• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm well aware that they are not looking for thermite or addressing conspiracy theorists. I asked Chris Mohr what he thought of these findings relative to his insistence that no proof of CD is available and you started jumping up and down about there being no proof for thermite amongst the FEMA evidence.

As I read it, they are questioning how the steel came to look as it did and why high levels of sulphur were found. They now need to understand where that sulphur came from. I don't see them discussing the time element of eutectic reactions and suggesting they are slow.
The eutectic proves it was not thermite. You are not listening. Have you had chemical engineering, one course? You don't listen, you don't care, you like lies.
 
This is one of the arguments of the debunkers they often use.

It shows their lack of knowledge about demolitions.

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/02/debunker-verinage-fantasies-are-bunk.html

Read everything, watch everything.

Lie number 1: They don't weaken ANY floors. Period. (You can read the patent)

Lie number 2: "Debunkers" do not claim the reason the two are comparable is because of their speed. It is because it shows that a building CAN in fact collapse, without any explosives being used.

(The "debunkers" here will see the contradiction in this)
"the Verinage demolitions actually seem to support our claims because in all three of the videos I could find, the rate of fall appeared to slow down after the upper section impacted the lower section."

Then, in the VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, he says :
"I never actually measured the rate of fall of these buildings though."

Wow.

Why must someone make up at least 1 complete lie, and invent strawman arguments, to try to prove his point?

Oh, because what he says, is bull ****. Period.
 
200 technical experts, to explain the collapse of wtc 7.

And no one has noticed the free fall LOL

But a highschool teacher can...

Strange debunkers ignoring this.... Very strange....

Did it change the mechanism of collapse at all?

Didn't think so.
 
Since all they are saying is the beam reached 1000 degreesC I don't see what your point is?

Well, of course you don't. You're a truther.

Here, I will go slow for you.

If the temperature only reached 1000 deg. C, then it wasn't therm*te of any kind. Therm*te burns well in excess of 2200 deg. C. Well above.

Conclusion: Not therm*te of any flavor.
 
Well, of course you don't. You're a truther.

Here, I will go slow for you.

If the temperature only reached 1000 deg. C, then it wasn't therm*te of any kind. Therm*te burns well in excess of 2200 deg. C. Well above.

Conclusion: Not therm*te of any flavor.

A six year old could understand that. Let's see how the truthers do.
 
A six year old could understand that. Let's see how the truthers do.

I just asked my son, (who, BTW, says he wants to be a firefighter when he is older. He's 10) and he understands the concept just fine.

In fact, his words were, and I quote: " What kind of moron can't figure out that it wasn't thermite? I mean, really? What kind of idiot doesn't understand the problem?"

Now, I understand that my son is kinda above the curve when it comes to fire and fire science, but really, that's basic math and reasoning.
 
Chris, whatever happened to the over 75 Pentagon videos that were confiscated by the FBI? Why haven't they been released.

How many time must it be explained to troofers. Private videos that had no evidence of the event on them and were not used in court remain the property of the private entities that created them. Pentagon videos that did not contain any evidence of the event remain unreleased due to security issues.

The pentagon contains 6,500,000 s.f. how many cameras do troofers think were point at the sky in such a facility? :jaw-dropp
 
I just asked my son, (who, BTW, says he wants to be a firefighter when he is older. He's 10) and he understands the concept just fine.

In fact, his words were, and I quote: " What kind of moron can't figure out that it wasn't thermite? I mean, really? What kind of idiot doesn't understand the problem?"

Now, I understand that my son is kinda above the curve when it comes to fire and fire science, but really, that's basic math and reasoning.

Math and reasoning are strangers to truthers. You have a smart son,you must be proud of him.
 
How many time must it be explained to troofers. Private videos that had no evidence of the event on them and were not used in court remain the property of the private entities that created them. Pentagon videos that did not contain any evidence of the event remain unreleased due to security issues.

The pentagon contains 6,500,000 s.f. how many cameras do troofers think were point at the sky in such a facility? :jaw-dropp

To sidetrack for a minute,the Pentagon has a lot more toilets as it should have because when it was being built segregation was still rife and there were black and white facilities. There were protests and the toilets were made a free for all. End of sidetrack.

http://www.snopes.com/military/pentagonbathrooms.asp
 
A free for all in the toilets? I don't really like the sound of that. It seems to me that that might just be a tad unsanitary.
 
To sidetrack for a minute,the Pentagon has a lot more toilets as it should have because when it was being built segregation was still rife and there were black and white facilities. There were protests and the toilets were made a free for all. End of sidetrack.

http://www.snopes.com/military/pentagonbathrooms.asp

Furthering your side track.....note that it was government entities that demanded separate facilities. If it had been up to most private businesses, they would not have wasted the money on unneeded duplicate facilities. :mad:
 
I just asked my son, (who, BTW, says he wants to be a firefighter when he is older. He's 10) and he understands the concept just fine.

In fact, his words were, and I quote: " What kind of moron can't figure out that it wasn't thermite? I mean, really? What kind of idiot doesn't understand the problem?"

Now, I understand that my son is kinda above the curve when it comes to fire and fire science, but really, that's basic math and reasoning.
Hey Tri,

I'm still asking around about pix of Building 7 and its tilt either before collapse or as it was collapsing. Seems I can't convince our friend Bill that there was a visible tilt in Building 7. BTW Bill go 11 minutes into part 16 of my videos to see and hear firefighter Miller talking about and showing the visible leaning of Building 7 and predicting its collapse. Maybe Tri has another picture. I'm not quitting on you Bill. Do you agree that Building 7 was tilting based on this video or do you still deny it? Maybe Tri or his ten year old son has the proof you need. It's frustraing that we can;t even agree on visual observation.
 
BTW Bill go 11 minutes into part 16 of my videos to see and hear firefighter Miller talking about and showing the visible leaning of Building 7 and predicting its collapse. .

Chris, seriously give it up witjh Bill.

I already showed him that clip in this thread, he already knew about it and said this in responce to me:

The structural 'tegrity guy ? I must say he looks like a really trustworthy person. Babysitter material even.

Bill thinks, of course, that Miller is a government agent presumably or maybe that he is just insane or just a complete idiot. Either way he clearly has no respect for the FDNY so there is no point quoting what the firefighters actually believe, all Bill cares about is when he can find a place where they said they heard 'splosions.
 
Bill,

This is your big chance to prove EDX wrong! Don't miss this incredible opportunity! (see his post #2175 immediately above). Or do you totally mistrust the parade of firefighters who testified that they saw structural deformations and huge fires in Building 7 prior to its collapse? EDX says you have no respect for FDNY except when they talk about explosions.

So please tell me, do you not believe firefighter Miller, and do you also believe the photo I showed you of the tilting of Building 7 is fraudulently distorted? Or can you allow this into our little exercise in direct visual observation? Is EDX right about you? I hope not!
 
Interesting interview today with James Meigs of Popular Mechanics and Jonathan Kay.

http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/08/25/conspiracy-theories-and-the-sept-11-terrorist-attacks

A good suggestion to a commenter named Markus.

Think of it as someone was telling you all the main events including before and after were going to take place. Scratch your head. That would be your first pass.

Then look at the official explanations as if you were an investigator for a legal organization. Think of it as a possible arson/insurance type scam with the WTC owner getting billions, the Eisenhower Military–industrial complex complex getting two wars and the Patriot Act and Homeland Security.
 
I just asked my son, (who, BTW, says he wants to be a firefighter when he is older. He's 10) and he understands the concept just fine.

In fact, his words were, and I quote: " What kind of moron can't figure out that it wasn't thermite? I mean, really? What kind of idiot doesn't understand the problem?"

Now, I understand that my son is kinda above the curve when it comes to fire and fire science, but really, that's basic math and reasoning.

Sounds like a chip off the old block :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom