• 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.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
BStrong said:
Grizzly:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...94&postcount=3

I think that must have left a mark.
Click to expand...

Do you expect me to take something seriously, that I guess is suppose to be some kind of scientific analysis, that has "He then just drivels for a bit with the usual unsupported nonsense." written in it? As I said above, forget about Cole's experiment...conduct any experiment you feel will explain the "perplexing" findings. You know the same findings that both Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening suggested NIST should run tests on...and of course didn't.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Watch this video (all of it)...he tells you what to disprove...and he tells why he is running the test...why both Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening said there should be more tests.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=channel_video_title
Click to expand...
The maker of that video doesn't understand what the word eutectic means. You don't understand what the word eutectic means.

Please show me how Jon Cole managed to assess whether integranular melting or sulphidation occurred or didn't occur in that video.

I'll tell you - he looked at with his eyes. Now you won't know this because you are an ignoramus with zero knowledge of metallurgy, but I will tell you all the same in the vain hope that you might actually learn something - the two phenomenon are measured on a micron scale, that is a millionth of a metre. It is impossible to get this resolution with the human eye, instead you need to use an optical microscope (as well as preparing the sample).

TMD2_1 answer these questions?

Did Mr Cole take a sample from his experiment?
Did Mr Cole mount, grind, polish and etch this sample?
Did Mr Cole use a microscope to look at the structures present in this sample?
Did Mr Cole identify any intergranular melting, sulphidation or eutectic microstructures in this sample?
Did Mr Cole present these findings?

Now do you understand why his claims are nonsense?

Of course you won't - your a truther!
 
tmd2_1 said:
What is the point in that question? I mean the answer is not much...but I'm sure you are going to tell me how much you did....can't wait to hear it.
Click to expand...
You see this is exactly what we are talking about. You don't understand the question when everyone else understands the question. In a nutshell that is a truther - someone who doesn't understand or refuses to understand.

He simply is enquiring whether you have actually gone out into the big wide world to investigate your claims. To actually do something physical. How many people have you interviewed face to face? How many qualifications have you gained that are connected with 9/11? None I bet, because you get all your "information" from youtube. You are lazy.
 
tmd2_1 said:
We're going around in circles....
Click to expand...

Get ready for another ten years of going around in circles,then another ten years...... You have no evidence,no proof,no alternative coherent theory,you continually debunk yourself. Will you still be doing this in your old age? Get another hobby is my advice.
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
The maker of that video doesn't understand what the word eutectic means. You don't understand what the word eutectic means.

Please show me how Jon Cole managed to assess whether integranular melting or sulphidation occurred or didn't occur in that video.

I'll tell you - he looked at with his eyes. Now you won't know this because you are an ignoramus with zero knowledge of metallurgy, but I will tell you all the same in the vain hope that you might actually learn something - the two phenomenon are measured on a micron scale, that is a millionth of a metre. It is impossible to get this resolution with the human eye, instead you need to use an optical microscope (as well as preparing the sample).

TMD2_1 answer these questions?

Did Mr Cole take a sample from his experiment?
Did Mr Cole mount, grind, polish and etch this sample?
Did Mr Cole use a microscope to look at the structures present in this sample?
Did Mr Cole identify any intergranular melting, sulphidation or eutectic microstructures in this sample?
Did Mr Cole present these findings?

Now do you understand why his claims are nonsense?

Of course you won't - your a truther!
Click to expand...

The answer to all of your questions is no. But as I posted above forget about all he did for a second...all you have to do is do is exactly what Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening suggested NIST should do. Run experiments, to come up with an explanation for the "perplexing" findings. I mean you can pretend what he did never happened...just go out and prove it by experiment. Just as Cole suggested.

This should be no problem for you right? It would a good chance for you to enlighten everyone on what the word eutectic means. Someone with your qualifications, knowledge, and work ethic, and given the absurdity of what Cole is alleging, you should have that video out by the end of the day right? I do look forward to seeing it.
 
tmd2_1 said:
The answer to all of your questions is no. But as I posted above forget about all he did for a second.
Click to expand...
No, this is the real world tmd, those little mistakes do not get ignored.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
Ask yourself this...you had a crime the magnitude of 9/11 and not a single arrest was made in the country it was committed? Seems strange to me at least.
Click to expand...

Seems strange because it's a lie.

Please feel free to google for Zacarias Moussaoui.

Where did you hear that nobody was arrested?
 
tmd2_1 said:
I mean generally speaking you would think that most of the criminals support network would have to be in relatively close proximity. Maybe that's a bad assumption on my part.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they were. But, they were in the planes, and died. Terrible eh?

Why do you apologize for terrorists? AQ has admitted to the plot. There has been a conviction for the plot, and some have been killed trying to hide. Why are you supporting terrorism?
 
tmd2_1 said:
Do me a favor...Mr Big time investigator...look at this video by Jon Cole...it's all self contained...even Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening said more tests should be run. Watch the video and do exactly what he says....prove him wrong by experiment...for someone as smart as you that video should be done in just a few hours right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=channel_video_title
Click to expand...

Bolding mine. If you are such an big investigator yourself when you can not even get Dr. Greening's name correct. At least 7 times, you have referred to him as Fred when his name is Frank. I would think an intrepid investigator such as yourself would be sure to get his name correct, especially since he questions some of NIST's findings.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Do me a favor....prove him wrong by experiment, Ryan Mackey even said NIST (pg 102) should run tests...they didn't. Cole did, so I will wait for your video.
Click to expand...

He hasn't proven that the results that he sees in his experiments, match the corroded steel from the WTC.

Perhaps he has some more work to do.
 
Listen if you really want people to believe what you guys are saying...you (and I mean you as in the members of this forum) may try treating people with a little more respect.
Click to expand...

I (personally) will give you respect the INSTANT I think you deserve it. You keep urinating on the graves of the thousands of good people lost that day, you don't deserve it. Not you, not ergo, not any of the dozens of 'truthers' out there. Not one of you deserve it.

You "ask questions" - and ignore the answers that you don't like, which are the REAL truth by the way.

The REAL truth is explosives can't survive what we saw on 9/11.
The REAL truth is those aircraft could NOT have been remotely controlled.
The REAL truth is flight 77 struck the Pentagon.
The REAL truth is a massive fire from top to bottom burned in WTC 7 unfought for what - 7 hours?

Every single aspect of 9/11 has been digested ad nauseum and proven to be accurate in the context of what you people call the 'official story'. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

The fires, the aircraft impact, the hijackings, DNA proof of the passengers on the aircraft, wreckage at all 4 sites, everything.

Your side has proven nothing. You can't even prove the so-called explosives can exist, much less do what you claim they did.

And no, it wasn't the joos.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
If we're going to be addressing topics other than that of the OP can we at least chose one? I've seen this thread shotgun through hani Hanjour's piss poor flying, melted steel, thermit, WTC 7, dancing israelie's, and remote controlled aircraft. I thought topic swings like this were the reason why the general discussion thread was made...
Click to expand...

It should be merged with it as far as I'm concerned. My money's clearly safe with this one.
 
tmd2_1 said:
I am going to post the same thing I posted to that other lovely fellow...I really do await your video.


Do me a favor...Mr Big time investigator...look at this video by Jon Cole...it's all self contained...even Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening said more tests should be run. Watch the video and do exactly what he says....prove him wrong by experiment...for someone as smart as you that video should be done in just a few hours right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=channel_video_title
Click to expand...

When was Ryan Mackey's white paper that you cite done?

Are you aware that one of the top fire science schools in the country (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) with some of the best minds from that school, did infact analyze the steel? That they did in fact do more experiments, and concluded that it was NOT from thermite or thermate?

Are you aware of that?

Also, will you please cite your source for Mr. Mackey claiming what you say? Thanks.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Didn't say that..infact I have never ever said it was an "inside" job. Simply that I believe the evidence is more in the favor of an alternative theory. Which all I really would hope anyone is...at least willing to open that your long hold dogma may be incorrect (whatever the subject may be) it just seems like people here have trouble with that. They bend over backwards to hold on to their beliefs...no matter what the evidence....when if someone presents to me a good case and evidence, I will change my theory or beliefs.
Click to expand...

See - that's your problem. To you, 9/11 is a belief. A religion.

Is it my "belief" that an 18 wheeled truck carrying a load of stone from a quarry weighs more than my Chevy Volt? No. It's a fact.

Same thing for 9/11. The irrefutable fact is 19 terrorists hijacked 4 aircraft and caused 9/11. That's a fact. It's been proven time and again. People WITNESSED it. Everything is connected from the boarding in Boston to the partial collapse of the Pentagon and everything in between.

Your side is so hellbent to keep the argument to one aspect (WTC 7....the twin towers, etc) that you forget to include what happened the rest of the day in any of your silly little "beliefs".

We don't believe. We know.
 
tmd2_1 said:
The answer to all of your questions is no. But as I posted above forget about all he did for a second...all you have to do is do is exactly what Ryan Mackey and Fred Greening suggested NIST should do. Run experiments, to come up with an explanation for the "perplexing" findings. I mean you can pretend what he did never happened...just go out and prove it by experiment. Just as Cole suggested.

This should be no problem for you right? It would a good chance for you to enlighten everyone on what the word eutectic means. Someone with your qualifications, knowledge, and work ethic, and given the absurdity of what Cole is alleging, you should have that video out by the end of the day right? I do look forward to seeing it.
Click to expand...

Already done. By experts in the fire science/fire protection/engineering fields.

R. R. Biederman,* Erin M. Sullivan,* George F. Vander Voort** and R. D. Sisson, Jr.,*

http://www.georgevandervoort.com/fa_lit_papers/WTC_Talk.pdf

Perhaps you should stop running your mouth about something you're CLEARLY uneducated about.
 
triforcharity said:
When was Ryan Mackey's white paper that you cite done?

Are you aware that one of the top fire science schools in the country (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) with some of the best minds from that school, did infact analyze the steel? That they did in fact do more experiments, and concluded that it was NOT from thermite or thermate?

Are you aware of that?

Also, will you please cite your source for Mr. Mackey claiming what you say? Thanks.
Click to expand...

look at page 102 of his report..I've cited it many times
 
triforcharity said:
Already done. By experts in the fire science/fire protection/engineering fields.

R. R. Biederman,* Erin M. Sullivan,* George F. Vander Voort** and R. D. Sisson, Jr.,*

http://www.georgevandervoort.com/fa_lit_papers/WTC_Talk.pdf

Perhaps you should stop running your about something you're CLEARLY uneducated about.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? This is right from the FEMA report. Written by Biederman and Sisson.

The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.

That power point slide you sent has one experiment in it that I could see. Didn't really post the results that I could see. Gave some hypotheses as to where the Sulfur came from...but ultimately said...we don't know. As near as I can see this offers next to nothing. You'll have to point out what you want me to see from this.

Also I notice you conveniently sent me a report without a date, that's ok I was able to find one that had it on it. Though I'm not sure if it's correct you can go here http://www.wpi.edu/Images/CMS/MCSI/2006biederman.pdf
It looks like it was presented twice June 8th 2005 and June 6 2006. Even if you go with the later date....that was released around when Greening released his report asking for questions (May 2006) and two years before Mackey did (2008)

I highly doubt Cole would have done this in 2010 and not mentioned what whatever this study you linked to is supposed to prove.
 
Clayton Moore said:
"Our purpose was to document the event."
"Our purpose was to document the event."

It was said on Israeli TV. That's not evidence? Stating they were there to document the Towers getting hit by jets is not evidence?
Click to expand...

Fail by quotemine...... by this same silly standard Silverstein ordered WTC 7 demolished by FDNY and there were both freight trains and explosives at the WTC.

None of these things are meaningful except as records of off-the-cuff comments that people make.

If those young guys were not from Israel they wouldn't even be on truther's radar.

Pathetic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom