• 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.

Molten Steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
bill smith said:
The government can lean on anybody it wants to especially if they want to survive in business. I'd say some of those contractors were about as independent as the Purdue nalysis.
Click to expand...

care to debunk the NIST analysis?

Or just keep waffling.
 
BigAl said:
There is no "eyewitnesses for truth" group. I meant to type, "there is no "WTC first-responders for truth" group".

As for all the members of all the other groups, nobody knows why any of these people believe whatever it is they believe because they won't speak in public, make their case using whatever professional expertise they have, and then address polite, relevant questions from others with similar expertise. Most of them parrot Truther boilerplate assertions as if there is a standard script somewhere.

None of these people seem to feel strongly enough about about the biggest crime in history to speak in public and use their professional connections and expertise to spread the word.
Click to expand...

You mean like on CNN or something ? That'll be the day. The mainstream media have no history of helping the TRuth Communityto get the word out. On the contrary they have been heavily complicit in the coverup.

When you see us on mainstream TV getting a proper chance to have our say you will know that they have jumped ship. That can happen any day. They will have to if they want to survive as successful media organs.
 
in bill's world, the conspiracy is so vast, so reaching, that only he and a few hundred people are actually NOT in on it.

I can see why it gets him upset. Can you imagine living in such a world, and being impotent to do anything about it.

TAM:)
 
bill smith said:
You mean like on CNN or something ? That'll be the day. The mainstream media have no history of helping the TRuth Communityto get the word out. On the contrary they have been heavily complicit in the coverup.
Click to expand...

proof? They just laugh at you like we do.

Bill said:
When you see us on mainstream TV getting a proper chance to have our say you will know that they have jumped ship. That can happen any day. They will have to if they want to survive as successful media organs.
Click to expand...

Bring them something like real evidence instead of the non existent fantasies you have brought for the last 7 years then.
 
bill smith said:
You mean like on CNN or something ?
Click to expand...

No. I'm speaking of these people making themselves to available to people that have relevant expertise and addressing relevant questions and explaining why they think there is something wrong with the NIST study, or whatever in specific technical terms that make sense to other professionals. In my experience, these people are nice and polite and don't bite. Mostly.

Based on my professional work in large buildings in Manhattan, there are questions I'd love to ask Scott Forbes about his claims about a power down at WTC. He is, or was, NYC-based and so am I, but strangely he never makes himself available here.
 
funk de fino said:
proof? They just laugh at you like we do.



Bring them something like real evidence instead of the non existent fantasies you have brought for the last 7 years then.
Click to expand...

Maybe you know that a lawyer filed a case against Bush in 004 on behalf of 400 of the 9/11 famiy members and the American taxpayer. A murder suit. The case was properly filed and all defendents including Bush were served. The case was later squashed by a tame judge on the grounds of 'sovereign immunity' yu know....like a king gets. That means he charges were never answered and Bush walked away.

Did you know that Bush was accused of rape in 2002 ? The charges are filed with a sherriffs dept. Unfortunately the woman in question committeed suicide several months later by gunshot wound to the head.

You must have read about all this in the mainstream media ???
 
BigAl said:
No. I'm speaking of these people making themselves to available to people that have relevant expertise and addressing relevant questions and explaining why they think there is something wrong with the NIST study, or whatever in specific technical terms that make sense to other professionals. In my experience, these people are nice and polite and don't bite. Mostly.

Based on my professional work in large buildings in Manhattan, there are questions I'd love to ask Scott Forbes about his claims about a power down at WTC. He is, or was, NYC-based and so am I, but strangely he never makes himself available here.
Click to expand...

There's a recently released British 9/11 movie called 'The elephant in the Room' in which Scott Forbes speaks at greater length.I've heard what he said but I can't remember if there was anything new. I think there will be a streaming site somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Of course molten steel can solidify around rebar. [Steel does not melt immediately]
Click to expand...

Steven Jones, TWS, and you have had three years to demonstrate it.

. . . . . . Paper, not so much.

The guy in the video about the "meteorite" says something about "molten". Steven was probably quoting him.
Click to expand...
I'll remind you that Steven Jones made the claim three years ago in his paper and has been asked repeatedly to demonstrate his claims or retract them. He refused to do either.

Please refer to Steven Jones paper:

Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse?

See page 9:

Quote:
The following photograph has become available, evidently showing the now-solidified metal with entrained material, stored (as of November 2005) in a warehouse in New York:

Clipboard01.jpg



What difference does it make anyway?
Click to expand...
Obviously, it makes all the difference to the veracity of 9/11 Truther claims, and it makes all the difference to Steven Jones, TMS, you, and all other 9/11 Deniers in dodging having to defend unsupported claims necessary to keep the 9/11 Truth Movement Fairy Tale alive.

It's just a lame-assed excuse to slam somebody.
Click to expand...
Steven Jones was outed years ago as a fraud and charlatan.

What part of "Attack the argument, not the arguer." don't you guys get?
Click to expand...
What part of the argument do you not understand? What part of intellectual dishonesty TMS engages in do you still not understand? He has had every opportunity to defend his claims rather than evade them. He chose the latter and I called him on it.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Maybe you know that a lawyer filed a case against Bush in 004 on behalf of 400 of the 9/11 famiy members and the American taxpayer. A murder suit. The case was properly filed and all defendents including Bush were served. The case was later squashed by a tame judge on the grounds of 'sovereign immunity' yu know....like a king gets. That means he charges were never answered and Bush walked away.
Click to expand...

You're not leaving out any important details in this story are you?

bill smith said:
Did you know that Bush was accused of rape in 2002 ? The charges are filed with a sherriffs dept. Unfortunately the woman in question committeed suicide several months later by gunshot wound to the head.

You must have read about all this in the mainstream media ???
Click to expand...

You're not leaving out any important details in this story are you?
 
bill smith said:
Theer's a recently released British 9/11 movie called 'The elephant in the Room' in which Scott Forbes speaks at greater length.I've heard what he said but i can't remember if there was antything new. I think there will be a streaming site somewhere.
Click to expand...

Forbes refuses to speak to any people that know anything about what he says he does for a living.

And so it goes for all the other people that invent 9/11 conspiracy claims.
 
3bodyproblem said:
You're not leaving out any important details in this story are you?



You're not leaving out any important details in this story are you?
Click to expand...


Well....let's see. the lawyer story goes a bit like this. He is a 30-year lawyer and ex chief-of-staff to Bob Dole. He ttended the university ofChicago in the 1960's with Paul Wolfowitz. Douglas Feith nd possibly Don Rumsfeld. They used to brainstorm as young turks do about revolutionary and radical changes to government. So much so that the lawyer's own final thesis was.....get this.....'How to turn America into a Presidential Dictatorship by manufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbour attack' See the playbook ? Lter he became disillusioned with the budding neocons and went his own way. Years later he sued them for 9/11.

This link will give you a start on the rape.
http://www.truthalliance.net/Portals/0/Archive/Community Article Images/Detail5.jpg Press Report
 
Has Jones ever discounted the source of his findings as being paint? (wrt iron rich spherules/iron oxide/aluminum/previously molten material)
 
Last edited:
alexi_drago said:
Has Jones ever discounted the source of his findings as being paint? (wrt iron rich spherules/iron oxide/aluminum/previously molten material)
Click to expand...

Jones has never attempted to discount ANY OTHER possibilities for the spherules. Hence the fatal flaw in his "scientific" analysis.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
I do not have the stomach to watch and listen to that entire diatribe. Do you have points of reference concerning the video? pieces I should watch, and why? Or perhaps I should just link you to the commission report and ask you to read it.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

This gives the gist though the video has gaphs and so on.

If you spray water from an vapouriser you get a fine mist of droplets. If you look at the droplets under a microscope they show up as tiny spheres as we have all seen on TV at one time or another, If steel is vaporised by extreme temperatures (way above what you need to melt steel) you get exactly the same tiny spheres, except that these harden and stay as tiny spheres. The dust from the WTC has these tiny balls of steel in abundance. Now Professor Stephen jones says he has recovered trace amounts of UNREACTED Thermite from the dust and steel sphere samples. He can even make these live traces 'flare' or 'flash' when he subjects them to a directed and concentrated heat source. This really is evidence that Thermite was used at the WTC on 9/11
 
bill smith said:
Maybe you know that a lawyer filed a case against Bush in 004 on behalf of 400 of the 9/11 famiy members and the American taxpayer.
Click to expand...
It wasn't 400. More like 14, and even there we have to trust Hilton. He eventually denied he'd ever said that, although even Abel Ashes (who he represented in a later version of the suit) said that was a lie (see http://www.ubl.com/artists/abelashes/profile/).

Hilton also told us he had a document showing that George Bush signed off on 9/11. Sounds plausible, doesn't it, something you'd put in writing? I thought it was nonsense at the time, and sure enough, despite Hilton's claims of evidence, he's made none of it public.

Anyone who's interested can Google for Stanley Hilton to find out more. This post (from a truther) at abovetopsecret.com shows what even some true believers think of him, and his "case".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom