The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

[Thunder]

Your posts are tiring-- boring and tiring. In terms of that piece of steel's ability to provide clues it is contaminated evidence. Stop wasting your time and mine with this childishness.

the fatigue you might feel from reading my posts, has nothing to do with the thread.

however, I shall keep this post in my lock box, for the next time you ask me for evidence.

....and btw, if this hunk of steel is "contaminated evidence", then so is the crap found on the Brooklyn Bridge or in that chick's A/C unit & windowsill, that was used to "confirm" the presence of thermite.

Checkmate.

 

[TJM]

These explosions occurred deep in the sub-levels and people in the lobby were knocked to the ground. "Large motors filled with oil"? Who are you kidding here?

I've worked in buildings with large emergency generators, main electrical switchgear, UPS systems, diesel fuel tanks, natural gas mains, gasoline lines, sewer mains, large stores of chemicals - all in the basement levels.

 

[tempesta29]

the fatigue you might feel from reading my posts, has nothing to do with the thread.

however, I shall keep this post in my lock box, for the next time you ask me for evidence.

....and btw, if this hunk of steel is "contaminated evidence", then so is the crap found on the Brooklyn Bridge or in that chick's A/C unit & windowsill, that was used to "confirm" the presence of thermite.

Checkmate.

Then I guess we should start interrogating that chick about her access to nano-thermitic materials. She could be a Russian super spy!

 

[Carlos]

These explosions occurred deep in the sub-levels and people in the lobby were knocked to the ground. "Large motors filled with oil"? Who are you kidding here?

I can say another one... a Boeing 767 impact at 80th floor.

 

[twinstead]

Then I guess we should start interrogating that chick about her access to nano-thermitic materials. She could be a Russian super spy!

I suppose step one would be to show it was nano-thermitic material in the first place.

 

[Thunder]

Then I guess we should start interrogating that chick about her access to nano-thermitic materials. She could be a Russian super spy!

soo much effort, soo little substance.

 

[chipmunk stew]

It's unlikely so much aluminum would have gathered together in such a manner.

I find it hi-larious that Armchair Engineer continues to make these types of bald assertions about what's likely and what's not.

Volume of metals at Ground Zero--
Steel: high (structural members)
Aluminum: high (cladding)

Pools of steel: likely
Pools of aluminum: unlikely
Evidence: {NULL}
Reasoning: {NULL}

 

[tempesta29]

So then volumes of steel and aluminum are comparable you would say?

 

[triforcharity]

I'd say the evidence is pretty convincing. You disagree. Aluminum generally does not glow bright yellow, or even look warm in color at all. Now perhaps aluminum could have glowed somewhat at some point, but not 4 or 5 weeks after the initial WTC office fires. Also, I see no reason why so much molten aluminum would have united in these "pools" and "rivers" of what was described as "like lava". It's unlikely so much aluminum would have gathered together in such a manner.

And again, there are witnesses of actual steel beams melting. This is probably how they know it was molten steel. These weren't simply just pools of glowing material. There was a great amount of steel in and around these molten pools.

Asside from the general bull **** that is your post, you do realize that the fires burned for 99 DAYS? Which, BTW, is more than 4-5 weeks.

Once they were on the ground, it wasn't just "office fires". It then included cars, trucks, people, etc. that was caught in the pile.

 

[triforcharity]

These explosions occurred deep in the sub-levels and people in the lobby were knocked to the ground. "Large motors filled with oil"? Who are you kidding here?

You don't think a large electrical motor could explode?

Was this "explosion that lifted people off their feet" before or fter the collapse? We need some context. A quote would be nice.

Got quotes? And, a source would be even better. Thanks.

 

[chipmunk stew]

So then volumes of steel and aluminum are comparable you would say?

In that there was lots of both, yes.

Unless you can be specific about the size of the pools, there's no need to get more specific than that. A single section of cladding melted down would be a "pool" of molten aluminum.

 

[dafydd]

These explosions occurred deep in the sub-levels and people in the lobby were knocked to the ground. "Large motors filled with oil"? Who are you kidding here?

He was not attempting to kid. At the printers and photo engravers where I used to work there were three large transformers in the basement,all filled with large amounts of oil. You really should know something about a subject before you comment on it.

 

[Fonebone]

POopsie

Because it has been shown.

Alienentity has a channel on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/user/AlienEntity1




He has done a rather indepth analysis of buildings which were CD and found that even with intentional CD, the buildings did not fall at gravitational acceleration. Oopsie.

So the fact that wtc7 had 2.25 seconds of gravitational accelerations shows it wasn't a CD.

You are trying to claim that
a. free fall acceleration is a product of CD.

when shown that free fall acceleration isn't a product of CD now you shift to
b. the fact that free fall acceleration isn't the product of CD means it is CD.

how does that work again?

POopsie

AlienEntity's integrity and veracity has been benchmarked in this post:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6702140#post6702140
Reporter :HUGE EXPLOSION !

BTW likewise AW Smith's reply typifies and benchmarks the JREF debunkie monkey crew's "on message" mantra ...NO ?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6702155#post6702155

 

[A W Smith]

POopsie

AlienEntity's integrity and veracity has been benchmarked in this post:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6702140#post6702140
Reporter :HUGE EXPLOSION !

BTW likewise AW Smith's reply typifies and benchmarks the JREF debunkie monkey crew's "on message" mantra ...NO ?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6702155#post6702155

Why do you bump my post to remind yourself of a question you wont answer?

Again

When you listened to the audio of that video fonebone, be honest with us, Did YOU hear a huge explosion? Or did you just take the reporters word that there was a "huge explosion" because it supports your conspiracy fantasy?

 

[Dragon37]

If you can name one thing that can create such massive explosions that people are literally rocked off their feet then I'm all ears.

kerosene traveling down the elevator shafts and blasting out the elevators. If you had actually read witness testimony instead of making relying on one person's unsubstantiated bomb claims then you would know that several people on several floors who were by elevators were knocked down when doors were blasted off by fuel explosions.

 

[Dragon37]

I'd say the evidence is pretty convincing. You disagree. Aluminum generally does not glow bright yellow, or even look warm in color at all. Now perhaps aluminum could have glowed somewhat at some point, but not 4 or 5 weeks after the initial WTC office fires. Also, I see no reason why so much molten aluminum would have united in these "pools" and "rivers" of what was described as "like lava". It's unlikely so much aluminum would have gathered together in such a manner.

All assertions not fact. Why would molten aluminum not gathered in such a manner? Is aluminum anti-social?

And again, there are witnesses of actual steel beams melting. This is probably how they know it was molten steel. These weren't simply just pools of glowing material. There was a great amount of steel in and around these molten pools.

If there was so much molten steel why is it that of the recorded steel recovered, which is almost all of the steel that the buildings were built of, is it INTACT (meaning not melted, not slag)? Could it be that who ever witnesses this was either incorrect or even embellishing the story? Why is it that despite all the fables of molten steel that deniers make so much hoopla about is there ZERO evidence of huge slag formations being extracted or carted away?

 

[Fonebone]

Sigh. Yes they could change their transponder codes, i believe, but ALL OF THE PLANES that were thought to be hijacked were known commercial flights not test flights. As well I must stress again I have NEVER heard that the military test were taking place anywhere near the trouble area. The only problem ATC had was confirming which of the commercial flights were actually hijacked they never mentioned any issues whatsoever regarding military simulations.

Say WHAT ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W2Hu70y_D8
[excerpt]
ATC : Flt 175 suddenly changed transponder codes and...[/excerpt]

 

[Fonebone]

It's as if you didn't read the OP.

100%. Impossible. One-hundred-percent.

You're free to disagree, of course. But you'd be wrong. Again.

How do you explain this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/apr/30/nation/na-attack30
April 30, 2002|ERIC LICHTBLAU and JOSH MEYER

[excerpt]
The hijackers "left no paper trail," FBI Director Robert Mueller said in the text of a speech that the FBI released Monday. "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper--either here in the United States or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere--that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot."[/excerpt]

amateur terrorists outfox the FBI ? NSA ? CIA etc. ?

100 % impossible - one hundred percent !
LUCK ?
OR ...?

 

[tempesta29]

All assertions not fact. Why would molten aluminum not gathered in such a manner? Is aluminum anti-social?

Because aluminum was not even remotely as abundant as steel. You ever wonder why we never hear about reports of large pools of silvery molten metal in the rubble? We certainly would have had there been abundant and contiguous volumes of the material. It is highly improbable most if not all witnesses of molten steel didn't also see steel beams in states of heat near a liquid state. Where there is molten steel, there is a steel beam dripping.

If there was so much molten steel why is it that of the recorded steel recovered, which is almost all of the steel that the buildings were built of, is it INTACT (meaning not melted, not slag)? Could it be that who ever witnesses this was either incorrect or even embellishing the story? Why is it that despite all the fables of molten steel that deniers make so much hoopla about is there ZERO evidence of huge slag formations being extracted or carted away?

This is one of the "ground zero meteorites". It's comprised of formerly molten steel and concrete.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc_meteorite.wmv

There's a 9/11 display here in NYC that houses some of these "meteorites".
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/gun_notice.jpg

 

[Fonebone]

Why do you bump my post to remind yourself of a question you wont answer?

Again

NO I didn't hear the huge explosion in the video but the reporter DID.
Meaning the explosion noises in the video were excised or muted.
These firemen heard the explosions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o&feature=player_embedded


Are you calling these firemen liars AW ?
Be honest with us AW - Are you saying the reporter shouted
"HUGE EXPLOSION" just to fool those stupid twoofers he knew
would question the official story in the future ?

Some have something to say,
and some have to say something .