Moderated Continuation - Why a one-way Crush down is not possible
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
-
- Tags
- wtc collapse
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
You must be kidding dtugg. The boot is on the other foot now. I just watched a video about the latest Richard Gage exposition in DC at the architect's converntion. Events are moving so quickly now that you guys just can't shovel it under the carpet fast enough. It's going to come out, mark my words. Whether anything iis done about it or not I can't say. But it WILL be common public knowledge and that is all I care about.
Last edited:
Gage is a dolt who has idiots contributing to his travel expenses (and you should know it since you have zero evidence to back any of his moronic ideas). The only thing needing shoveling here is your continuous pile of BS. You are totally free of knowledge on 911 and by posting delusional statements like this you prove it everyday.
It is common knowledge Gage is a fraud. Gage has zero ability to build a 110 story high-rise building or he would not be so stupid on this 911 issue of dim witted engineering by Heiwa with you cheering them on. Not sure who the bigger fraud is; Gage or Heiwa?
I would advice you to go to engineering school since the 911 failed movement you believe in will be just like Bigfoot, UFOs, JFK, and other failed delusions which continue forever. In 7 more years you could have a PhD and then understand your failed support of Heiwa and the other idiotic ideas you have on 911.
Last edited:
I am not kidding. In addition to being extremely ignorant, you are extremely delusional. Assuming, of course that you actually believe what you say. I am not sure that you do. It is hard for me to even imagine a person that is as far gone as you portray yourself to be. It is very possible that you are just pretending for some pathetic reason.
Here is a question that you will certainly ignore: Do you think that dropping a cardboard box on another one proves that 9/11 was an inside jobby job like your hero Richard Gage?
Last edited:
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,715
You mean the same convention which had 24000 registerd members in attendance and they managed to get 50 signuatures (under 10 were degreed and licensed architects?) Is that the same convention?
Or did you all have another epic fail that I'm unaware of?
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
An excellent result. Don't furget that many architects will not have the guts to put pen to paper while being now fully aware of the situation and probably sympathetic to the goals of www.ae911truth.org. Like Richard says, almost no architect who sees building seven collapse will have any doubt what he is seeing. Almost 740 degreed and licenced architects and engineers signed up since 2007. Way to go.
Last edited:
Earth to Bill: Gage is a cowardly fraud who hides under his bed whenever he's challenged by a debunker. Remember his cardboard boxes?
"Events are moving so quickly..." Uh, Bill, your insane movement is stone-cold dead. Motionless. Inert. Kaput. This parrot is dead, Bill. Events have passed you by. Nothing will ever "come out" because you liars are flogging a nonsensical fairy tale. You have nothing, as you demonstrate constantly.
Tell us what Gage has discovered.
Bye, Bill. Sorry you had to run.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
I find it really funny to hear that the Movement for Truth is almost dead when on this forum alone there are at least one hundred debunkers for every Truther. This would seem to indicate that you do not consider us dead by any means. On the contrary you validate and confirm us entirely. We could never have come so far without you and for that you have our thanks.
Last edited:
Well Bill you are clearly wasting your time here. You should return to ae911truth where your leadership and insight will be praised and highly valued. You could be the next Mr Gage, perhaps you already are, since you have the same way of dealing with the truth.
Unfortunately for you, most people here are really trying to be honest and you should return to truthland, where you belong.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
When am I going to win one though ? I have a space open on my mantlepiece especially for it. For me its got the same cachet as winning an Oscar does for an actress.
Justin39640
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 22, 2009
- Messages
- 4,202
theyre all scared?
i guess theyre going by all the bad things that has happened to other AE members.. o wait nothing has happened to them
yes bill most architects and engineers who watch building 7 see nothing that resembles a demolition
hence 50 out of 24000
way to go failures
LOL! I am not suprised in the slightest that you would be proud of winning an award that given to people who display their profound ignorance, stupidity, and insanity.
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 12,374
There's a lot of competition for Stundies in the truth movement. So many Stundies, so little time.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Yes...but awarded by the jref debunkers. Need I say more ?
Heiwa,
I'll accept your complete evasion of the portion that I've presented thus far as acceptance of my first contention. That is, that three stories of the building & its contents will produce a substantially higher impact when concentrated into a half story than they would spread over their original three stories. Of course, this is no new theory of mine, that you have so derogatorily implied. But simply a direct consequence of classical impulse - momentum considerations.
It's good that you finally agree.
Of course, we could stop right here. Because all of the above applied REGARDLESS of any compaction of the debris. But I am willing to answer your questions.
Because "answering each others' questions", honestly & directly, is exactly how knowledge & truth emerges, isn't it, Anders? (Curious that you declined my wager that simply required that you promise to answer questions honestly for a short period of time. Is there something scary about that for you?)
But I'm getting a little tired of people asking you question after question... and having you ignore them. So I'm going to press you to please answer several of the questions that I've asked. Then I'll be happy to answer any that you have.
From previous posts:
1. Do you yet understand yet that "rigid body" does not mean "indestructible"?
2. If the collapse wave can so OBVIOUSLY fracture the connections between the cross trusses & the core columns, then how can you possibly write that "in order to ... crush down [the towers] you have to destroy the core"?
3. WHAT was going to stop the crush down after it had descended, say 20 floors? after 40 floors? after 80 floors? According to your theory, did they have to keep blowing up floors? Or was there some point where the collapse was self-sustaining?
4. Will the football players spread over 6 yards create a bigger or smaller impact on the wall when they run into the wall, compared to the same numbers of football players spread over 30 yards?
5. Please go back to post #624 & copy & paste the place where I mention the following statements. Or rescind them.
a. An "IKEA bookcase that disassembles itself..."
b. An "IKEA book case ... becomes solid rubble that destroys the ground..."
c. An "IKEA book case ... becomes solid rubble that destroys ... everything"
That'll do for now.
Tom
.
I'll accept your complete evasion of the portion that I've presented thus far as acceptance of my first contention. That is, that three stories of the building & its contents will produce a substantially higher impact when concentrated into a half story than they would spread over their original three stories. Of course, this is no new theory of mine, that you have so derogatorily implied. But simply a direct consequence of classical impulse - momentum considerations.
It's good that you finally agree.
Of course, we could stop right here. Because all of the above applied REGARDLESS of any compaction of the debris. But I am willing to answer your questions.
Because "answering each others' questions", honestly & directly, is exactly how knowledge & truth emerges, isn't it, Anders? (Curious that you declined my wager that simply required that you promise to answer questions honestly for a short period of time. Is there something scary about that for you?)
But I'm getting a little tired of people asking you question after question... and having you ignore them. So I'm going to press you to please answer several of the questions that I've asked. Then I'll be happy to answer any that you have.
From previous posts:
1. Do you yet understand yet that "rigid body" does not mean "indestructible"?
2. If the collapse wave can so OBVIOUSLY fracture the connections between the cross trusses & the core columns, then how can you possibly write that "in order to ... crush down [the towers] you have to destroy the core"?
3. WHAT was going to stop the crush down after it had descended, say 20 floors? after 40 floors? after 80 floors? According to your theory, did they have to keep blowing up floors? Or was there some point where the collapse was self-sustaining?
4. Will the football players spread over 6 yards create a bigger or smaller impact on the wall when they run into the wall, compared to the same numbers of football players spread over 30 yards?
5. Please go back to post #624 & copy & paste the place where I mention the following statements. Or rescind them.
a. An "IKEA bookcase that disassembles itself..."
b. An "IKEA book case ... becomes solid rubble that destroys the ground..."
c. An "IKEA book case ... becomes solid rubble that destroys ... everything"
That'll do for now.
Tom
Last edited:
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
But that would be cheating. It's got to be fair and square or the prize is worthless.
No, I fully understand that you to an "award" given by rational people for saying the stupidest thing of the month would be something to be proud of. After all, saying stupid stuff is what you do best, although apparently you aren't even that good at that as you haven't won yet. You should work on that.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
I definately will. To a Truther a jref stundie is an absolute mark of distinction. Have you never noticed ? The more effective a Truther is the more stupid you call them. Thus a stundie is a tangible proof of an effective Truther. You may not agree but that does not change the actualité.
Last edited: