Merged More proof of WTC demolitions/controlled explosives

tempesta29 said:
Since many witnesses testified to molten steel, it's hardly a lie. You may not agree with the reliability of the witnesses, but calling it a lie is just childish.
Click to expand...
Where is the melted steel? No melted steel was found during clean up, glowing steel was found, but I have that in my wood stove. Lies is the best 911 truth can do. But please feel free to pick the melted steel and show us the proof. 911 truth can't find evidence for explosives, can't prove melted steel, can't do much more than pass on lies and delusions. Failure in the 10th year, guaranteed infinite fail.
 
beachnut said:
Where is the melted steel? No melted steel was found during clean up, glowing steel was found, but I have that in my wood stove. Lies is the best 911 truth can do. But please feel free to pick the melted steel and show us the proof. 911 truth can't find evidence for explosives, can't prove melted steel, can't do much more than pass on lies and delusions. Failure in the 10th year, guaranteed infinite fail.
Click to expand...

Tempesta,will you still be doing this from the computer built into your wheelchair in the old folk's home?
 
Oystein said:
How do you measure "accomplished", and what's your evidence that Toni is "accomplished"?

Szamboti is not a licensed professional engineer (P.E.) in any state of the Union. This may not be very important for mechanical engineers (I frankly don't know), but doesn't speak for him either.




This is a nonsensical statement. There is no such factor that could be reasonably given for the entire building. Even if there were, the moment you take out some structural element, as happened when WTC1 crashed into 7, all such design considerations are off. Once fire breaks out, and rages uncontrolledly for over 7 hours and throughout at least 14 floors, probably more, all such factors are off.
That you would write such nonsense proves once again that you have close to zero understanding of the things you talk about here.
Does it bother you that your imcompetence is clearly visible for most posters here every single time you post?
Click to expand...


Bumped for walkyrie, who ran away from earlier nonsense claims, only to return for new nonsense stuff.
 
tempesta29 said:
Since many witnesses testified to molten steel, it's hardly a lie. You may not agree with the reliability of the witnesses, but calling it a lie is just childish.
Click to expand...

Yoou said "there was molten steel", not "many witnesses testified to molten steel".
There wasn't any molten steel to speak of.
There weren't many witnesses testifying to it.
Not a single one of those testimonies could corroborated.
Not a single one of the witnesses had a method at his or her disposal to identify whatever they saw as both "molten" and "steel".

So what you wrote was plain wrong. Maybe not a lie - I can believe that you believe that there was molten steel. You are just as wrong as any of the witnesses.
 
Oystein said:
Not a single one of the witnesses had a method at his or her disposal to identify whatever they saw as both "molten" and "steel".
Click to expand...

There were only two witnesses who actually saw liquid metal flowing on the site.

Two fire fighters are shown on video somewhere around here commenting that the saw "molten steel running down the channels." This would have to place them somewhere under the pile or one of the buildings. Indications are that they were under Builng 6 while it was still burning.

There was molten brass and lead in Building 6.

The only testimony to "molten steel" is obviously far short of evidence.
 
Just goes to show that truthers and everybody else on Earth have a fundamental difference of opinion on the very definition of the word "proof".
 
tempesta29 said:
Since many witnesses testified to molten steel, it's hardly a lie. You may not agree with the reliability of the witnesses, but calling it a lie is just childish.
Click to expand...
They testified to seeing what they thought was molten steel. It could've been aluminium, or a lot of other things. Without actually having a metallurgist on scene to test, their statements can't be taken as definitive.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Since it's impossible to identify molten steel by visual inspection from a safe distance, who cares?

Dave
Click to expand...

Excellent point, and one not mentioned enough.

Temperature of liquid steel is approximately 1800oC (3272oF).

At that temp, a person not wearing any PPE would find themselves with serious burns being in the relative vicinity of "rivers of molten steel"...
 
twinstead said:
Just goes to show that truthers and everybody else on Earth have a fundamental difference of opinion on the very definition of the word "proof".
Click to expand...

Its common across all conspiracy theorists not just Truthers. I see the same nonsense "proof" in Vaccination CTs and Birthers to name just two.:(
 
Sabretooth said:
Excellent point, and one not mentioned enough.

Temperature of liquid steel is approximately 1800oC (3272oF).

At that temp, a person not wearing any PPE would find themselves with serious burns being in the relative vicinity of "rivers of molten steel"...
Click to expand...

Steven Jones did even better than that. He tried to pass a rescue/cleanup operation as a moment where firefighters gathered around one spot, unprotected with 2800oF molten steel shining in right in their faces two feet away. And many truthers ate that fake of a picture like candy.
 
Listening to that guy talk makes my head hurt. I realize he's trying to remove jargon from what he's talking about but with his lack of public speaking ability it really just comes out as gibberish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom