lon Waters+Mar 16 2006, 06:33 AM)
QUOTE (hereward+Mar 16 2006, 04:35 AM)
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were courteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
After over 500 pages of circular argument and cheap insults, your post was so refreshing to read. In addition I agree with you and think Andrew Johnsons original post is the direction this thread needs to go in......
Hi Rove's Shill...
can you post a link to that cache of 8000 pics?
Thanks
Foxx
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
After over 500 pages of circular argument and cheap insults, your post was so refreshing to read. In addition I agree with you and think Andrew Johnsons original post is the direction this thread needs to go in......
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
"tower seven" gets 847 hits in google.con's search engine on march 16th, 2006.
be where thee, eye 'duhs' of march.
haha! double edged sword!
p.s. google search, "wtc7", turned iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinto google results, "wtc".
DUH.
see, duh.
double you see duh?
wtc, duh?
a world trade sens, duh?
al, kay, duh?
no copyright on my extreme brilliance. publish and score dough freely off me.
LOLOOHOOSAIRS
be where thee, eye 'duhs' of march.
haha! double edged sword!
p.s. google search, "wtc7", turned iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinto google results, "wtc".
DUH.
see, duh.
double you see duh?
wtc, duh?
a world trade sens, duh?
al, kay, duh?
no copyright on my extreme brilliance. publish and score dough freely off me.
LOLOOHOOSAIRS
QUOTE (newton+Mar 16 2006, 06:28 AM)
feeling rather proseful, i be thinked, ...
you know when you were in class, back in the day, and the bozos would hover and ask IDIOTIC questions that kept you from your REAL WORK?
just curious.
here's tae us.
Long time ago, newton but I sorta remember those days.
I just kept my nose to the grindstone while they clipped me up backside of the head, ignored them, and carried on with the real work.
They tried to distract me but I fooled 'em, and chuckled when the grades were passed out. They were so busy clipping me up the backside of the head while I was studying... that they forgot to study.
A vs C-
you know when you were in class, back in the day, and the bozos would hover and ask IDIOTIC questions that kept you from your REAL WORK?
just curious.
here's tae us.
Long time ago, newton but I sorta remember those days.
I just kept my nose to the grindstone while they clipped me up backside of the head, ignored them, and carried on with the real work.
They tried to distract me but I fooled 'em, and chuckled when the grades were passed out. They were so busy clipping me up the backside of the head while I was studying... that they forgot to study.
A vs C-
QUOTE (newton+Mar 16 2006, 07:03 AM)
"tower seven" gets 847 hits in google.con's search engine on march 16th, 2006.
be where thee, eye 'duhs' of march.
haha! double edged sword!
p.s. google search, "wtc7", turned iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinto google results, "wtc".
DUH.
see, duh.
double you see duh?
wtc, duh?
a world trade sens, duh?
al, kay, duh?
no copyright on my extreme brilliance. publish and score dough freely off me.
LOLOOHOOSAIRS
You been poundin those cheap beers again newt ?
be where thee, eye 'duhs' of march.
haha! double edged sword!
p.s. google search, "wtc7", turned iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinto google results, "wtc".
DUH.
see, duh.
double you see duh?
wtc, duh?
a world trade sens, duh?
al, kay, duh?
no copyright on my extreme brilliance. publish and score dough freely off me.
LOLOOHOOSAIRS
You been poundin those cheap beers again newt ?
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 07:02 AM)
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
QUOTE
Originally posted by Rove's Shill
Hey foxx,
I found some photos of burning cars and stuff but I can't upload them to FPHost for some reason to post them on the thread. I found them on mininova, a cache of 8000 pics about 911.
Hey foxx,
I found some photos of burning cars and stuff but I can't upload them to FPHost for some reason to post them on the thread. I found them on mininova, a cache of 8000 pics about 911.
Hi Rove's Shill...
can you post a link to that cache of 8000 pics?
Thanks
Foxx
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 07:02 AM)
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
But since he chose to 'yawn' instead of 'do Basic Physics' as Andrew Johnson wanted, it seems to PROVE that what Schneibster said about Foxx was TRUE.
I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'.
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
I take it YOU at least understand the import of the Basic Physics I pointed out to him.
RC.
.
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
But since he chose to 'yawn' instead of 'do Basic Physics' as Andrew Johnson wanted, it seems to PROVE that what Schneibster said about Foxx was TRUE.
I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'.
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
I take it YOU at least understand the import of the Basic Physics I pointed out to him.
RC.
.
Quack...
(an affectionate name I coined for 'Coastal')
Need I remind you of your signature... " OK, you got me there, Foxx"
After decimating your BS on another forum, I don't really feel the need to address your past history BS anymore. It's all cached on the long thread.
There is no point in feeding trolls... go back to the cornfield.
I wasted enough time addressing your Amazing Bowling Ball theory and Smashing Watermelons theories in the past in the 'long thread'.
What?.... do you want to go over that whole 1500 page thread again?
I've already trounced you and YID once... it's all there in the record if anyone wants to go through that whole 1500 page thread. Everyone is free & welcome to go through the entire thread to determine the context of each post.
... or maybe you'd like to bring up the trouncing Turbonium, metamars, and I gave JU at the ApolloHoax nest.
Those are different threads, Coastal... they're in the past record.
I'm not going back... I'm going forwards... and that's the last I'll address previous threads on this one. If you have something 'NEW' feel free to bring it forward.
If I have learned one lesson (although not thoroughly yet)...it's to NOT feed the trolls obfuscations.
Later ...
(an affectionate name I coined for 'Coastal')
Need I remind you of your signature... " OK, you got me there, Foxx"
After decimating your BS on another forum, I don't really feel the need to address your past history BS anymore. It's all cached on the long thread.
There is no point in feeding trolls... go back to the cornfield.
I wasted enough time addressing your Amazing Bowling Ball theory and Smashing Watermelons theories in the past in the 'long thread'.
What?.... do you want to go over that whole 1500 page thread again?
I've already trounced you and YID once... it's all there in the record if anyone wants to go through that whole 1500 page thread. Everyone is free & welcome to go through the entire thread to determine the context of each post.
... or maybe you'd like to bring up the trouncing Turbonium, metamars, and I gave JU at the ApolloHoax nest.
Those are different threads, Coastal... they're in the past record.
I'm not going back... I'm going forwards... and that's the last I'll address previous threads on this one. If you have something 'NEW' feel free to bring it forward.
If I have learned one lesson (although not thoroughly yet)...it's to NOT feed the trolls obfuscations.
Later ...
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 07:49 AM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 07:02 AM)
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
It's been awhile since such a large group of distortions were posted here.
And, ............ coming from one who actually has no evidence for any core unless it is a concrete core.
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
Those 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns would show in at least one of these images of the core area at various stages if it existed. Certainly you can support the core you believe existed by explaining what happened to it.
C'mon, you can explain it.
Is your quote above addressed to me, Chris ?
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
It's been awhile since such a large group of distortions were posted here.
And, ............ coming from one who actually has no evidence for any core unless it is a concrete core.
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
Those 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns would show in at least one of these images of the core area at various stages if it existed. Certainly you can support the core you believe existed by explaining what happened to it.
C'mon, you can explain it.
QUOTE
Originally posted by Christophera
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
Is your quote above addressed to me, Chris ?
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 16 2006, 07:56 AM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 07:02 AM)
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
But since he chose to 'yawn' instead of 'do Basic Physics' as Andrew Johnson wanted, it seems to PROVE that what Schneibster said about Foxx was TRUE.
I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'.
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
I take it YOU at least understand the import of the Basic Physics I pointed out to him.
RC.
.
Hi RC,
OK - Im going to try to wrap my brain around this. FOXX said:
Hi RC,
OK - Im going to try to wrap my brain around this. FOXX said:
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
and here's your rebuttal:
and then:
and then:
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
OK, firstly, its clear that FOXX is giving us a rough average figure - agreed. The figure is based on a "generous" collapse time of 20 secs. In reality the rate of destruction would have been slower than 5 floors per sec in the early phase of the collapse, and faster than 5 floors per sec towards the end of the collapse.
Is this a correct representation of what you are saying? (I want to be sure I have not misunderstood your argument ).
btw, my mother wanted me to be a guerilla - hence the name.
(: hereward
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
But since he chose to 'yawn' instead of 'do Basic Physics' as Andrew Johnson wanted, it seems to PROVE that what Schneibster said about Foxx was TRUE.
I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'.
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
I take it YOU at least understand the import of the Basic Physics I pointed out to him.
RC.
.
QUOTE
I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'.
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters?
Hi RC,
OK - Im going to try to wrap my brain around this. FOXX said:
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I leave it to hereward (who is the only Cter whom I still have any respect for) to make an unbiased assessment of both Foxx's "5-floor" (versus 110-story gravity-accelerated 'fall') reasoning and his attitude when properly challenged on the Basic Physics of his 'proof'. hereward, I ask you straight, Aussie to Aussie: Do you still have any respect left for Foxx after that shamefull display? Is this to be the level of dishonest behaviour he is to pursue without any restraint from other more honest Cters? |
Hi RC,
OK - Im going to try to wrap my brain around this. FOXX said:
Even IF one were to accept an extended number such as 20 seconds for the collapse, it would mean that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 5 floors per second. If we accept that the floors were 12' high... that means that the buildings were disintegrating at a speed of 60 feet of structurally sound building per second.
Well, no one really needs an engineering degree to tell that that is just an impossibility according to physics... a five story building disintegrating to the ground in ONE SECOND - absolutely impossible without the input of added energy.
and here's your rebuttal:
QUOTE
This time, try to use the ACCELERATION of gravity to calculate what SPEED/MOMENTUM/IMPULSE those 5-floors would have after ACCELERATING through 110 story height....and therefore what fraction-of-second TIME they would only need to rip through the lower/lowest 5-floor sections by that time. Your 'selected average' for the START of a collapse of 5 floors 'only' is invalid unless you also take into account the FINISHING rate after 110 stories and THEN 'average out'.
and then:
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| This time, try to use the ACCELERATION of gravity to calculate what SPEED/MOMENTUM/IMPULSE those 5-floors would have after ACCELERATING through 110 story height....and therefore what fraction-of-second TIME they would only need to rip through the lower/lowest 5-floor sections by that time. Your 'selected average' for the START of a collapse of 5 floors 'only' is invalid unless you also take into account the FINISHING rate after 110 stories and THEN 'average out'. |
and then:
And there's a perfect image of A CTer WHO IS NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY ANDREW JOHNSON STARTED THIS THREAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
For IF Foxx WAS interested in 'Basic Physics', he would have re-done his sums re those 5-floors to PROPERLY reflect its relevance to the 110 story tower collapse times.
OK, firstly, its clear that FOXX is giving us a rough average figure - agreed. The figure is based on a "generous" collapse time of 20 secs. In reality the rate of destruction would have been slower than 5 floors per sec in the early phase of the collapse, and faster than 5 floors per sec towards the end of the collapse.
Is this a correct representation of what you are saying? (I want to be sure I have not misunderstood your argument ).
btw, my mother wanted me to be a guerilla - hence the name.
(: hereward
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 16 2006, 08:10 AM)
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 07:49 AM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 07:02 AM)
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74454
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
It's been awhile since such a large group of distortions were posted here.
And, ............ coming from one who actually has no evidence for any core unless it is a concrete core.
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
Those 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns would show in at least one of these images of the core area at various stages if it existed. Certainly you can support the core you believe existed by explaining what happened to it.
C'mon, you can explain it.
Hello Chris. Since I'm still here for the day, I would just point out that:-
(1) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who FIRST accused YOU of being a disinformation agent for the govt., not the non-Cter 'side'.
(2) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who early on pointed out to ME that the core contained heavy columns where you say they were NOT.
(3) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who pointed out to ME early on that there was NO re-inforced concrete core (other than floors) where you say there WAS.
So perhaps, now that many non-CTers feel they have done enough "Basic Physics' to satisfy Andrew Johnson's stated aims for starting this thread, you might like to take up your concerns with your fellow CTer FOXX....who seems to contradict you in every way.
Go on, ask Foxx to answer your questions about the core columns; and about the re-inforced concrete core; and what he thinks NOW of your motives and your posts here.
To take a leaf out of newton's book: "I dare you". Cheers! And good luck getting any sense/truth out of FOXX, Chris.....you'll need it! Adios, amigo!
RC.
.
I'm not going back... I'm going forwards...
You're going somewhere alright...
The same place Christophera is.
Happy trails.
yawn... later RC... I'll see you on the REAL physics threads, bye now...
I could waste my time and forum bandwidth in addressing the nonsense here, but I prefer not to feed the trolls...
....anymore.
I apologize for feeding you in the past.
Of course you won't address it.
You can't.
Same as it ever was. You ignore the people who've disproved your beliefs. Remember. I know where you started out. I've seen the whole show from the beginning.
No plane hit the Pentagon.
Rebar in the floors.
Concrete core (remember when I had to show you it wasn't. watching you ridicule schneibster was pathetic.)
'Spooks' behind the airport cameras.
AA 767 still flying around today.
C4 destroyed the towers
RDX destroyed the towers
Thermite destroyed the towers (i like the new superthermite. nice touch.)
600 mph 707.
On and on and on... ad nauseum.
I've watched you believe in all of these things that you now call 'straw men'. The reason you discount them now is because they couldn't stand the light of reason.
And now we see you go to where I've told you repeatedly that you'd end up......
Fantasy land. Nanotech SuperThermite. Particle beams. Exotic secret government weapons. Space based lasers. Are you folding those dollar bills yet?
You had to go there. There was no choice. Reality kills the delusion.
Hate to say I told you so. but.....
It's been awhile since such a large group of distortions were posted here.
And, ............ coming from one who actually has no evidence for any core unless it is a concrete core.
So all the talk about fires seems functional, but concrete doesn't heat and bend and if you are talking about the supposed steel core columns, where the heck are they. You are not being accountable.
Those 47, 1,300 foot steel core columns would show in at least one of these images of the core area at various stages if it existed. Certainly you can support the core you believe existed by explaining what happened to it.
C'mon, you can explain it.
Hello Chris. Since I'm still here for the day, I would just point out that:-
(1) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who FIRST accused YOU of being a disinformation agent for the govt., not the non-Cter 'side'.
(2) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who early on pointed out to ME that the core contained heavy columns where you say they were NOT.
(3) It was your fellow CTer FOXX who pointed out to ME early on that there was NO re-inforced concrete core (other than floors) where you say there WAS.
So perhaps, now that many non-CTers feel they have done enough "Basic Physics' to satisfy Andrew Johnson's stated aims for starting this thread, you might like to take up your concerns with your fellow CTer FOXX....who seems to contradict you in every way.
Go on, ask Foxx to answer your questions about the core columns; and about the re-inforced concrete core; and what he thinks NOW of your motives and your posts here.
To take a leaf out of newton's book: "I dare you". Cheers! And good luck getting any sense/truth out of FOXX, Chris.....you'll need it! Adios, amigo!
RC.
.
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 08:06 AM)
I'm not going back... I'm going forwards...
You're going somewhere alright...
The same place Christophera is.
Happy trails.
QUOTE (Lon Waters+Mar 16 2006, 06:33 AM)
QUOTE (hereward+Mar 16 2006, 04:35 AM)
1) The thread was started by a guy (Andrew Johnson) who has since disappeared, even his name is gone ... don't know why. I found the thread interesting in the beginning because Andrew's posts were courteous and he kept the discussion relentlessly "on topic" without being rude.
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
Great find!
Judy Wood, a mechanical Engineer in the ST911 group, calculates a minimum time of 1:36 for the pancake collapse in her analysis in the link below.
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html
Its ironic that the time calculated by a CT'er (Judy wood), is less than that calculated by oponents of the Official Hypothesis in their most generous scenario.
Practice debunkery-by-association. Lump together all phenomena popularly deemed paranormal and suggest that their proponents and researchers speak with a single voice. In this way you can indiscriminately drag material across disciplinary lines or from one case to another to support your views as needed. For example, if a claim having some superficial similarity to the one at hand has been (or is popularly assumed to have been) exposed as fraudulent, cite it as if it were an appropriate example. Then put on a gloating smile, lean back in your armchair and just say "I rest my case."
Remember that most people do not have sufficient time or expertise for careful discrimination, and tend to accept or reject the whole of an unfamiliar situation. So discredit the whole story by attempting to discredit *part* of the story. Here's how: a) take one element of a case completely out of context;
find something prosaic that hypothetically could explain it; c) declare that therefore that one element has been explained; d) call a press conference and announce to the world that the entire case has been explained!
-------------
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key to) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
Twenty-Five ways to Suppress the Truth...
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
The Art of Debunkery...
http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
12.4 feet per floor
free fall through 12.4 feet takes 0.877 seconds
110 floor times 0.877 seconds is 96 seconds (1minute 36 seconds)
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
Well well well, Coastal. And I was only 'funnin'-hypothesising....as I haven't done the 'rounds' of those sites like you guys (on both 'sides') seem to have done.
BTW, Ive heard mention once or twice (by someone here many pages back) of "ApolloHoax" forum/site (I think that was it).
Can you or anyone else tell me the 'state of play' in THAT forum/conspiracy-theory, please?....as I can't easily access/navigate all those CTer/Hoax/UFO sites like all you lucky b*st*rds can, hehehe. Thanks.
RC.
.
Apollohoax is a site that debunks the hoax theory not one that supports it.
The majority there also debunk the gov't conspiracy theorists concerning 9/11.
At present there is not much going on there concerning 9/11 except for a back and forth between a few posters about Greening's calculations.
And Next --- If the glowing 'metal fire' rectangle is aluminum burning... then why is the aluminum cladding right above it not on fire?
An unbiased scientific look at your postulation will pretty much put that theory to rest.
You are correct though that I can not explain the anomaly... the rectangular shape of it is truly baffling to me, and I can not even think what could account for such a situation.
What is clear is that this 'metal fire' appeared suddenly around half an hour after impact... and shortly before molten steel began pouring down the side of the building.
No point in trying to speculate that the molten metal is aluminum... Jones' experiments have put that to rest. His experiments completely refute Dr Greenings speculations. If you support Greening, I suggest you write him and tell him to get busy and respond to Jones empirical experiments. If he doesn't, he stands refuted.
You are speculating far more than I am. Thermite / Thermate has known properties which match exactly what we see. Not my problem that YOU think it is 'implausible' (in spite of all the body of evidence) that the buildings were purposely demolished.
You still have to have fires capable of even leading to steel-buckling collapses, and I have shown that the evidence just does not support that contention at least as far as WTC 2... (apart from wishful thinking). You need to refresh your memory and read the NIST reports (ALL of them) with a critical eye, rather than just blindly accepting the fairy tale presented.
Cheers
Two dimensional thinking Foxx. The rectangle can just as easily be an opening in the corner structure of the building that is allowing light from a fire beyond it to be seen. This removes the requirement for the object on fire to be rectangular and to remain rectangular during the time it is being consumed by the fire. It also increases the distance between the aluminum cladding of the building and the object that is on fire. However if this were a thermite conflagration and actually in contact with the corner columns then that aluminum cladding could not help but be consumed as well, unless you assert that the steel column would be melted at a lower temp than the cladding.
I am not speculating more than you are.I am utilizing materials and conditions known to have been present while you reject such an approach out of hand and instead search for another, exotic condition which is in no way backed up by any evidence as having been present.
You are speculating far more than I am. Thermite / Thermate has known properties which match exactly what we see. Not my problem that YOU think it is 'implausible' (in spite of all the body of evidence) that the buildings were purposely demolished.
You still have to have fires capable of even leading to steel-buckling collapses, and I have shown that the evidence just does not support that contention at least as far as WTC 2... (apart from wishful thinking). You need to refresh your memory and read the NIST reports (ALL of them) with a critical eye, rather than just blindly accepting the fairy tale presented.
Cheers
Two dimensional thinking Foxx. The rectangle can just as easily be an opening in the corner structure of the building that is allowing light from a fire beyond it to be seen. This removes the requirement for the object on fire to be rectangular and to remain rectangular during the time it is being consumed by the fire. It also increases the distance between the aluminum cladding of the building and the object that is on fire. However if this were a thermite conflagration and actually in contact with the corner columns then that aluminum cladding could not help but be consumed as well, unless you assert that the steel column would be melted at a lower temp than the cladding.
I am not speculating more than you are.I am utilizing materials and conditions known to have been present while you reject such an approach out of hand and instead search for another, exotic condition which is in no way backed up by any evidence as having been present.
Great!... Thanks YID.
So now we are supposed to believe a Geocities Yahoo site...
"Fabiano Mota Cavalcanti's Home Page"...
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/7169/index.html
as a reference source...as opposed to...
Inchem...
http://www.inchem.org/
This helps to explain a lot about your 'research'.
Great site Foxx. Probably a much better reference. However, you may be intimately familiar with this site due to your profession. All those posters on this thread who are equally familiar raise your hands. You seem to be alone on that Foxx.
This would be the equivalent of my giving a number from NIST and posting a link to the NIST homepage.
Perhaps you can at least tell me what you searched that site for. I tried "aluminum' but I do not wish to labor through 272 search returns for that. Searching for 'iginition temperature of aluminum' gives 0 returns, 'aluminum fire' gives 0 returns.
I am glad to see mention of Andrew Johnson's original post. Andrew brought up the rate of the collapse as a major problem that could not be accounted for by the official version of the collapses. A great deal of the early controversy on this thread centered on whether the collapses were free fall, faster than free fall, or near free fall. There was a lot of quibbling about a few seconds here or there. For my part, I still believe that the speed of the collapse has not been adequately explained by the official hypothesis (OH). Actual simulation of the collapse is apparently a place where NIST and the supporters of the OH do not dare to go. Fortunately, that is not the case with everyone. One of the papers presented by the OHers in support of gravitation collapse is that of Lu and Jiang:
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
I brought this up a couple of days ago. It did not get any attention, but I still believe it is significant. Lu-Jiang present what is the only FEM simulation of the collapse of the towers. The authors are only able to induce a complete collapse in an extreme case when they lower the fracture plastic strain of the steel to 0.5%. When this value is at 1% there is only a partial collapse that is arrested 100m below the damaged areas. At 5% there is only a localized collapse near the plane impact area. "gordon" has shown from Bazant-Zhou and Greening that a strain of at least 3% is expected. Further, in the Lu-Jiang case of 0.5%, the simulated collapse times are much greater than the actual times. It is unfortunate that they do no mention the times in their paper, however they did provide these values when I inquired. The collapse times they found are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
For the North Tower, that is about a factor of 7 greater than the actual time. I believe this begins to confirm the instincts and intuition of many people who have returned to review the WTC collapses after the initial "shock and awe" of the event have worn off. Lest I be accused of covering anything up, let's be clear that Lu-Jiang support the OH in their paper. However, it is telling that they did not report the estimated collapse times, and I cannot see how these results can be offered in support of the OH. I can only guess at how OHers would react to this. If indeed they are done on this thread maybe we won't find out, but I will be interested to see how they try to explain it away. This is, after all, a peer reviewed paper, so by their many claims in that regard it should not be easy to dismiss.
Great find!
Judy Wood, a mechanical Engineer in the ST911 group, calculates a minimum time of 1:36 for the pancake collapse in her analysis in the link below.
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html
Its ironic that the time calculated by a CT'er (Judy wood), is less than that calculated by oponents of the Official Hypothesis in their most generous scenario.
QUOTE
Practice debunkery-by-association. Lump together all phenomena popularly deemed paranormal and suggest that their proponents and researchers speak with a single voice. In this way you can indiscriminately drag material across disciplinary lines or from one case to another to support your views as needed. For example, if a claim having some superficial similarity to the one at hand has been (or is popularly assumed to have been) exposed as fraudulent, cite it as if it were an appropriate example. Then put on a gloating smile, lean back in your armchair and just say "I rest my case."
Remember that most people do not have sufficient time or expertise for careful discrimination, and tend to accept or reject the whole of an unfamiliar situation. So discredit the whole story by attempting to discredit *part* of the story. Here's how: a) take one element of a case completely out of context;
find something prosaic that hypothetically could explain it; c) declare that therefore that one element has been explained; d) call a press conference and announce to the world that the entire case has been explained!-------------
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key to) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
Twenty-Five ways to Suppress the Truth...
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
The Art of Debunkery...
http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html
911 EYEWITNESS SHOWS AT INTERNATIONAL PRESS CONFERENCE
Is the American Press still Free?
This was the title of a controversial presentation at a prestigious press club in Tokyo, Japan, Tuesday, March 14. The New York Times Tokyo Bureau Chief, Jim Brooks, said that he couldn’t attend an official press function about 9/11 or he would be fired. Coincidentally, the Reuters Bureau chief, Daniel Sloan, was also a strong opponent to the event being held, but he and Brooks were voted down by international members and the event was able to go ahead.
911Eyewitness was screened during dinner for 50 international journalists at the Tokyo, Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan and received tremendous applause.
Was this meeting the reason that the 911 Eyewitness site was hacked? Did this screening for influential journalists trigger a retaliatory attack on the news website?
Are the evildoers getting worried about the scientific analysis of controlled demolition presented in 911Eyewitness?
Could this line of inquiry be the weak link that they have no debunking defense against?
Long-standing FCCJ member Benjamin Fulford, former Tokyo Bureau Chief for Forbes Magazine, chaired the discussion about 9/11 evidence. He talked about his own personal epiphany after researching the evidence available on the net. He challenged the international press to do their own investigations to determine whether the bloggers have scooped the mainstream press on the true story behind the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001.
Those in attendance were virtually unanimous in agreement that controlled demolition brought down the towers after watching 911Eyewitness.
The lone vocal critic who labeled 911Eyewitness analysis featuring Newton’s Laws of Science as “propaganda” was quickly silenced by additional testimony from ex-MI5 agent David Shayler, stating 9/11 was an inside job, streaming from the internet on Google’s video site.
The evening was a resounding success for 9/11 truth.
Japan is currently buzzing with numerous magazine articles on 9/11 and may prove to be a key ally in the fight for truth. Stay tuned for more.
Note: This morning we got the site operational again after it was brought down by hackers on the 14th. Coincidence that it was not available to the Conference?
911Eyewitness
Is the American Press still Free?
This was the title of a controversial presentation at a prestigious press club in Tokyo, Japan, Tuesday, March 14. The New York Times Tokyo Bureau Chief, Jim Brooks, said that he couldn’t attend an official press function about 9/11 or he would be fired. Coincidentally, the Reuters Bureau chief, Daniel Sloan, was also a strong opponent to the event being held, but he and Brooks were voted down by international members and the event was able to go ahead.
911Eyewitness was screened during dinner for 50 international journalists at the Tokyo, Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan and received tremendous applause.
Was this meeting the reason that the 911 Eyewitness site was hacked? Did this screening for influential journalists trigger a retaliatory attack on the news website?
Are the evildoers getting worried about the scientific analysis of controlled demolition presented in 911Eyewitness?
Could this line of inquiry be the weak link that they have no debunking defense against?
Long-standing FCCJ member Benjamin Fulford, former Tokyo Bureau Chief for Forbes Magazine, chaired the discussion about 9/11 evidence. He talked about his own personal epiphany after researching the evidence available on the net. He challenged the international press to do their own investigations to determine whether the bloggers have scooped the mainstream press on the true story behind the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001.
Those in attendance were virtually unanimous in agreement that controlled demolition brought down the towers after watching 911Eyewitness.
The lone vocal critic who labeled 911Eyewitness analysis featuring Newton’s Laws of Science as “propaganda” was quickly silenced by additional testimony from ex-MI5 agent David Shayler, stating 9/11 was an inside job, streaming from the internet on Google’s video site.
The evening was a resounding success for 9/11 truth.
Japan is currently buzzing with numerous magazine articles on 9/11 and may prove to be a key ally in the fight for truth. Stay tuned for more.
Note: This morning we got the site operational again after it was brought down by hackers on the 14th. Coincidence that it was not available to the Conference?
911Eyewitness
My opinion...
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 16 2006, 02:15 AM)
The CT'ers are now posting total fantasy.
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Tappin' out Arthur? Please wait, I have so many more questions you can't answer truthfully.
RC: I'll give you another chance, mate. Please observe and post the footage of your choice of the collapse of WTC 7. There are links to it throughout this thread. If you can't find, it I'll link it. Based on your observations, in terms of physics, please explain to me: the accelerated fall rate, the symmetry of the collapse, and the behavoir of the structure during collapse. Break it down frame by frame (i will do the same)
Feel free to link to PHOTOS of damage, and diagrams showing the 24 steel beam core columns and 57 perimeter columns.
I don't feel we should involve the firemens quotes because they are often dismissed when brought up involving the WTC 1,2 collapse events. Rudy Gulliani was in WTC 7 when the first tower fell and recieved a phone call to 'get out it was going to collapse'
Why did he recieve warning and not the firefighters staging in the bottom of both towers?
FRATER IF YOU READ THIS, I KNOW YOU CAN FIND THIS FOOTAGE I've never been able to, but it is public record, unbelievable I saw it that morning and DUH.
I SINCERELY hope you can walk me through this footage explaining the fire damage to cause the collapse of this structure in such a distict manner.
FOXX didn't forget, isn't on mininova anymore, FPHOST totally shutting me out now (wierd) I'll find another tomorrow and hopefully get them on the thread. Or another way to get them to you?
SuperThermite,
SuitCase Nukes,
Mind Control
C-40 under the concrete
Thermite plaster
Concrete Core
As if the previous weren't fantasy enough
Pyroclastic clouds
Faster than free fall
Controlled demolition
Squibs
Rivers of melted Steel
Pull It means Blow it UP
A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon
As we have slogged through this, one by one the CT ideas have fallen to science and reason. There is now over 500 pages of searchable material that can be fairly easily used to debunk each and every one of these CT lies.
Poor BYU Jones must be crapping his pants as almost all of these are parroted in his paper. I hope his Marxist publisher sees this and he sees how every one of his "points" get taken apart so easily by the likes of Schneibster, CS, RC, YID, SteveS etc. All relative light weights when it comes to structures and architecture, but more than enough to punch holes in every crazy idea the CT'ers posted.
So as the CT'ers rally for another round of idiocy I think I'm going to call it quits on this thread, there really is nothing more to see.
To RC and other voices of reason, I'll see you on the REAL physics forums, you know, the ones the CT'ers NEVER post on.
Arthur
Tappin' out Arthur? Please wait, I have so many more questions you can't answer truthfully.
RC: I'll give you another chance, mate. Please observe and post the footage of your choice of the collapse of WTC 7. There are links to it throughout this thread. If you can't find, it I'll link it. Based on your observations, in terms of physics, please explain to me: the accelerated fall rate, the symmetry of the collapse, and the behavoir of the structure during collapse. Break it down frame by frame (i will do the same)
Feel free to link to PHOTOS of damage, and diagrams showing the 24 steel beam core columns and 57 perimeter columns.
I don't feel we should involve the firemens quotes because they are often dismissed when brought up involving the WTC 1,2 collapse events. Rudy Gulliani was in WTC 7 when the first tower fell and recieved a phone call to 'get out it was going to collapse'
Why did he recieve warning and not the firefighters staging in the bottom of both towers?
FRATER IF YOU READ THIS, I KNOW YOU CAN FIND THIS FOOTAGE I've never been able to, but it is public record, unbelievable I saw it that morning and DUH.
I SINCERELY hope you can walk me through this footage explaining the fire damage to cause the collapse of this structure in such a distict manner.
FOXX didn't forget, isn't on mininova anymore, FPHOST totally shutting me out now (wierd) I'll find another tomorrow and hopefully get them on the thread. Or another way to get them to you?
QUOTE
Judy Wood, a mechanical Engineer in the ST911 group, calculates a minimum time of 1:36 for the pancake collapse in her analysis in the link below.
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
12.4 feet per floor
free fall through 12.4 feet takes 0.877 seconds
110 floor times 0.877 seconds is 96 seconds (1minute 36 seconds)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 16 2006, 03:04 AM)
QUOTE (Coastal+Mar 16 2006, 02:52 AM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Mar 16 2006, 02:46 AM)
PS: Hey, I wonder if these CTers would 'implode' (hehehe) if there was no-one left for them to call 'Schneibster', 'shill', 'murderer', 'obfuscater' etc. Do you think they'd start turning on themselves just to have something to aim their lunacy at?
RC.
That's exactly what happens.
I've seen it over and over again on other threads and kook sites.
Well well well, Coastal. And I was only 'funnin'-hypothesising....as I haven't done the 'rounds' of those sites like you guys (on both 'sides') seem to have done.
BTW, Ive heard mention once or twice (by someone here many pages back) of "ApolloHoax" forum/site (I think that was it).
Can you or anyone else tell me the 'state of play' in THAT forum/conspiracy-theory, please?....as I can't easily access/navigate all those CTer/Hoax/UFO sites like all you lucky b*st*rds can, hehehe. Thanks.
RC.
.
Apollohoax is a site that debunks the hoax theory not one that supports it.
The majority there also debunk the gov't conspiracy theorists concerning 9/11.
At present there is not much going on there concerning 9/11 except for a back and forth between a few posters about Greening's calculations.
The U.S. government is having trouble in the only 9/11 trial:
U.S. Tries to Salvage Unraveling 9/11 Trial
Prosecutors in Zacarias Moussaoui case ask that ban on aviation security witnesses be lifted, or 'there's no point for us to go forward.'
By Richard A. Serrano and Johanna Neuman, Times Staff Writers
March 16, 2006
WASHINGTON — All week long, government lawyer Carla J. Martin badgered them. She sent them 100-plus-page court transcripts. She harried them with e-mails criticizing prosecutors and fretting about the government's image. She called them at home.
By Friday, Lynne A. Osmus had had enough. As a top security official at the Federal Aviation Administration — and soon to be a key prosecution witness in the death penalty trial of admitted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui — she did not like being used to further the lawyer's interest in making the FAA look good at the expense of telling the truth in a capital murder case.
"I didn't want to have secret discussions with her," she said.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...=la-home-nation
U.S. Tries to Salvage Unraveling 9/11 Trial
Prosecutors in Zacarias Moussaoui case ask that ban on aviation security witnesses be lifted, or 'there's no point for us to go forward.'
By Richard A. Serrano and Johanna Neuman, Times Staff Writers
March 16, 2006
WASHINGTON — All week long, government lawyer Carla J. Martin badgered them. She sent them 100-plus-page court transcripts. She harried them with e-mails criticizing prosecutors and fretting about the government's image. She called them at home.
By Friday, Lynne A. Osmus had had enough. As a top security official at the Federal Aviation Administration — and soon to be a key prosecution witness in the death penalty trial of admitted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui — she did not like being used to further the lawyer's interest in making the FAA look good at the expense of telling the truth in a capital murder case.
"I didn't want to have secret discussions with her," she said.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...=la-home-nation
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 14 2006, 07:00 AM)
And Next --- If the glowing 'metal fire' rectangle is aluminum burning... then why is the aluminum cladding right above it not on fire?
An unbiased scientific look at your postulation will pretty much put that theory to rest.
You are correct though that I can not explain the anomaly... the rectangular shape of it is truly baffling to me, and I can not even think what could account for such a situation.
What is clear is that this 'metal fire' appeared suddenly around half an hour after impact... and shortly before molten steel began pouring down the side of the building.
No point in trying to speculate that the molten metal is aluminum... Jones' experiments have put that to rest. His experiments completely refute Dr Greenings speculations. If you support Greening, I suggest you write him and tell him to get busy and respond to Jones empirical experiments. If he doesn't, he stands refuted.
QUOTE
by YID
Sure those are 'could have's' but at least it utilizes known factors and is not a 'could have been thermite', utilizing a speculation of the existence of thermite.
Sure those are 'could have's' but at least it utilizes known factors and is not a 'could have been thermite', utilizing a speculation of the existence of thermite.
You are speculating far more than I am. Thermite / Thermate has known properties which match exactly what we see. Not my problem that YOU think it is 'implausible' (in spite of all the body of evidence) that the buildings were purposely demolished.
You still have to have fires capable of even leading to steel-buckling collapses, and I have shown that the evidence just does not support that contention at least as far as WTC 2... (apart from wishful thinking). You need to refresh your memory and read the NIST reports (ALL of them) with a critical eye, rather than just blindly accepting the fairy tale presented.
Cheers
Two dimensional thinking Foxx. The rectangle can just as easily be an opening in the corner structure of the building that is allowing light from a fire beyond it to be seen. This removes the requirement for the object on fire to be rectangular and to remain rectangular during the time it is being consumed by the fire. It also increases the distance between the aluminum cladding of the building and the object that is on fire. However if this were a thermite conflagration and actually in contact with the corner columns then that aluminum cladding could not help but be consumed as well, unless you assert that the steel column would be melted at a lower temp than the cladding.
I am not speculating more than you are.I am utilizing materials and conditions known to have been present while you reject such an approach out of hand and instead search for another, exotic condition which is in no way backed up by any evidence as having been present.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| by YID Sure those are 'could have's' but at least it utilizes known factors and is not a 'could have been thermite', utilizing a speculation of the existence of thermite. |
You are speculating far more than I am. Thermite / Thermate has known properties which match exactly what we see. Not my problem that YOU think it is 'implausible' (in spite of all the body of evidence) that the buildings were purposely demolished.
You still have to have fires capable of even leading to steel-buckling collapses, and I have shown that the evidence just does not support that contention at least as far as WTC 2... (apart from wishful thinking). You need to refresh your memory and read the NIST reports (ALL of them) with a critical eye, rather than just blindly accepting the fairy tale presented.
Cheers
Two dimensional thinking Foxx. The rectangle can just as easily be an opening in the corner structure of the building that is allowing light from a fire beyond it to be seen. This removes the requirement for the object on fire to be rectangular and to remain rectangular during the time it is being consumed by the fire. It also increases the distance between the aluminum cladding of the building and the object that is on fire. However if this were a thermite conflagration and actually in contact with the corner columns then that aluminum cladding could not help but be consumed as well, unless you assert that the steel column would be melted at a lower temp than the cladding.
I am not speculating more than you are.I am utilizing materials and conditions known to have been present while you reject such an approach out of hand and instead search for another, exotic condition which is in no way backed up by any evidence as having been present.
Great!... Thanks YID.
So now we are supposed to believe a Geocities Yahoo site...
"Fabiano Mota Cavalcanti's Home Page"...
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/7169/index.html
as a reference source...as opposed to...
Inchem...
http://www.inchem.org/
This helps to explain a lot about your 'research'.
Great site Foxx. Probably a much better reference. However, you may be intimately familiar with this site due to your profession. All those posters on this thread who are equally familiar raise your hands. You seem to be alone on that Foxx.
This would be the equivalent of my giving a number from NIST and posting a link to the NIST homepage.
Perhaps you can at least tell me what you searched that site for. I tried "aluminum' but I do not wish to labor through 272 search returns for that. Searching for 'iginition temperature of aluminum' gives 0 returns, 'aluminum fire' gives 0 returns.
These photos were taken at Ground Zero, the World Trade Center site in New York, on September 13, 2001. They were taken by someone named "Ed" who was allowed into the area by a member of the emergency response crew, at a time when all civilians -- including most journalists -- were forbidden to enter the area. As a result, these photos are just about the only close-ups ever taken of the World Trade Center site so soon after the 9/11 attacks.
Photos
Photos
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 PM)
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
What is everybody's opinion of the Lu-Jiang analysis, the collapse simulation, and the calculated time of collapse??
Why has nobody commented on this yet??
Why has nobody commented on this yet??
There is a huge difference between the objectives of the two groups who post here. One group operates from the premise that 9/11 was and is an open ended phenomena, open to interpretation and in need of closure or at least some perspective. The other group comes to the table with a closed ended, blind faith, orthodoxy. They accept the summary of events concerning 9/11 religiously but inexplicably; from a government that lies about foreign policy, lies about domestic policy, exploits the good faith implied in democracy, operates in total secrecy, reverses all institutional checks and balances, openly practices cronyism and nepotism, is dumbing down its' citizens into a coma and then importing cheaper, subservient brain power to fill the induced void, is irretrievably mortgaging away U.S. interests and is ultimately beholden to foreign global entities'. I could go on and on and on. The point being however, is that no government in the history of the united states has demonstrated such a degree of character deficit and ill will, as this one. Why would anyone trust the integrity and intent of ANY findings about anything, begotten by this self appointed, autocratic band of thieves. Everything the bush administration engages, MUST further its' illicit interests, therefore, any investigations, past and present, MUST reflect favorably and distance the naked kingdom from the vortex of the 9/11 anomalies.
If arthur says the vase on the table is black then I know it's white. If he says the the thread is waning then I suspect it is waxing. We understand the mechanisms of disinformation more than ever. Unfortunately, we will need to employ the counter-measures more than ever.
Newton has become an asymmetric force to be reckoned with and a de-facto, poet laureate. I believe his omni-directional Ascension has red-lined the pragmatic dogmatism of arthur.
I'm here to learn the art of rhetorical, hand to hand combat. If along the way, I can chink the Armour of the official account, by attacking it from some insanely, oblique angle, so much the better. If, however, I make that my primary interest, the odds would suggest, that I'd be designing a vehicle of intensional disappointment.
The threads biggest threat is finite bandwidth. The schnei-clops will try to exploit that.
If arthur says the vase on the table is black then I know it's white. If he says the the thread is waning then I suspect it is waxing. We understand the mechanisms of disinformation more than ever. Unfortunately, we will need to employ the counter-measures more than ever.
Newton has become an asymmetric force to be reckoned with and a de-facto, poet laureate. I believe his omni-directional Ascension has red-lined the pragmatic dogmatism of arthur.
I'm here to learn the art of rhetorical, hand to hand combat. If along the way, I can chink the Armour of the official account, by attacking it from some insanely, oblique angle, so much the better. If, however, I make that my primary interest, the odds would suggest, that I'd be designing a vehicle of intensional disappointment.
The threads biggest threat is finite bandwidth. The schnei-clops will try to exploit that.
Definitely molten metal, probably aluminum, pouring from that corner.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...raplanet+9%2F11
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...raplanet+9%2F11
This was sent to Citizenswatch by Les Jamieson of ny911truth.org.
DATE: Wed., March 22nd, 2006
TIME: 12 pm – 2 pm
LOCATION: 120 Broadway (south of Fulton St., also home of Silverstein Properties!)
ADDITIONAL ACTIONS:
2 pm demonstration at Ground Zero
4 pm demonstration at Wall St. & Broadway to engage the financial district
In August of 2004, according to a Zogby Poll, 66% of the people of New York State wanted a real investigation into 9/11. You would think the NY State Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, would recognize the call to action. However, he has been silent. Despite his inaction, it only stands to reason that now an even great number of New Yorkers recognize that the lies of Iraq, torture, wiretapping, Katrina, to name a few, underscore the fact that there is overwhelming evidence that we have been deceived about 9/11. In November of 2004, an independent inquiry into the events of 9/11 titled “Citizens’ Complaint & Petition” was submitted to Eliot Spitzer’s office. His deputy, William Casey personally received it. In public events Mr. Spitzer was asked for a response to this Complaint, which he acknowledged knowing about. To this day there has been no response.
Now earlier this month, in special Congressional hearings on Able Danger we see more cause for suspicion. Able Danger was a Pentagon terrorist tracking operation. News broke last summer with whistleblowers reporting they knew about Mohamed Atta in early 2000, but experienced suppression of their testimony by the 9/11 Commission. Here is another scenario where Eliot Spitzer’s behavior raises more red flags which should outrage all Americans. He barred his top aide, Deputy Attorney General Dietrich Snell, from testifying at these hearings which occurred after 248 Congressmen petitioned the Pentagon.
In the 2004 book by five-time Emmy award-winning journalist Peter Lance called "Cover Up: What the Government is Still Hiding About the War on Terror", he makes a damning statement about Dietrich Snell. "Under objective circumstances, Snell would have made an important witness before the Commission. But in the heavily-conflicted world of the Commission staff, he was hired to be one of its senior attorneys and team leaders." According to Peter Lance, Dietrich Snell "was one of the fixers, hired early on to sanitize the Commission's final report."
To further illustrate the nature of this suspicious act by the top NY law enforcement officer, according to February 15th's New York Post, "Attorney General Eliot Spitzer personally intervened with a congressional panel to get a top aide out of testifying at an explosive hearing on pre-9/11 intelligence failures... the House Armed Services Committee had requested testimony of Deputy Attorney General Dietrich Snell -- a former top investigator with the 9/11 commission -- at a hearing today on 'Able Danger.'"
How could it be that Spitzer, who has won accolades for his successful legal actions against Wall St. financial institutions engaging in fraud, has acted to suppress information that would reveal what happened on 9/11 rather than bringing the full power of his office to investigate and expose every detail leading to the truth of what happened that horrific day?
We feel strongly he's guilty of Obstruction of Justice. We feel he is complicit to treason for actual government complicity for the crimes of 9/11 for which there is overwhelming evidence. We feel he is also complicit to fraud for not cooperating with the Able Danger investigation as well as not exposing the wholesale cover-up known as the 9/11 Commission Report. By his inaction, Spitzer showed whose side he is on.
Eliot Spitzer does not represent the people of New York or anyone other than the oligarchy. The evidence is, he represents the entrenched military/industrial/ congressional machine that is reaping billions of dollars in war profits and homeland security contracts. The terror economy is winning, while Americans pay the bill with treasure and lives, while functional democracy has become a myth.
The truth won’t wait forever. It's time to send a signal, Americans want truth and accountability for the crimes of 9/11. It's time to get into the streets to show our "leadership" we won't settle for the "big lie" they want us to believe. We owe it to the victims. We owe it to ourselves. See you there!
DATE: Wed., March 22nd, 2006
TIME: 12 pm – 2 pm
LOCATION: 120 Broadway (south of Fulton St., also home of Silverstein Properties!)
ADDITIONAL ACTIONS:
2 pm demonstration at Ground Zero
4 pm demonstration at Wall St. & Broadway to engage the financial district
In August of 2004, according to a Zogby Poll, 66% of the people of New York State wanted a real investigation into 9/11. You would think the NY State Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, would recognize the call to action. However, he has been silent. Despite his inaction, it only stands to reason that now an even great number of New Yorkers recognize that the lies of Iraq, torture, wiretapping, Katrina, to name a few, underscore the fact that there is overwhelming evidence that we have been deceived about 9/11. In November of 2004, an independent inquiry into the events of 9/11 titled “Citizens’ Complaint & Petition” was submitted to Eliot Spitzer’s office. His deputy, William Casey personally received it. In public events Mr. Spitzer was asked for a response to this Complaint, which he acknowledged knowing about. To this day there has been no response.
Now earlier this month, in special Congressional hearings on Able Danger we see more cause for suspicion. Able Danger was a Pentagon terrorist tracking operation. News broke last summer with whistleblowers reporting they knew about Mohamed Atta in early 2000, but experienced suppression of their testimony by the 9/11 Commission. Here is another scenario where Eliot Spitzer’s behavior raises more red flags which should outrage all Americans. He barred his top aide, Deputy Attorney General Dietrich Snell, from testifying at these hearings which occurred after 248 Congressmen petitioned the Pentagon.
In the 2004 book by five-time Emmy award-winning journalist Peter Lance called "Cover Up: What the Government is Still Hiding About the War on Terror", he makes a damning statement about Dietrich Snell. "Under objective circumstances, Snell would have made an important witness before the Commission. But in the heavily-conflicted world of the Commission staff, he was hired to be one of its senior attorneys and team leaders." According to Peter Lance, Dietrich Snell "was one of the fixers, hired early on to sanitize the Commission's final report."
To further illustrate the nature of this suspicious act by the top NY law enforcement officer, according to February 15th's New York Post, "Attorney General Eliot Spitzer personally intervened with a congressional panel to get a top aide out of testifying at an explosive hearing on pre-9/11 intelligence failures... the House Armed Services Committee had requested testimony of Deputy Attorney General Dietrich Snell -- a former top investigator with the 9/11 commission -- at a hearing today on 'Able Danger.'"
How could it be that Spitzer, who has won accolades for his successful legal actions against Wall St. financial institutions engaging in fraud, has acted to suppress information that would reveal what happened on 9/11 rather than bringing the full power of his office to investigate and expose every detail leading to the truth of what happened that horrific day?
We feel strongly he's guilty of Obstruction of Justice. We feel he is complicit to treason for actual government complicity for the crimes of 9/11 for which there is overwhelming evidence. We feel he is also complicit to fraud for not cooperating with the Able Danger investigation as well as not exposing the wholesale cover-up known as the 9/11 Commission Report. By his inaction, Spitzer showed whose side he is on.
Eliot Spitzer does not represent the people of New York or anyone other than the oligarchy. The evidence is, he represents the entrenched military/industrial/ congressional machine that is reaping billions of dollars in war profits and homeland security contracts. The terror economy is winning, while Americans pay the bill with treasure and lives, while functional democracy has become a myth.
The truth won’t wait forever. It's time to send a signal, Americans want truth and accountability for the crimes of 9/11. It's time to get into the streets to show our "leadership" we won't settle for the "big lie" they want us to believe. We owe it to the victims. We owe it to ourselves. See you there!
Morgan Reynolds responds to Hoffmans criticism -
Part 1 - http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynold...isiting_p1.html
Part 2 - http://www.serendipity.li/wot/reynolds/reynolds.htm
Part 1 - http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynold...isiting_p1.html
Part 2 - http://www.serendipity.li/wot/reynolds/reynolds.htm
QUOTE (Guest+Mar 16 2006, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 PM)
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
QUOTE (brian+Mar 16 2006, 09:21 PM)
Morgan Reynolds responds to Hoffmans criticism -
Part 1 - http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynold...isiting_p1.html
Part 2 - http://www.serendipity.li/wot/reynolds/reynolds.htm
It really stretchs the man's credibility when he cannot even see that indeed, 767 hit the towers.
Morgan Reynolds may well be a very intelligent man in the realm of economics but is a loony otherwise.
Part 1 - http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynold...isiting_p1.html
Part 2 - http://www.serendipity.li/wot/reynolds/reynolds.htm
QUOTE
No single hypothesis about planes and passengers has yet emerged hands-down triumphant, in my opinion. True, I am highly skeptical toward the official story that Boeing 767s struck the towers because the evidence doesn’t convince me. Maybe I’m just slow, maybe I’m on to something, and maybe we should just ignore jetliners as a big distraction that diverts attention from the fact of demolition. Yet human beings seek explanations for what happened, so speculation, hypotheses and investigations about aircraft are inevitable.
While I may not yet understand the impact holes, airplanes and such, I can’t resist inquiring about them. I’d like an explanation. More generally, if only one consequence derived from a hypothesis turns out to be false, then the hypothesis itself can be rejected. An important consequence of the Boeing 767 hypothesis is an impact hole in each tower at least as large as a Boeing 767. Impact holes smaller than a Boeing 767, assuming each plane was intact upon initial impact, would refute the hypothesis. A smaller aircraft, say, a Boeing 737 with a wingspan of only 93 feet, versus the Boeing 767’s 155 feet, would remain a viable hypothesis. Regardless, the relatively small, “neat” outline nature of the impact holes, lack of recovered black boxes, lack of major wreckage and many other facts bother me. So, my June 9 essay was basically saying, “Show me the facts that implicate Boeing 767s beyond a reasonable doubt (and put notoriously problematic eyewitness testimony and videos aside for the moment).” That’s Missouri-style reasoning, the inchworm mind and all. Certainly I’m not buying anything the bald-faced liars in government say without independent confirmation.
While I may not yet understand the impact holes, airplanes and such, I can’t resist inquiring about them. I’d like an explanation. More generally, if only one consequence derived from a hypothesis turns out to be false, then the hypothesis itself can be rejected. An important consequence of the Boeing 767 hypothesis is an impact hole in each tower at least as large as a Boeing 767. Impact holes smaller than a Boeing 767, assuming each plane was intact upon initial impact, would refute the hypothesis. A smaller aircraft, say, a Boeing 737 with a wingspan of only 93 feet, versus the Boeing 767’s 155 feet, would remain a viable hypothesis. Regardless, the relatively small, “neat” outline nature of the impact holes, lack of recovered black boxes, lack of major wreckage and many other facts bother me. So, my June 9 essay was basically saying, “Show me the facts that implicate Boeing 767s beyond a reasonable doubt (and put notoriously problematic eyewitness testimony and videos aside for the moment).” That’s Missouri-style reasoning, the inchworm mind and all. Certainly I’m not buying anything the bald-faced liars in government say without independent confirmation.
It really stretchs the man's credibility when he cannot even see that indeed, 767 hit the towers.
Morgan Reynolds may well be a very intelligent man in the realm of economics but is a loony otherwise.
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 09:41 PM)
QUOTE (Guest+Mar 16 2006, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 PM)
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first.
The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
The "pancake" theory is an idealized scenario in which all the floors stay intact and pile up on each other -- this is not observed in the actual collapse in which the tower is crumbing on the way down into dust and debri with no large stack of floors.
Judy woods analysis assumes that the floors pulverize instantaneously upon impact on the way down, fall off to the sides, and innitialize the collapse of the floor below it.
...but anyway what are your thoughts on the Lu-Jiang analysis, and the calculated time in their simulation??
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 09:41 PM)
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first.
The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
The "pancake" theory is an idealized scenario in which all the floors stay intact and pile up on each other -- this is not observed in the actual collapse in which the tower is crumbing on the way down into dust and debri with no large stack of floors.
Judy woods analysis assumes that the floors pulverize instantaneously upon impact on the way down, fall off to the sides, and innitialize the collapse of the floor below it.
...but anyway what are your thoughts on the Lu-Jiang analysis, and the calculated time in their simulation??
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 16 2006, 09:57 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 09:41 PM)
QUOTE (Guest+Mar 16 2006, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 PM)
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
<<sighs heavily>>
The planes impacts and causes an immediate loss of about 3% of the total load carrying capacity of the building. The resultant fires weaken the ability of the towers to support the mass above the impact zones until the upper section finnaly drops. The falling upper section impacts lower sections with approx 30 times the energy required (Bazant-Zhou) to fail the next floor.
30 times!!
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
<<sighs heavily>>
The planes impacts and causes an immediate loss of about 3% of the total load carrying capacity of the building. The resultant fires weaken the ability of the towers to support the mass above the impact zones until the upper section finnaly drops. The falling upper section impacts lower sections with approx 30 times the energy required (Bazant-Zhou) to fail the next floor.
30 times!!
30 times!!
Edit - BZ say 30 times the force. Not the energy.
But over what fraction of the distance? And have you accounted for the safety factor yet? If not you will have to reduce that figure to 14.45 times. At most.
That of course will be compressive load, but as the columns failed due to buckling, you will have to reduce it again if you want to collapse it over one storey. That should bring it down to less than 4, but for the other tower it would be less than 3.
3 times the force over a fraction of the distance doesn't look quite so impressive does it?
Gordon.
Edit - BZ say 30 times the force. Not the energy.
But over what fraction of the distance? And have you accounted for the safety factor yet? If not you will have to reduce that figure to 14.45 times. At most.
That of course will be compressive load, but as the columns failed due to buckling, you will have to reduce it again if you want to collapse it over one storey. That should bring it down to less than 4, but for the other tower it would be less than 3.
3 times the force over a fraction of the distance doesn't look quite so impressive does it?
Gordon.
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 10:17 PM)
QUOTE (Rove's shill+Mar 16 2006, 09:57 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 09:41 PM)
QUOTE (Guest+Mar 16 2006, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE (Guest_yesitdid+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 PM)
That time assumes that as each floor fell it came to a complete stop before the following floor fell.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
<<sighs heavily>>
The planes impacts and causes an immediate loss of about 3% of the total load carrying capacity of the building. The resultant fires weaken the ability of the towers to support the mass above the impact zones until the upper section finnaly drops. The falling upper section impacts lower sections with approx 30 times the energy required (Bazant-Zhou) to fail the next floor.
30 times!!
All discussion of collapse omits reference to the concrete core. The only core shown in all photos of the demolition.
A tubular rectangle with steel reinforced cast concrete walls. The inner tube of the "tube in a tube construction. Steel core columns will be visible under these conditions and they are unseen. WHY?
Any argument for collapse is null and void before it begins.
Heh. I love this thread.
It looks like you guys wore out another shill.
Keep up the good work.
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
....its apparent that Lu did an actual FEM simulation of the collapse as is detailed in the paper, and it took that long for it to finish. Although he doesnt put the time in his paper (I guess becuase he figured that it wasnt relavent) - somebody emailed and asked for it.
THAT simply has no relevance to the situation.
It does... "pancaking" assumes the floors all stay intact on the way down, and all of the momentum is transfered to the floors below. From the Video evidence this is not happening at all; the floors are just pulverizing into dust and debree on the spot, and going all over the place - which is where most of the kinetic energy is disapated. There was no large stack of floors pushing the building down evident in any of the videos of the collapse, instead the building crumbled all the way down. I think Judy Woods analysis was apt.
NO! the pancaking theory does NOT require that each failure occur only after the falling upper sections come to a complete stop first. The impact fails the floors and indeed would use some of the KE of the falling debris to do so but it need not come to a complete stop.
OK YID this is a pretty crucial part of the debate wouldn't you agree? You are obviously saying a 110 story structural steel building, sustaining approximately 3% damage of the whole, collapses in 11 sec.?
<<sighs heavily>>
The planes impacts and causes an immediate loss of about 3% of the total load carrying capacity of the building. The resultant fires weaken the ability of the towers to support the mass above the impact zones until the upper section finnaly drops. The falling upper section impacts lower sections with approx 30 times the energy required (Bazant-Zhou) to fail the next floor.
30 times!!
All discussion of collapse omits reference to the concrete core. The only core shown in all photos of the demolition.
A tubular rectangle with steel reinforced cast concrete walls. The inner tube of the "tube in a tube construction. Steel core columns will be visible under these conditions and they are unseen. WHY?
Any argument for collapse is null and void before it begins.
QUOTE (adoucette+Mar 16 2006, 06:45 PM)
Heh. I love this thread.
It looks like you guys wore out another shill.
Keep up the good work.
Check out the colour of the light in the window from which the ejecta has just emerged. I wonder what the official line will be on this one. Referring to this link...
http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem4/1696-01.jpg
and with thanks to Tasketo on ATS - it just keeps on coming.
Gordon.
http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem4/1696-01.jpg
and with thanks to Tasketo on ATS - it just keeps on coming.
Gordon.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=29...=the+illuminati
The Illuminati, The All Seeing Eye: Part 1 of 2 (video)
Australian Independent Media (AIM)
The Illuminati, The All Seeing Eye: Part 1 of 2 (video)
Australian Independent Media (AIM)
Who peer reviewed Lu's paper? It's a paper submitted to a conference proceeding. If anyone here is involved in the research community, they know that conference papers usually are not reviewed, or at least not in the more rigorous way they are for publication in a regular research journal.
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
QUOTE (shagster+Mar 16 2006, 06:25 PM)
Who peer reviewed Lu's paper? It's a paper submitted to a conference proceeding. If anyone here is involved in the research community, they know that conference papers usually are not reviewed, or at least not in the more rigorous way they are for publication in a regular research journal.
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
Why don’t you write Lu-Jiang and find out?
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
Why don’t you write Lu-Jiang and find out?
I didn't claim it was peer reviewed. Not sure why someone said it was peer reviewed.
I read the paper but didn't see anything about fall times. The paper centered more on ways of absorbing the energy to try to prevent progressive collapse.
I read the paper but didn't see anything about fall times. The paper centered more on ways of absorbing the energy to try to prevent progressive collapse.
QUOTE (shagster+Mar 16 2006, 06:45 PM)
I didn't claim it was peer reviewed. Not sure why someone said it was peer reviewed.
I read the paper but didn't see anything about fall times. The paper centered more on ways of absorbing the energy to try to prevent progressive collapse.
Lon Waters wrote The authors to find the times.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74448
I wasn’t implying you said it was peer reviewed. I realize your first statement was to question the credibility of the paper because it doesn’t support the Official Conspiracy Theory(OCT).
I read the paper but didn't see anything about fall times. The paper centered more on ways of absorbing the energy to try to prevent progressive collapse.
Lon Waters wrote The authors to find the times.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=74448
I wasn’t implying you said it was peer reviewed. I realize your first statement was to question the credibility of the paper because it doesn’t support the Official Conspiracy Theory(OCT).
QUOTE (gordon+Mar 17 2006, 12:06 AM)
30 times!!
Edit - BZ say 30 times the force. Not the energy.
But over what fraction of the distance? And have you accounted for the safety factor yet? If not you will have to reduce that figure to 14.45 times. At most.
That of course will be compressive load, but as the columns failed due to buckling, you will have to reduce it again if you want to collapse it over one storey. That should bring it down to less than 4, but for the other tower it would be less than 3.
3 times the force over a fraction of the distance doesn't look quite so impressive does it?
Gordon.
Where do you get 14.45 times??
My recollection was that the overbuilt margin was 5 times design load, you are putting it at over 15 times.
Failure was due to buckling and fracture.
Any velocity of the falling upper section that continues after failure of the first columns post initial collapse simply adds to the KE of the falling debris by increasing the velocity of that debris over the velocity of the falling mass at contact with the first floor encountered. Since KE increases with the square of velocity while decreasing proportionately with any loss of mass(falling off to the side) obviously velocity has a much greater effect.
Edit - BZ say 30 times the force. Not the energy.
But over what fraction of the distance? And have you accounted for the safety factor yet? If not you will have to reduce that figure to 14.45 times. At most.
That of course will be compressive load, but as the columns failed due to buckling, you will have to reduce it again if you want to collapse it over one storey. That should bring it down to less than 4, but for the other tower it would be less than 3.
3 times the force over a fraction of the distance doesn't look quite so impressive does it?
Gordon.
Where do you get 14.45 times??
My recollection was that the overbuilt margin was 5 times design load, you are putting it at over 15 times.
Failure was due to buckling and fracture.
Any velocity of the falling upper section that continues after failure of the first columns post initial collapse simply adds to the KE of the falling debris by increasing the velocity of that debris over the velocity of the falling mass at contact with the first floor encountered. Since KE increases with the square of velocity while decreasing proportionately with any loss of mass(falling off to the side) obviously velocity has a much greater effect.
I'm not so much questioning the credibility of the paper. I'm questioning whether it was peer reviewed as someone claimed.
Since I haven't seen anything in the paper regarding fall times, it can't be used one way or another to support a position. The fact that someone said that Lu stated in an email a particular fall time doesn't help much. If it wasn't included in the paper and explained, it's not of much use.
Since I haven't seen anything in the paper regarding fall times, it can't be used one way or another to support a position. The fact that someone said that Lu stated in an email a particular fall time doesn't help much. If it wasn't included in the paper and explained, it's not of much use.
The factor of 30 in Bazant's paper is actually optimistic, because it assumes the failure mode during all of the collapse was a maximum buckling of the columns, which takes a relatively large amount of energy compared with breaking weaker links.
There are other modes of failure which require less energy, such as breaking of column splices and floor connections. The collapse itself showed many individual un-bent columns flying about and the rubble on the ground also showed that the weaker links were broken, as most columns were individual straight pieces, as opposed to a situation with multiple columns still spliced together with the columns severely bent.
The same can be said for all of the broken floor connections seen during the collapse and in the rubble. If the floor connections had held, sections of floor still connected to columns would have been seen during the collapse and in the rubble, but they weren't for the most part. That weak link mode of failure is different than one where all of the connections are assumed to hold and maintain the integrity of the structure such that full buckling of the columns can occur.
Bazant's treatment is optimistic with respect to preventing progressive collapse. It's more appropriate for the period when the collapse had just began and columns were still in registry with one another. It doesn't fit well with the mode of failure as the collapse progressed where it became more chaotic, splices and connections failed, and the columns were no longer in registry with one another as they were when the building was still standing and was just starting to buckle catastrophically.
There are other modes of failure which require less energy, such as breaking of column splices and floor connections. The collapse itself showed many individual un-bent columns flying about and the rubble on the ground also showed that the weaker links were broken, as most columns were individual straight pieces, as opposed to a situation with multiple columns still spliced together with the columns severely bent.
The same can be said for all of the broken floor connections seen during the collapse and in the rubble. If the floor connections had held, sections of floor still connected to columns would have been seen during the collapse and in the rubble, but they weren't for the most part. That weak link mode of failure is different than one where all of the connections are assumed to hold and maintain the integrity of the structure such that full buckling of the columns can occur.
Bazant's treatment is optimistic with respect to preventing progressive collapse. It's more appropriate for the period when the collapse had just began and columns were still in registry with one another. It doesn't fit well with the mode of failure as the collapse progressed where it became more chaotic, splices and connections failed, and the columns were no longer in registry with one another as they were when the building was still standing and was just starting to buckle catastrophically.
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 10:28 AM)
My opinion...
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
Neither of you appear to want the truth. In fact the exchanges between you appear manufactured to take up space and look like something meaningful. When in fact not only it insignificant information proportionally, it also has no possible use in showing intent.
I have a web site sharing what I know as I use it to analyze hard evidence. It's easy to see the concrete core if a person has a modicum of experience in construction. I see no one invested with evidence reasonably, logically with their opinion of what the truth of 9-11 was at the WTC.
As far as the comparison of the fact of the concrete core, the most common building material on the planet; to the pod; a suggestion induced hallucination, trick of light, error; is devious and disproportionate to a degree that exposes you.
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
Neither of you appear to want the truth. In fact the exchanges between you appear manufactured to take up space and look like something meaningful. When in fact not only it insignificant information proportionally, it also has no possible use in showing intent.
I have a web site sharing what I know as I use it to analyze hard evidence. It's easy to see the concrete core if a person has a modicum of experience in construction. I see no one invested with evidence reasonably, logically with their opinion of what the truth of 9-11 was at the WTC.
As far as the comparison of the fact of the concrete core, the most common building material on the planet; to the pod; a suggestion induced hallucination, trick of light, error; is devious and disproportionate to a degree that exposes you.
QUOTE (shagster+Mar 17 2006, 02:25 AM)
Also, how did Lu calculate those collapse times?
....its apparent that Lu did an actual FEM simulation of the collapse as is detailed in the paper, and it took that long for it to finish. Although he doesnt put the time in his paper (I guess becuase he figured that it wasnt relavent) - somebody emailed and asked for it.
QUOTE (Guest+Mar 14 2006, 02:33 AM)
QUOTE (Commen sense+Mar 12 2006, 08:28 PM)
Peer reviewd studies supporting collapse by fire..
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
Out of curiosity I contacted Dr. Lu, one of the authors of this paper, in request of the simulated collapse times for the towers. He reported back that those values are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
That's minutes and seconds, obviously. I have a hard time believing that the most wildly optimistic case (fracture strain = 0.5%) yielding times like these can be in support of gravitational collapse.
To which I said...
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=73797
I don't think anyone should be taking his word for anything.
As for peer review..
Lu XZ., Jiang JJ. Dynamic Finite Element Simulation for the Collapse of World Trade Center. China Civil Engineering Journal. 34(6), 2001,8~10
http://www.luxinzheng.net/enpublications.htm
Do you have E-mail? I'd like to verify please.
I'm not coming back (Yet), I just want an answer.
http://www.luxinzheng.net/publications/english_WTC.htm
Out of curiosity I contacted Dr. Lu, one of the authors of this paper, in request of the simulated collapse times for the towers. He reported back that those values are:
North Tower: 1:53
South Tower: 1:32
That's minutes and seconds, obviously. I have a hard time believing that the most wildly optimistic case (fracture strain = 0.5%) yielding times like these can be in support of gravitational collapse.
To which I said...
QUOTE
Do you have E-mail? I'd like to verify please.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=73797
I don't think anyone should be taking his word for anything.
As for peer review..
Lu XZ., Jiang JJ. Dynamic Finite Element Simulation for the Collapse of World Trade Center. China Civil Engineering Journal. 34(6), 2001,8~10
http://www.luxinzheng.net/enpublications.htm
Do you have E-mail? I'd like to verify please.
I'm not coming back (Yet), I just want an answer.
QUOTE (Christophera+Mar 17 2006, 03:25 AM)
QUOTE (Foxx+Mar 16 2006, 10:28 AM)
My opinion...
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
Neither of you appear to want the truth. In fact the exchanges between you appear manufactured to take up space and look like something meaningful. When in fact not only it insignificant information proportionally, it also has no possible use in showing intent.
I have a web site sharing what I know as I use it to analyze hard evidence. It's easy to see the concrete core if a person has a modicum of experience in construction. I see no one invested with evidence reasonably, logically with their opinion of what the truth of 9-11 was at the WTC.
As far as the comparison of the fact of the concrete core, the most common building material on the planet; to the pod; a suggestion induced hallucination, trick of light, error; is devious and disproportionate to a degree that exposes you.
Can you produce one picture showing any sort of concrete forms being set up to pour concrete?
You do realize that pouring a concrete core would require many forms be set beforehand. I have never seen one photograph of any such thing.
Until you produce some photos to back this up, you have ZERO credibility
Christophera is a disinfo agent... comparable to Phil Jayhan and the ridiculous Pod theory.
The fact that there were 47 massive interior core columns is incontestable.
The ONE photo Christophera posts as 'evidence' to his theory is unsupportable when compared to historical evidence.
Notice that the gravity-driven collapse supporters 'attacks' against him are a sham.
Check out 'Democratic Underground'
Sorry... I have to call a 'spade' a 'spade'.
Regardless of the feigned association with CTers... (IMHO)... he works with the disinfo team, as a plant to input strawman theories which can easily be refuted.
I'm not wasting my time addessing concrete core BS. feel free to waste your time with this nonsense if you like.
Concrete Core !!! (my mule)
Investigate for yourself.
Nice try, 'Chris'... you are NOT fooling me
Neither of you appear to want the truth. In fact the exchanges between you appear manufactured to take up space and look like something meaningful. When in fact not only it insignificant information proportionally, it also has no possible use in showing intent.
I have a web site sharing what I know as I use it to analyze hard evidence. It's easy to see the concrete core if a person has a modicum of experience in construction. I see no one invested with evidence reasonably, logically with their opinion of what the truth of 9-11 was at the WTC.
As far as the comparison of the fact of the concrete core, the most common building material on the planet; to the pod; a suggestion induced hallucination, trick of light, error; is devious and disproportionate to a degree that exposes you.
Can you produce one picture showing any sort of concrete forms being set up to pour concrete?
You do realize that pouring a concrete core would require many forms be set beforehand. I have never seen one photograph of any such thing.
Until you produce some photos to back this up, you have ZERO credibility
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.