Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[Sabretooth]

A well insulated pool of 15,000 tons will not cool quickly in ordinary terms. Cooling molten steel forms flecks on the surface that gradually join uo to form a skin. But the whole bulk has to radiate and transmit it's heat away. In such insulated conditions and with such poor conductors the heat could not quickly be wicked away. Ergo the 100 days.

And, how much thermite do you suppose is needed to melt 15k+ tons of steel?

 

[The Platypus]

A well insulated pool of 15,000 tons will not cool quickly in ordinary terms.

How do you know there was 15,000 tons? Leslie again?

 

[Fly Poster]

As I said if you can look at the Cole video and not think thermite could have been used you never will. Cole said it best...there's some people you can't convince.
You're right every time there is "maintenance" going on in a building every one there makes sure to give it a close up inspection. They also couldn't have done some of the work late at night when no one is there. What would be the challenge in that? Do right smack in the middle of the day.

All of this is beside the point the lead NIST investigator was caught lying about the subject. To me and I hope to everyone this is a big deal.

Cole actually used thermate (thermite with added sulphur, and barium nitrate), according to Wikipedia ( which may be wrong), the addition of barium nitrate makes the mixture explosive, even if that is not the case, I doubt Cole could reproduce his experiment without it, and as far as I know no one has found barium nitrate in either alleged thermite samples, or the corroded steel.

 

[bill smith]

And, how much thermite do you suppose is needed to melt 15k+ tons of steel?

Maybe 50 or 100 tons. But I will tell you how that was planted unseen at another time.

 

[twinstead]

Maybe 50 or 100 tons. But I will tell you how that was planted unseen at another time.

Why, do you need a little more time to make that story up?

 

[Sabretooth]

Maybe 50 or 100 tons. But I will tell you how that was planted unseen at another time.

10 years not enough time, bill?

 

[WildCat]

Maybe 50 or 100 tons.

So you're claiming that 1 lb of thermite can melt 150 lbs of steel?

 

[beachnut]

How many times a day do you use the word delusional?

Until you, others, and 911 truth stop spewing delusional nonsense. Easy question.

This appears to be a new poster, and some patience is called for.

WTC 1&2 ALONG WITH WTC 7 WERE ALL DESTROYED ACCORDING TO A MASTER PLAN....

Delusional, you share this with him, you don't understand why it is delusional. For you this is reality, for rational people, it is delusional when you check the evidence and do reality based research. I know you have no clue what happen on 911, so you think this is rational. He has delusions, you like delusions. What is new? Welcome to the new guy, he must of missed this is a skeptics forum. He posted in the sub forum where crazy 911 claims are discussed, like the failed ideas you have on 911. You have no evidence, he has no evidence. Patience? 10 years is enough time to figure out 911, and your parents and teachers should tell you the internet is not a safe place to find information and blindly repeat it as if it was true.

I was pushing the envelope of the meaning of pyroclastic. Even if he is wrong in his use of pyroclastics, it does have a use as an analogy, and if we looked through the eyes of vulcanologist would we see anything different.

New poster said this...

how did all the concrete turn to dust...how does human bone turn to dust? how about the massive Pyroclastic clouds......

ALL the concrete turn to dust - a lie, kind of delusional.
"massive Pyroclastic clouds", now we have a volcano at the WTC, he needs to add to him it looked like a pyroclastic cloud. No big deal, he is repeating blindly things he picked up on the internet, or made up out of ignorance.

What is interesting there is no 911 truth single integrated story of woo. We have WTC nonsense, some Flight 93 nonsense, and Pentagon nonsense. No single plot put forth by 911 truth makes sense or fits what happens in the real world. Why do you support lies and spread delusional claims?

 

[The Platypus]

50 or 100 tons LMAO!!!

Somehow 911 kooks think noone can see right through their ridiculous lies.

 

[DeathDart]

You want skeptical,
You get skeptical.
You want methodical,
you get methodical.

You say fire caused the final collapse of the buildings?
You say there was a real investigation at WTC.

Prove it!
Show me all the steel that reached more than 700C.
Your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) controlled the site. No one was sneaking in there and carting away the evidence unless it was done by your people.

Visual evidence does not prove that the fire brought the buildings down.

Painting a mixture of clay and carbon on the gypsum all along the core will produce an equivalent failure. The acid remains as corrosive gas that will flow with upward with the heat. It would tend to affect the thin cored upper stories first. Cascade failure by any cause, is still cascade failure.

You do not have the rigorous proof necessary to remove all reasonable doubt. You don't have it because your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) did not want to have it. At this point I can't tell you why they did what they did.

Why don't you ask them, while they are hooked to a polygraph, and under oath. No one did that either!

Their actions is what precipitated all this Truther garbage. Why doesn't anyone question the people with the answers, under oath?

Now you see the real conspiracy!

And No, the Zelikow Puppet show doesn't count as an investigation.

 

[DeathDart]

Where is the proof?

Where is the steel?

 

[Animal]

You want skeptical,
You get skeptical.
You want methodical,
you get methodical.

You say fire caused the final collapse of the buildings?
You say there was a real investigation at WTC.

Prove it!
Show me all the steel that reached more than 700C.
Your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) controlled the site. No one was sneaking in there and carting away the evidence unless it was done by your people.

Visual evidence does not prove that the fire brought the buildings down.

Painting a mixture of clay and carbon on the gypsum all along the core will produce an equivalent failure. The acid remains as corrosive gas that will flow with upward with the heat. It would tend to affect the thin cored upper stories first. Cascade failure by any cause, is still cascade failure.

You do not have the rigorous proof necessary to remove all reasonable doubt. You don't have it because your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) did not want to have it. At this point I can't tell you why they did what they did.

Why don't you ask them, while they are hooked to a polygraph, and under oath. No one did that either!

Their actions is what precipitated all this Truther garbage. Why doesn't anyone question the people with the answers, under oath?

Now you see the real conspiracy!

And No, the Zelikow Puppet show doesn't count as an investigation.

So much fantasy, so much cynical delusion......with a dash of kookiness

 

[sylvan8798]

So much fantasy, so much cynical delusion......with a dash of kookiness

Shaken, not stirred.

 

[DeathDart]

So much fantasy, so much cynical delusion......with a dash of kookiness

Answer the question, where is the steel?

You are the one who lives in the unexamined delusion.

 

[DeathDart]

Shaken, not stirred.

Shaken,not stirred.

One part Pakistani ISI
One part Israeli Intelligence (doesn't have to be the Mossad, Israel has several intelligence groups)
One part Saudi Arabian money, and of course Osama Bin Laden

ISI and the Saudis are going to do a fund raiser (fund raiser as in The Long Kiss Goodnight).

 

[Animal]

Answer the question, where is the steel?

Hangar 17 at Kennedy International Airport.

You are the one who lives in the unexamined delusion.

Nope....that belongs solely to the troofer world

 

[beachnut]

You want skeptical,
You get skeptical.
You want methodical,
you get methodical.

You say fire caused the final collapse of the buildings?
You say there was a real investigation at WTC.

Prove it!
Show me all the steel that reached more than 700C.
Your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) controlled the site. No one was sneaking in there and carting away the evidence unless it was done by your people.

Visual evidence does not prove that the fire brought the buildings down.

Painting a mixture of clay and carbon on the gypsum all along the core will produce an equivalent failure. The acid remains as corrosive gas that will flow with upward with the heat. It would tend to affect the thin cored upper stories first. Cascade failure by any cause, is still cascade failure.

You do not have the rigorous proof necessary to remove all reasonable doubt. You don't have it because your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) did not want to have it. At this point I can't tell you why they did what they did.

Why don't you ask them, while they are hooked to a polygraph, and under oath. No one did that either!

Their actions is what precipitated all this Truther garbage. Why doesn't anyone question the people with the answers, under oath?

Now you see the real conspiracy!

And No, the Zelikow Puppet show doesn't count as an investigation.

How many times a day do you post delusional claptrap like this? And you ask why I use delusional so much.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Prove it!
Show me all the steel that reached more than 700C.

NIST did the modeling. If you doubt the modelling, you need to show imperially that it's wrong. Calling them government paid shills is not proving them "wrong" it's poisoning the well. That's not skepticism, it's utter paranoia. It's not methodical, it's absolutely sloppy.

Visual evidence does not prove that the fire brought the buildings down.

Visual evidence + witness + careful study of Material properties/construction + modelling + physical evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt a combination of impact and fire.

AE911's "methodical" approach:
first in history = not possible
pyroclastic flows
"cold massive steel"
Compare the WTC to some random street building even if it's a porn strip built of legos.

You want to suggest otherwise? Show that NIST's errors are as grotesque as you claim, and show competent research that demonstrates it. Calling Bush an illegitimate president, Rudy rotten, NIST part of a government cohort, or you peers shills isn't just "not enough," it's nothing at all.

Who to believe? The organization that actually spent 4 to 6 years doing the models and studies? Or the rag tag group of professionals who think you can slap two cardboard boxes together and call it a model to a full scale building? That's tough question!

Painting a mixture of clay and carbon on the gypsum all along the core will produce an equivalent failure. The acid remains as corrosive gas that will flow with upward with the heat. It would tend to affect the thin cored upper stories first. Cascade failure by any cause, is still cascade failure.

Do as you demand from us; don't speculate, show the proof. You can argue anything you want, but for it to be a proven reality you need to show imperial proof that:
A) NIST's engineering report is grotesquely inaccurate, and where
B) That said errors are made knowingly
C) That you have evidence of an alternative culprit

Anything before that is speculation.

You do not have the rigorous proof necessary to remove all reasonable doubt. You don't have it because your people (FBI, NIST, Rotten Rudy) did not want to have it.

Show us where they covered up. Show us NIST's grotesquely misused engineering calcs and statements. Show that Rudy was even involved in the first place... You demand proof but aren't willing do it for your own arguments. You make a claim, it's your burden to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

Why don't you ask them, while they are hooked to a polygraph, and under oath. No one did that either!

Is your probable cause something other than that you think they're utter slime balls? That's old news... but has nothing to do with direct complicity in mass murder.

 

[Fly Poster]

Originally Posted by bill smith
"Maybe 50 or 100 tons. But I will tell you how that was planted unseen at another time."


"Why, do you need a little more time to make that story up?"



Bill has said this before, then gone on to explain how the hollow columns were filled with thermite.

Teaser fail.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

NIST did the modeling. If you doubt the modelling, you need to show imperially that it's wrong.

Ok, before I start: "Imperially??

Only one, Childlike poster in this forum can do that, and he's not participating in this part of the thread.

But as to the rest:

Calling them government paid shills is not proving them "wrong" it's poisoning the well. That's not skepticism, it's utter paranoia. It's not methodical, it's absolutely sloppy.


Visual evidence + witness + careful study of Material properties/construction + modelling + physical evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt a combination of impact and fire.

AE911's "methodical" approach:
first in history = not possible
pyroclastic flows
"cold massive steel"
Compare the WTC to some random street building even if it's a porn strip built of legos.

You want to suggest otherwise? Show that NIST's errors are as grotesque as you claim, and show competent research that demonstrates it. Calling Bush an illegitimate president, Rudy rotten, NIST part of a government cohort, or you peers shills isn't just "not enough," it's nothing at all.


Do as you demand from us; don't speculate, show the proof. You can argue anything you want, but for it to be a proven reality you need to show imperial proof that:
A) NIST's engineering report is grotesquely inaccurate, and where
B) That you have evidence of an alternative culprit

Anything before that is speculation.


Show us where they covered up. Show us NIST's grotesquely misused engineering calcs and statements. Show that Rudy was even involved in the first place... You demand proof but aren't willing do it for your own arguments. You make a claim, it's your burden to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.


Is your probable cause something other than that you think they're utter slime balls? That's old news... but has nothing to do with direct complicity in mass murder.

Grizzly Bear here has hit it right on the head. The argument "The investigation is wrong because I can call Rudy G. names" simply does not fly. I don't know whether to characterize it as Ad Hom or to just say it's outright wrong, but the reality is that one does not follow the other. Like Griz here said, if there are egregious errors in the NIST report, point them out. James Quintiere feels there are, and went to Congress to tell them what was wrong. And once there, he didn't use the argument The Investigation's Wrong Because Guliani's a (fill-in-the-blank), he described the specifics of his point vs. NISTs. But the bottom line is that the correct way to criticize the various investigations' findings is to actually criticize the findings. Not to think that throwing pejoratives on them is sufficient refutation. It is not. And it speaks ill of a person to try that tactic.