Coast to Coast AM Debate, August 21 2010

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

ETA: Then he has the gall to accuse Richard Gage of what he just did. Johnson said. “Gage was making things up as he went along, or repeating earlier things that were made up or extreme speculation and treating them as fact, and this was one of his major errors.”

Gotta love that comment about Richard Gage. Johnson hit it right on the head!

 

[Chorduroy]

Seconded.

So, truthers are looking for an explosive that can cut through steel beams...quietly...doesn't give off light...doesn't produce a shockwave...doesn't break windows...can be set up in a matter of minutes...doesn't react to fire...and is undetectable. Oh, and it has never been used before, or since, 9/11.

Jeezus...this is starting to sound like an infomercial...

...CALL NOW...SUPPLIES ARE LIMITED...get your bucket of OXYCLEAN STEEL REMOVER today for only $19.99!!!1!!.... plus shipping and handling...

Well said!!

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Seconded.

So, truthers are looking for an explosive that can cut through steel beams...quietly...doesn't give off light...doesn't produce a shockwave...doesn't break windows...can be set up in a matter of minutes...doesn't react to fire...and is undetectable. Oh, and it has never been used before, or since, 9/11.

Jeezus...this is starting to sound like an infomercial...

...CALL NOW...SUPPLIES ARE LIMITED...get your bucket of OXYCLEAN STEEL REMOVER today for only $19.99!!!1!!.... plus shipping and handling...

I believe it was a SBD (Silent, But Deadly). That would require Truthers to eat Bush Beans in order to have a "silent explosive".

I wonder what would Billy Mays would've said if he were still alive.

 

[bill smith]

Seconded.

So, truthers are looking for an explosive that can cut through steel beams...quietly...doesn't give off light...doesn't produce a shockwave...doesn't break windows...can be set up in a matter of minutes...doesn't react to fire...and is undetectable. Oh, and it has never been used before, or since, 9/11.

Jeezus...this is starting to sound like an infomercial...

...CALL NOW...SUPPLIES ARE LIMITED...get your bucket of OXYCLEAN STEEL REMOVER today for only $19.99!!!1!!.... plus shipping and handling...

I can easily explain all of that Sabretooth. Do you want me to ? You and the Readers will be amazed at how easy it actually was to set up.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

You and the Readers will be amazed at how easy it actually was to set up.

You mean how you Truthers set up this phony Conspiracy about 9/11 being a "Government Operation" or how you guys set up the lies & fairy stories to win the hearts & minds of gullible people?

 

[Sabretooth]

I can easily explain all of that Sabretooth. Do you want me to ? You and the Readers will be amazed at how easy it actually was to set up.

Oh, please do ... I'm all ears (eyes)...

 

[Dog Town]

I can easily explain all of that...

So what's taking you soooo long? Pfffft, your fiction should be quick, I could use the laugh!

GO!

 

[bill smith]

So, truthers are looking for an explosive that can cut through steel beams...quietly...doesn't give off light...doesn't produce a shockwave...doesn't break windows...can be set up in a matter of minutes...doesn't react to fire...and is undetectable.

So you and the Readers want answers to the above questions ?

Okay..Nanothermite is a hi-tech incendiary that burns above 2500 degrees centigrade. Way more than enough to melt steel in a flash. In it's incendiary form it is non-explosive and it can be painted on in layers.

Now of course if it can be painted it can be pumped. Next..the 47 core columns pf each of the Twin Towers were hollow inside. So the nanothermite was pumped into the interior of the hollow core columns.

Nobody would have noticed a thing even if Harrit's proposed 100 tons had been pumped in.

There was no light because it all occurred behind the thick layers of fireproofing that vovered every core column. For this reason the nanothermite was undetectable. It didn't risk being ignited by external fires either because of the fireproofing.

That covers it I think. So incredibly simple when you examine it isn't it ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ11i6fi7KQ&eurl= animation

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Bolding's mine:

So you and the Readers want answers to the above questions ?

Yes! Can you answer my question: "You mean how you Truthers set up this phony Conspiracy about 9/11 being a "Government Operation" or how you guys set up the lies & fairy stories to win the hearts & minds of gullible people?"

Okay..Nanothermite is a hi-tech incendiary that burns above 2500 degrees centigrade. Way more than enough to melt steel in a flash. In it's incendiary form it is non-explosive and can be painted on in layers.

Very much like the paint on the Hindenberg.

Now of course if it can be painted it can be pumped. Next..the 47 core columns of each of the Twin Towers were hollow inside. So the nanothermite was pumped into the interior of the hollow core columns.

You have no evidence or witnesses that say about any kind of substance being "pumped in" the columns. Pure speculation!

Nobody would have noticed a thing even if Harrit's proposed 100 tons had been pumped in.

Nobody wouldn't notice? Seriously, there would've been 50,000 workers in each Tower watching them do it. That's 100,000 people! Think about it!!

There was no light because it all occurred behind the thick layers of fireproofing that vovered every core column. For this reason the nanothermite was undetectable. It didn't risk being ignited by external fires either because of the fireproofing.

The fireproofing was sprayed on & it wasn't that thick. Plus the core was covered with drywall. And nano-thermite is nothing more than a sparkler.

That covers it I think. So incredibly simple when you examine it isn't it ?

You can't examine what can't be there to begin with.

 

[GlennB]

Now of course if it can be painted it can be pumped. Next..the 47 core columns pf each of the Twin Towers were hollow inside. So the nanothermite was pumped into the interior of the hollow core columns.

As I recall the core columns were hollow all the way to the bottom, where they were hollow at all. All the thermo-gumph would have fallen down there and - if the theory is correct - might have melted core columns randomly in the basement somewhere, if there had been ignition system down there.

But I'm not 100% sure about the core columns being entirely hollow and open-ended. I can't recall seeing a photo of one with a blocked-off end, neither can I think why one might as they were welded at the joins and not bolted internally like the exterior columns.

And, of course, many of the columns in the collapse zone were "I" section and not amenable to Bill's utterly nonsensical scheme anyway. For example, at the 84th floor only 10 core columns were box-section (source freely available via NIST to non-nincompoops)

 

[bardamu]

I believe it was a SBD (Silent, But Deadly). That would require Truthers to eat Bush Beans in order to have a "silent explosive".

Beans don't cause SBD's. Have you never seen Blazing Saddles?

 

[Dog Town]

So incredibly simple when you examine it isn't it ?

Yes, for an insane person to believe. No one else I'm afraid.

But Bravo, I knew you'd come through!




Only four though, you left some out!

 

[bill smith]

As I recall the core columns were hollow all the way to the bottom, where they were hollow at all. All the thermo-gumph would have fallen down there and - if the theory is correct - might have melted core columns randomly in the basement somewhere, if there had been ignition system down there.

But I'm not 100% sure about the core columns being entirely hollow and open-ended. I can't recall seeing a photo of one with a blocked-off end, neither can I think why one might as they were welded at the joins and not bolted internally like the exterior columns.

And, of course, many of the columns in the collapse zone were "I" section and not amenable to Bill's utterly nonsensical scheme anyway. For example, at the 84th floor only 10 core columns were box-section (source freely available via NIST to non-nincompoops)

I or H sections have deep channel rails eminently suitable for the painting on of multiple layers of nanothermite Glenn. Then a nice thick coat of fireproofing and Bob's your uncle..

PS. Did you never read about the fact that they had 'upgraded'- read 'thickened' the fireproofing on the floors that had fire in WTC1 ? Nanothermite ignites at about 460-odd degrees and they were afraid the jet fuel would ignite it prematurely.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I or H sections have deep channel rails eminently suitable for the painting on of multiple layers of nanothermite Glenn. Then a bice thick coat of fireproofing and Bob's your uncle..

EMRTC already did an expieriment with nano-thermite last year. They found that it just fizzled into nothing & didn't even harm a steel beam.

Why you're so obcessed with something that has been debunked long ago is beyond me.

 

[bardamu]

Kim Johnson makes an utterly false statement:

Kim Johnson felt one of his strongest points involved bomb-sniffing dogs. “I got Harrit on the dogs. Apparently Gage does not understand how these dogs are trained and cross-trained. Dogs sniff out the combination of the blend of aluminum and iron oxides which form the basis of the thermite incendiary,”

I'm not a big fan of the "thermite hypothesis", but it did strike me that the pair of debunkers must have been truly desperate, when one of them said the dogs would have caught the thermite as it was being taken into the building.

 

[Christopher7]

1. So does the 30 foot drop you admitted to in one second constitute free fall?

No. The exterior frame is buckling asymmetrically, providing resistance.

Why did you remove the caption "The NIST computer model is not falling at free fall" from the following image?http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/nistwtc7modelvideo14s16.jpg

Here is the more recent image.
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/nistwtc7modelvideo14s16-1.jpg

I changed the 1-2 sec. to About 1 sec. and I changed "The NIST computer model is not falling at free fall acceleration" to "The top floors are buckling. This does not happen in the videos"
If the exterior frame is providing resistance, then the building is not falling at FFA. Is that too difficult for you to figure out?
Just for you:
http://a.imageshack.us/img841/7267/nistwtc7modelvideo14s16.jpg

Can you please post the information you are using to make the claim the buckling columns provide support/resistance to loads above?

It is axiomatic. Remember we are talking about 100 feet of FFA. All 58 exterior columns could not suddenly and simultaneously stop providing any resistance at all for 100 feet. In addition I have stated many times that the moment frames held the exterior walls together. They did not break apart. This can be seen in the computer model.

Dr. Sunder was correct when he said:
"a free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it"
He was also correct when he said:
"there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place. Everything was not instantaneous."

He clearly said the the NIST model provided resistance and therefore did NOT fall at FFA. That was their theory at the time.

You will never admit this because you are in denial.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I'm not a big fan of the "thermite hypothesis", but it did strike me that the pair of debunkers must have been truly desperate, when one of them said the dogs would have caught the thermite as it was being taken into the building.

It wouldn't be that hard to see dump truck loads of thermite parked right outside the buildings.

Damn, how can people be that senseless?

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

You will never admit this because you are in denial.

How can Gamolon be in "denial" when you have no evidence to prove?

 

[Christopher7]

Gotta love that comment about Richard Gage. Johnson hit it right on the head!

You love it when Kim Johnson lies about the dogs being able to detect nano-thermite and then accuses Mr. Gage of making stuff up.

 

[Christopher7]

How can Gamolon be in "denial" when you have no evidence to prove?

I just presented the evidence but you refuse to accept it because you are in denial too.