• 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.

Apparently Dave Thomas and others debating Gage, Harrit etc on Coast to Coast?

DaveThomasNMSR said:
Heiwa cooking Bazant's goose? :jaw-dropp:D:o:p:confused::boggled::eye-poppi

Gage wanted at least four additional team members on the show, and has been told to pick ONE. So I imagine his partner will be one of Kevin Ryan (chem.), Michael Donly (P.E.), Niels Harrit (chem.), or Erik Lawyer (Firefighter)
Click to expand...

So I guess you would have had to scale back too. You would have had to drop either Bazant or Kim. Were you as surprised as Richard when you were told that you wouldn't be able to bring on all the experts you wanted too ?
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
So I guess you would have had to scale back too. You would have had to drop either Bazant or Kim. Were you as surprised as Richard when you were told that you wouldn't be able to bring on all the experts you wanted too ?
Click to expand...

No. It's Gage who needs to game the system to prop up his non-existent case. All I've got going for me are the facts, the evidence, and the laws of chemistry and physics. Oh yeah - and Truther measurements (Chandler) that help disprove Truther shlock physics.

:D
 
bill smith said:
I already told you. I don't waste time pointlessly arguing it these days. I just lay out my case and trust Readers to use their own judgement.
Click to expand...

Bill, you'd do better to address those who are actually posting rather than some probable Readers.
 
bill smith said:
If the pool of molten steel was large enough then it would stay molten for months. Steel cools from the putside in in little flecks on the surface that slowly join up to create a skin. I guess that the pool was 10-15,000 tons in weight after approximately one third of the core columns had been melted and drained down into the basement.
Click to expand...

What happened to that 15,000 ton ingot?
 
bill smith said:
If you have the equipment to detect a very large magnetic anomaly you might find that it is still there. Or it may have been cut out with thermic lances.
Click to expand...

The same way the Hoover Damn was built with just a backhoe and a couple of cement trucks. :rolleyes:
 
bill smith said:
I am not familiar with these 5-7,500 ton Destroyers you guys are talking about. What class are they ?
Click to expand...

The Spruance Class and the first production block of the Arleigh Burke class came in at ~8,000 tons.

Now can you show us a US Navy destroyer-sized congealed slag puddle or what?
 
bill smith said:
If I am right- and I don't see how I can not be-
Click to expand...

Well there's your problem. :rolleyes:


Why don't you show us some numbers explaining how your pool of steel stayed molten for months. I don't want a UTube video of some misquote saying there was "rivers" of steel. I want numbers (you know x amount of energy needed to remain liquid - heat loss.....ECT).

You can do it, Just ask all your "scientists". :p

Bill, It's been 9 years! Certainly with your collection of minds you could prove something by now.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
Well there's your problem. :rolleyes:


Why don't you show us some numbers explaining how your pool of steel stayed molten for months. I don't want a UTube video of some misquote saying there was "rivers" of steel. I want numbers (you know x amount of energy needed to remain liquid - heat loss.....ECT).

You can do it, Just ask all your "scientists". :p

Bill, It's been 9 years! Certainly with your collection of minds you could prove something by now.
Click to expand...

See the Physicist Steven Jones for the numbers if you need them.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
No. It's Gage who needs to game the system to prop up his non-existent case. All I've got going for me are the facts, the evidence, and the laws of chemistry and physics. Oh yeah - and Truther measurements (Chandler) that help disprove Truther shlock physics.

:D
Click to expand...

Well I wish you luck. You will need it if you are to save the jref 9/11 subforum. I would say that Richard Gage has about a 70% success rate at winning these debates. So the odds are against you and the survival of the jref 9/11 subforum.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Well I wish you luck. You will need it if you are to save the jref 9/11 subforum. I would say that Richard Gage has about a 70% success rate at winning these debates. So the odds are against you and the survival of the jref 9/11 subforum.
Click to expand...
OK I'll bite. How does his success have anything to do with our making fun of "truthers"? This is what this sub-forums' about, you do know this? Don't you? I hope so.
 
DGM said:
OK I'll bite. How does his success have anything to do with our making fun of "truthers"? This is what this sub-forums' about, you do know this? Don't you? I hope so.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering why BS thinks he has any say or sway over these forums. Who put him in charge?

:D
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
Only 10 more posts till I get my own avatar! Thanks BS.
:D
Click to expand...

Hey Dave,

Stundie ( I believe he has a reputation here) replied to your post over at Wu's forum.

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1220&start=30#p15463

I replied to him here, in case you're interested:

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1220&start=40#p15485

It would be funny if these were the kinds of things Gage talked about as a defence to your points.
 
Edx said:
Hey Dave,

Stundie ( I believe he has a reputation here) replied to your post over at Wu's forum.

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1220&start=30#p15463

I replied to him here, in case you're interested:

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1220&start=40#p15485

It would be funny if these were the kinds of things Gage talked about as a defence to your points.
Click to expand...

Did I see that Dave Thomas is a former Truther on that forum ? Were you ?
 
bill smith said:
I already told you. I don't waste time pointlessly arguing it these days. I just lay out my case and trust Readers to use their own judgement.
Click to expand...

No, what you do is the following,

1. Cherry pick selected quotes or bits of articles that SEEM to prove or support your case.
2. You rely on the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE that your "readers" possess to insure they do not do the proper research on your crap to reveal it as that...CRAP.

Come on, at least be honest.

TAM:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom