• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Fyziks 101

[X] said:
But such a notion would negate:
- fans
- pumps
- airfoils
- shockwaves
- your namesake
and a great many other things
...
Click to expand...
That is funny, the big jet engine squib; how can the exhaust "squib" come out the back and not the big giant front opening of our young Turbofan.

His name, as you remind me, debunks his whole big opening theory. Oops, he has no theory, Rob told us so in the secret forum of p4t forum, we are to have no theories, etc. Some animals are not as equal as others, so p4t have back forums for the special p4t members. That is why their traffic is down, you can't see the secret forum sections where the truth is metered out slowly. When will Turbofan see they are selling DVDs, and that is the goal, not truth, but DVD sales.

Squibs, the sign of someone does not understand 9/11.
 
Newtons Bit said:
I think it's pretty obvious that Turbofan is just a troll who is trying to waste peoples time now. Welcome to ignore!
Click to expand...

Yes, I am certain you are correct. Thus the perfect way to end this thread is to just let TF make one final comment, and then ignore it forever. He'll hate that!

And when he attempts to disrupt other threads (which he surely will, because this isn't about debate, it's about calling attention to himself) we can all just ignore him there as well. He will really, really hate that!!

And pretty soon, he'll just go away because no one will play. And then we'll see this is the perfect way to treat all trolls, that if they just get ignored (not treated nicely or meanly, just ignored) they won't come here any more because trolling is about attention and nothing else.

So what do you say -- let's make TF a test case, and ignore every single troll posting he makes. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't, but perhaps once and for all we'll have an effective way of getting rid of trolls with no wasted effort. And who knows? Miracle of miracles, perhaps TF will eventually grow so starved for attention, he'll actually try posting -- dare I say it? -- something meaningful!!
 
beachnut said:
That is funny, the big jet engine squib; how can the exhaust "squib" come out the back and not the big giant front opening of our young Turbofan.
Click to expand...


Bolding mine.

Come on mister pilot sir.
Surely you've heard of compressor stall?
:p

That'll fire a burst of air out the front of an engine, won't it?
(And potentially lots more. Nasty things, compressor stalls.)
 
Last edited:
Turbofan said:
Yup, typical GL move. Ignore the facts.

Funny how nobody questioned the NASA article when the noted SPEED of
the shuttle!

"But Mr. NASA Scientist, the guys at JREF said it's supposed to be 11 KMs/S/S."

LOL
Click to expand...

Minadin said:
G-L? What's that mean, exactly?
Click to expand...

The reason that I ask is because depending on the answer, I might have just won, if it means what I think it might . . .

12532488e4c0b3a80a.gif


I'm just not sure which of the 2 possibilities in blue is where my bingo mark should be placed. Please help.
 
Turbofan said:
Did it ever occur to you , that I'm ignoring you and your repetitive useless
questions? Same goes for some of the other members.

"We've" already tried to show this on MSM. One case in particular was
Steven Jones

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ayYXNo0i_Cs

You see, they (MSNBC) didn't have the balls to show the video!

You may also recall the original MSM news broadcasts from 9/11 (which
are archived) were pulled from public view!

So keep asking your dumb questions about why we don't go to MSM!
Click to expand...

Your display of intellectual dishonesty and cowardice in this post is staggering.

You didn't even begin to address my question, and ignored the parts of it you found inconvenient.

Here it is again. Please pay special attention to the parts I've bolded:

If the collapse of the towers was so odd and in such violation of the laws of physics that a layperson such as yourself can perceive these oddities and violations merely by looking at photos of the collapse, then why hasn't any of this been discerned and/or revealed by a single MSM outlet, law enforcement agency, or investigative body on the planet?

Come on, Turbofan. Explain what special knowledge or insight you have that no single person in any of the above mentioned organizations seems to have. Why hasn't any investigative journalist or other professional investigator anywhere on the planet able to figure out what you did?
 
A W Smith said:
when you post a still image of the collapse, you remove the movement and thus remove the evidence that it is not an explosion at all. Thats called being dishonest. in some clips you can still see the intact chamfered edge of the tower parapet as it descends into the plume.


Click to expand...

There's nothing dishonest about getting a still frame shot of a video.

It's not like it was edited to show otherwise.

That's a poor excuse if I ever read one.

As for this compression theory you (R. Mackey) are trying to spin; that's
not how a fluid or gas reacts in an open environment. The entire volume
would need to reach the same pressure before the windows blow out.

Differential pressure will equalize in an open environment. Since you have
a massive airplane hole on at least one side of the building, you will have
to overcome outside ambient pressure throughout most of NYC before
one floor reaches enough pressure to blow out a window.

Afterall, you guys keep saying the towers were 90% air :rolleyes:

Nice try but, Mr. Mackey wants us to believe a pocket of air can travel
across a room in a linear fashion just like a bullet! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Newtons Bit said:
Because right now it just looks like your blowing smoke out your rear end. It's embarrasing, and honestly rather disgusting.
Click to expand...
And smelly too. Why'd he have to eat beans first? :D


Turbofan said:
Since you have a massive airplane hole on at least one side of the building, you will have
to overcome outside ambient pressure throughout most of NYC before one floor reaches enough pressure to blow out a window..
Click to expand...
I'm amazed you can't figure out what's wrong with your own statement...
 
Last edited:
Corsair 115 said:
And smelly too. Why'd he have to eat beans first? :D


I'm amazed you can't figure out what's wrong with your own statement...
Click to expand...

physics and architecture are clearly not his field...

There's nothing dishonest about getting a still frame shot of a video.
It's not like it was edited to show otherwise.
Click to expand...

No there isn't, however you are expecting people to interpret it in way that completely contradicts what the video shows. That's rather disengenous of you...


That's a poor excuse if I ever read one.
Click to expand...
Whip out the irony yet again, that's what, 5th, 6th time today?
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
physics and architecture are clearly not his field...



No there isn't, however you are expecting people to interpret it in way that completely contradicts what the video shows. That's rather disengenous of you...



Whip out the irony yet again, that's what, 5th, 6th time today?
Click to expand...

Then watch the video, and you'll see the same thing. Focus your eye on
one point of the tower where I drew the line. Use a pencil to reference
the same spot if you need to.

It's all the same. Tough to accept the facts huh?
 
Turbofan said:
Then watch the video, and you'll see the same thing. Focus your eye on
one point of the tower where I drew the line. Use a pencil to reference
the same spot if you need to.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately the video still shows nothing to indicate that the dust is moving 'up' AND out... I'm not sure why you are still at it trying to convince me it's doing anything other than falling. The only thing the picture shows is that the dust in the immediate vicinity of the collapse wake is being pulled down by a negative air current...

Turbofan said:
Tough to accept the facts huh?
Click to expand...
For you maybe, especially with you're inability to understand basic physics... However since what I am looking at are already facts there's nothing difficult for me to accept
 
Stellafane said:
Yes, I am certain you are correct. Thus the perfect way to end this thread is to just let TF make one final comment, and then ignore it forever. He'll hate that!
Click to expand...
Although (s)he doesn't seem to having much luck, I want to support Stellafane's call to completely ignore Turbofan but my reason, I must confess, is a bit more personal.

As I watch some of the videos one more time to rebut TF's idiocy, I can clearly see that he has no interest in the facts of the matter. But then the video ends and I stare at the screen thinking I just watched thousands of people die. Seven years on and it still hurts.

That these scenes get replayed for TF's benefit makes it worse. To revisit the scene of horror to relearn some important lessons is one thing but to do so in the service of stubborn, repugnant ignorance is another.

Yeah, sure, I could avoid the videos or even the thread. And I probably will do just that as time goes on. But for now, I join Stellafane's call to starve this ignorant person like we would a cancerous lump. And I choose the analogy for its accuracy.
 
Have you figured out how much explosives are required for your hypothesis Turbofan?
 
The weird thing about some of these threads are the CTists who are suddenly experts in a wide variety of fields. Fluid dynamics, Newtonian physics, aircraft maintenance, video technology, forensic chemistry, structural engineering, you name it, they are an expert! When you read the posts of the people examining their arguments, you usually see specialists (such as Newton's Bit or beachnut), or people referring to formally presented papers by such specialists. In addition, there have been threads in the past on how to recognize expertise, and for the posters here to list their areas of knowledge that show how important it is to determine what information and which sources of information can be trusted.

It's a shame that common sense is so common . . .
 
Hokulele said:
The weird thing about some of these threads are the CTists who are suddenly experts in a wide variety of fields. Fluid dynamics, Newtonian physics, aircraft maintenance, video technology, forensic chemistry, structural engineering, you name it, they are an expert! When you read the posts of the people examining their arguments, you usually see specialists (such as Newton's Bit or beachnut), or people referring to formally presented papers by such specialists. In addition, there have been threads in the past on how to recognize expertise, and for the posters here to list their areas of knowledge that show how important it is to determine what information and which sources of information can be trusted.

It's a shame that common sense is so common . . .
Click to expand...

You mean those same faceless people you quoted posting in all the same
threads?

They are super scientists, engineers, chemists, investigators, theorists all in one!

LMAO!
 
Turbofan said:
You mean those same faceless people you quoted posting in all the same
threads?

They are super scientists, engineers, chemists, investigators, theorists all in one!

LMAO!
Click to expand...
You'd have been better off keeping your "experts" secret. I mean, having a guy who thinks there's alien bases on the moon and secret submarine bases in the desert as an "expert" doesn't help your credibility.

Because, as has been established here over and over, there are no real FDR experts at the PfffT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom