• 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.

Invitation to Derek Johnson to discuss his ideas

Miragememories said:
Not a chance, especially given there was no such suspicion behind their search.

MM
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't the suspect something if as you say the evidence of demolition was obvious? So obvious in fact that all it takes is a quick look at any of the videos. Could it be that expert opinion does not agree with your assessment?
 
Derek Johnson said:
Nope, no speakers fee. I do this at no charge. Tell me beachnut, are you technically able to answer the questions in post #1152?

If so, what are your answers?

Also beachnut, did I get anything wrong in posts #1400 or #1475? If so, what? List them please. There are a lot of charges, if you are unable to find the error, the charges stand.

And you call "Da Twoofs" delusional?
Click to expand...

so as a trained welder, can you identify molten materials by sight?

why won't you answer this simple question without handwaving and trying to dodge? It is really a simple question.
 
BigAl said:
You demonstrate lack of familiarity with secure 24x7 buildings in post-1993 Manhattan.

I manages facilities in a couple of these buildings including bare-concrete renovations that made use of the loading docks and elevators and I worked with the unions.

Manhattan real estate is so valuable I don't know where one would put tons of secret material. Every square foot is protected turf by some department or tenant.
Click to expand...
Dodge.

MM
 
TruthersLie said:
so as a trained welder, can you identify molten materials by sight?

why won't you answer this simple question without handwaving and trying to dodge? It is really a simple question.
Click to expand...

He did answer, finally, in 1548:

Derek Johnson said:
...
You're right triforcharity, I admit that I can NOT identify molten metal by photos alone. You got me, da twoofie is vanquished....or maybe not so much.
...
Click to expand...
 
Miragememories said:
You are speculating on the side of ignorance.

Because thermite is not practical for commercial CD, you rule out
any possibility that it would be viable for non-commercial CD.

A ceramic collar could be used to contain a thermite reaction with a column.

Depending on where the collars were applied, the destructive effects of the subsequent
crushing building failure could easily obscure the thermite induced breaks in the columns.

Add to that, the fact that iron workers and fire fighters would not be looking for such evidence.

MM
Click to expand...

See now that is an interesting hypothesis. A real and truely testable hypothesis (in fact one of the ways I have thought of using therm*te to cut a verticle column.)

Now that leads to several very easy questions.

1. PROVE IT. A ceramic collar would be extremely easy to make. You can mold one and put it on in a few hours. Getting a piece of steel columns would also be easy.

Feel free to show it in action. I truely would LOVE to see it.

(as I have said, my requirements to become a twoof. show me a method in action of cutting a verticle beam under load in action. Then show me the same method used on multiple beams and getting failure across them all within a few seconds.

feel free. It should cost less than $10K.

How did that work for the TRUTH BURN fiasco?
 
Originally Posted by tfk
4. If the 2.25 seconds of "near free fall" (or even "at free fall") does not refer to the collapse of the core, then this renders your "2.25 seconds of core free fall" statement false.

Originally poste by Oystein
Do you agree or disagree?
I disagree. I did not mean to imply the core fell at FFA. I admit my wording was ambiguous there. To clarify: It was only a specific spot on the north face that is shown to have fallen for 2.25 seconds with an average acceleration of g.
I am unable to understand how this could have happened without the sudden removal of 4000 tons of structural steel below that part of the north wall. Can you explain it to me, please?

--------------------

This might seem like a dumb question but wouldn't the south wall pop up above the north wall in the videos if the north wall fell first?

--------------------

Also, all this ragging on about how Derek can't prove molten steel by sight alone has just been long continual dodging of his engineering questions. Obviously it would be difficult to identify molten steel by sight alone. His engineering questions, on the other hand, don't have such obvious answers.

OCTheorists can't prove that there couldn't have been a controlled demolition. They can provide reasons why it would be difficult to carry out a CD. They fail to admit that explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers. Will yall admit this?
 
Last edited:
I do not keep any nano-thermite dust on me, so I cannpt admit it's true. But a bunch of engineers lying about finding nano thermite on top of high rises and bridges is pointless

maybe they are just out to get you :D
 
Last edited:
Patriots4Truth said:
I do not keep any nano-thermite dust on me, so I cannpt admit it's true. But a bunch of engineers lying about finding nano thermite on top of high rises and bridges is pointless

maybe they are just out to get you :D
Click to expand...
A "bunch"? Why do you think they had to come up with their own special way of testing to identify what they think they found?
 
Patriots4Truth said:
OCTheorists can't prove that there couldn't have been a controlled demolition. They can provide reasons why it would be difficult to carry out a CD.
Click to expand...

There was no damage to the structures consistant with CD by explosives, and no demolition charges were heard. Forget the comments about "sounded like bombs going off." Most of them did not occur in a place or time to give them any meaning. That idiot MacQueen can't read for comprehension, as evidenced by his interpretation of Karen Deshore's statement.

There is no hush-a-boom, and nobody heard explosions at the right time, so there cannot have been demolition charges.

They fail to admit that explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence that such a thing exists, or existed at the time, or that it was capable of doing the damage that the whackadoodles who posit this theory say it could do.

Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers. Will yall admit this?
Click to expand...

No. It's paint. As far as can be determined, all of the aluminum in the samples was contained on plate-like structures. In micrographs, these plates seem to take up less than a third of the volumn, which would mean that less than a third of the iron oxide would be in contact with aluminum, which would mean FAIL.

Interestingly, the plate-like structures in the micrographs are exactly the same shape and size as kaolin crystals.

That's paint.
 
leftysergeant said:
There was no damage to the structures consistant with CD by explosives, and no demolition charges were heard. Forget the comments about "sounded like bombs going off." Most of them did not occur in a place or time to give them any meaning. That idiot MacQueen can't read for comprehension, as evidenced by his interpretation of Karen Deshore's statement.

There is no hush-a-boom, and nobody heard explosions at the right time, so there cannot have been demolition charges.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that proving a negative like this isn't possible.
 
Patriots4Truth said:
...
This might seem like a dumb question but wouldn't the south wall pop up above the north wall in the videos if the north wall fell first?
Click to expand...

You are right. It does seem like a dumb question. Because it is a dumb question.
The north wall did not fall first. It fell last. Its collapse started long after the collapse of the core.

Patriots4Truth said:
Also, all this ragging on about how Derek can't prove molten steel by sight alone has just been long continual dodging of his engineering questions. Obviously it would be difficult to identify molten steel by sight alone. His engineering questions, on the other hand, don't have such obvious answers.
Click to expand...

There are two different issues here.
One is Dereks claim that there was molten steel some time after the collapses, and his insiuation that this somehow has something to do with the reason for the collapses.
Both are false with near certainty.
A verdict strengthened by the fact that Derek must lie, and stick to his lies despite having been called on his lies for months, to keep up an appearance of residual sensibility.

The other issue is his inability to comprehend an engineering report.


Patriots4Truth said:
OCTheorists can't prove that there couldn't have been a controlled demolition. They can provide reasons why it would be difficult to carry out a CD.
Click to expand...

They simply demand a little evidence. Instead iof lies.

Patriots4Truth said:
They fail to admit that explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers. Will yall admit this?
Click to expand...

No. You mean that a group of so-called "scientists" fraudulently claims in a non-peer-reviewed vanity journal that they found UN-exploded nanothermite.
That claim is demonstrably false. What they found was paint and primer.
 
Patriots4Truth said:
It's so big that they must be making 1/100,000th of what Silverstein made
Click to expand...

The interesting thing is that many of them admit that WTC7 LOOKED like a controlled demolition in the videos. And they will also agree that WTC7 looks like a controlled demolition after it was demolished (see photos)

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8607/wtc7controlleddemolitiohq3.jpg WTC7 Before
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc-gallery/wtc-rescuer/wtc7-1.JPG WTC7 after

But amazingly despite all this visible evidence (with which they agree) that WTC7 was demolished they will tell you that it was NOT a controlled demolition. I kid you not----ask them .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom