Merged Has this structural engineer been debunked? / Astaneh-Asl "melting of girders"

bill smith said:
Well that's a start. I'll put that in the file and add it to the believabilty index a little later. Points out of ten.

Try to come up with something that's a litle bit realistic guys. It's not enough any more to simply apply the long used debunker rule of 'If it's not entirely impossible, then that's what happened'.

Things have changed and people are looking more critically at things. There was a time not too long ago when they would believe pretty well anything as you know. That's just about over thank God, and good riddance.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
 
Bill do they have you on something new? You seem unusually trollish today. I think hanging out here has changed you for the better. I'm positive you don't even believe the CT anymore. You're not offering anything to the discussion these days. Just these half hearted attempts at humour. Can you expand a little on your crumble theory? What about this light proofing? How's that work?
 
3bodyproblem said:
Bill do they have you on something new? You seem unusually trollish today. I think hanging out here has changed you for the better. I'm positive you don't even believe the CT anymore. You're not offering anything to the discussion these days. Just these half hearted attempts at humour. Can you expand a little on your crumble theory? What about this light proofing? How's that work?
Click to expand...

If I ever get a couple hours of spare time, I want to go over all of Bill's posts and try to piece together his complete, unified theory about 9/11. Should be hilarious, especially when I try to find a spot for his belief that the towers were brought down using superheated steam.
 
This was an interesting lecture. He says that almost all the concrete was pulverised which we all know anyway. But he also says that there were many particles as small as a hundred microns that could only have come from the compter chips. A hundred microns ? That's prettty small and the computers were maybe three feet above the floors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNbwLfczjt8&feature=player_embedded
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
This was an interesting lecture. He says that almost all the concrete was pulverised which we all know anyway. But he also says that there were many particles as small as a hundred microns that could only have come from the compter chips. A hundred microns ? That's prettty small and the computers were maybe three feet above the floors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNbwLfczjt8&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

514647b4a19730570.png
 
bill smith said:
This was an interesting lecture. He says that almost all the concrete was pulverised which we all know anyway. But he also says that there were many particles as small as a hundred microns that could only have come from the compter chips. A hundred microns ? That's prettty small and the computers were maybe three feet above the floors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNbwLfczjt8&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

What? Did they hover there and then float out the windows during the collapse?
 
bill smith said:
This was an interesting lecture. He says that almost all the concrete was pulverised which we all know anyway.
Click to expand...

Gregory Urich, who represents Scholar For 9/11 Truth and Justice, says this is not true.

4. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

This claim is not correct and in no way favors controlled demolition over gravitational collapse. Engineers at Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (STJ911), including Greg Jenkins, Tony Szamboti and Gregory Urich, have demonstrated that the upper bound for concrete pulverized to dust was 15%. We have also calculated that the amount of dust attributable to easily crushed materials like gypsum and SFRM (thermal insulation) was equivalent to 5 lbs per square foot over an area of 200 acres. We have also calculated that no extra energy source would be needed to create this amount of dust. The pressures approached 100,000 psi late in the collapse. How could these
pressures not result in humans and other materials being crushed to dust?


Tony Szamboti posts here as "Tony Szamboti" (after spending several months hiding his true identity behind the screen name "realcddeal") maybe you can message him and have him explain to you why you are wrong about the level of pulverization.
 
Last edited:
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Gregory Urich, who represents Scholar For 9/11 Truth and Justice, says this is not true.

4. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

This claim is not correct and in no way favors controlled demolition over gravitational collapse. Engineers at Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (STJ911), including Greg Jenkins, Tony Szamboti and Gregory Urich, have demonstrated that the upper bound for concrete pulverized to dust was 15%. We have also calculated that the amount of dust attributable to easily crushed materials like gypsum and SFRM (thermal insulation) was equivalent to 5 lbs per square foot over an area of 200 acres. We have also calculated that no extra energy source would be needed to create this amount of dust. The pressures approached 100,000 psi late in the collapse. How could these
pressures not result in humans and other materials being crushed to dust?


Tony Szamboti posts here as "Tony Szamboti" (after spending several months hiding his true identity behind the screen name "realcddeal") maybe you can message him and have him explain to you why you are wrong about the level of pulverization.
Click to expand...

Wow, the hypocrisy on display here is incredible.....unless your parents named you "Sword of Truth".

Tony Szamboti is now posting under his real name, have you ever posted under your real name here?
 
vinniem said:
Wow, the hypocrisy on display here is incredible.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely correct.

The self-righteous hypocrisy displayed by Tony Szamboti is deeply offensive.

Tony Szamboti said:
By the way Tom, you are anonymous. Sorry to say that providing your first name only does not qualify as giving your real name. Why don't you provide us with your full name Tom?
Click to expand...

But this is beside the point. Do you agree or disagree with Tony "realcddeal" Szambotis calculations which show that Dick Gage is lying about the level of pulverization in the Twin Tower collapses?
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
You're absolutely correct.

The self-righteous hypocrisy displayed by Tony Szamboti is deeply offensive.



But this is beside the point. Do you agree or disagree with Tony "realcddeal" Szambotis calculations which show that Dick Gage is lying about the level of pulverization in the Twin Tower collapses?
Click to expand...

Why did you claim Tony was hiding behind the name realcddeal? Are you hiding behind the name Sword Of Truth?

You and your debunking friends often like to claim that "truthers get everything wrong". As Tony is a truther, his calculations must be wrong, no?
 
So no comment on the pulverization then. Got it. Carry on with your silly rant. As a seeker of "Truth" you should always strive to end every sentence in your posts with a question mark. 3 out of 4 with the last one.
 
Last edited:
vinniem said:
Why did you claim Tony was hiding behind the name realcddeal? Are you hiding behind the name Sword Of Truth?

You and your debunking friends often like to claim that "truthers get everything wrong". As Tony is a truther, his calculations must be wrong, no?
Click to expand...

Do you agree or disagree with Tony "realcddeal" Szambotis calculations which show that Dick Gage is lying about the level of pulverization in the Twin Tower collapses?
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Do you agree or disagree with Tony "realcddeal" Szambotis calculations which show that Dick Gage is lying about the level of pulverization in the Twin Tower collapses?
Click to expand...

I will answer your question when you answer mine.


Are you hiding behind the name Sword of Truth? If you are not, why do you suggest that Tony is hiding?
 
I brought up Tonys calculations in this thread almost a little over an hour before you mentioned his hypocrisy.

Try again, Vinnie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom