Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[Edx]

Richard Gage disagrees with you. Add the media and NYPD also.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Thats what I don't get from truthers, even if they didnt just come right out and say it which they do, how can the FDNy firefighters have foreknowledge of the demolition, lie about the state of 7's fire, lie about the state of 7's damage, lie about the reason for the collapse zone and with no dissenting opinions from any of them in over a decade, yet at the same exact time these same firefighters are "not" in on it and how could we ever suggest that is what truthers believe.

 

[NoahFence]

You have been told that OBL and 19 hijackers is a conspiracy theory but it does not register.

When two or more people plan a crime, that is a crime called conspiracy.

The FBI charged OBL with CONSPIRACY to murder Americans outside the U.S. but that did not charge him with 9/11 - that is just a THEORY.

So you're reduced to playing with words. Shocking.

 

[plague311]

Thats what I don't get from truthers, even if they didnt just come right out and say it which they do, how can the FDNy firefighters have foreknowledge of the demolition, lie about the state of 7's fire, lie about the state of 7's damage, lie about the reason for the collapse zone and with no dissenting opinions from any of them in over a decade, yet at the same exact time these same firefighters are "not" in on it and how could we ever suggest that is what truthers believe.

I have seen footage of firefighters confronting the fools from Loose Change and telling them they're wrong. There have been interviews on Opie and Anthony where they've interviewed the Loose Change guys and firefighters have called in welcoming them down to the firehouse to tell the rest of the guys what they have to say about their "conspiracy theory."

 

[Christopher7]

The Chris's duke it out again!

C7: Only the color changes from black to gray but we will have to agree to disagree on that.

So you don't see less dust ejection in the first second than in the third second?

I see mostly black smoke obscuring the gray dust in the first couple seconds. Then I see perfectly timed explosions in a perfect line across each floor. A natural collapse could not be that symmetrical.

The explosions on the west side, above the impact point. Those are not caused by a collapse.

What you and I see is horizontal movement of materials. You interpret that as explosions. I interpret that as possibly 1/2 million feet of air per floor pushing stuff unevenly away from the perimeter

There cannot be floors collapsing on floors simultaneously. That has to happen one floor at a time to expel the air between them but the ejections all happen at once. If they were all falling, the distance between them would remain the same and there would be no ejection of air.

The top part is falling to one side yet the ejections are the same on both sides. That defies the laws of physics.

I thought Richard Gage called this a symmetrical almost freefall drop into its own footprint! Irregularities like this are to be expected in a natural collapse and are evidence of my theory. The chaotic interactions of buckling beams and broken up slabs of cement etc. are way to complex to analyze and create irregularities you don't see in a CD.

Yes, irregularities are to be expected in a natural collapse but there were none. The building disintegrated symmetrically, straight down, evenly on all sides. But that could not happen naturally if the top part is falling to one side. If it were a collapse, the side with the most weight pushing down would collapse faster and the top part would continue its fall to the side and fall off. This is basic physics that anyone should be able to understand.

I don't mean to be rude but you are not being realistic here. You seem to be looking for reasons to deny the physics.

You are not willing to accept that they know what they are talking about. You are not willing to accept any evidence of molten steel/iron.

An unwarranted generalization. A debunker recently called me gullible for be willing to consider elements of the CD theory. I don't embrace it but I have "admitted it into evidence" until further info is available.

You already know that there will be no further info. As you said, someone wrote them about this and got no answer. So that is just a left handed way of saying you will never accept the report.

You said: "so who wrote these words and how accurate are these contradictory claims?" You incorrectly state that the RJ Lee Group made contradictory claims and question their accuracy. Referring to them as "claims" and questioniong their accuracy is just plain denial. RJ Lee is an expert among experts. Read is credentials in the 2004 report.

No, it does not support both sides as I have noted several times.

"..is to be expected" has been used to support the debunkers' side and you know it. All I am saying is more clarification is needed, people have asked RJ Lee, no answer has been forthcoming.

Right, it's a false statement "debunkers" use to deny the scientific facts in the report and you have adopted it.

You are assuming that the RJ Lee Group doesn't know what they are talking about. That is denial. The problem is in your refusal to accept these scientific facts.

You can be SOOOOO irritating! All I said is these statements need more clarification. Comprende?

You know that there will be no clarification.

 

[Edx]

You said: "so who wrote these words and how accurate are these contradictory claims?" You incorrectly state that the RJ Lee Group made contradictory claims and question their accuracy. Referring to them as "claims" and questioniong their accuracy is just plain denial. RJ Lee is an expert among experts. Read is credentials in the 2004 report.
.

What the hell is wrong with you Christopher?

You keep telling is how much you respect RJ Lee and how much of a highly credentialed authority they are and yet they are the ones saying that the iron microispheres are "EXPECTED." THAT IS THE WORD THEY USED

You know what that means? That means if you are right then the are incompetent. Got it? YOU REQUIRE RJ Lee to not know what the hell the are talking about.

How are they highly credentialed experts one moment and the next they have no idea what they are saying?

 

[Christopher7]

Foreknowledge:
Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

No one could have predicted that a building would collapse five hours in advance. Furthermore, the fires had not even reached the area where the collapse began at that time. It appears that the engineer was "in on it" and knew the building would be brought down at about 5 PM.

 

[Christopher7]

You keep telling is how much you respect RJ Lee and how much of a highly credentialed authority they are and yet they are the ones saying that the iron microispheres are "EXPECTED." THAT IS THE WORD THEY USED

I answered that in post #479

They know that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporizes [volatilize] at 3182^oF. Those are the high temperatures they are considering.

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC Dust.

ETA; At that time, the "experts" were saying that the jet fuel melted the steel.
http://911review.com/coverup/fantasy/melting.html

 

[sheeplesnshills]

A natural collapse could not be that symmetrical.

Why? please show us the math that allowed you to come to that conclusion

There cannot be floors collapsing on floors simultaneously.

yes there can. can you work out why?

]That has to happen one floor at a time to expel the air between them but the ejections all happen at once.

no they don't.

If they were all falling, the distance between them would remain the same and there would be no ejection of air.

who ever said they were all falling?.....you are just constructing a strawman.

Yes, irregularities are to be expected in a natural collapse but there were none.

liar.

The building disintegrated symmetrically, straight down, evenly on all sides. But that could not happen naturally if the top part is falling to one side. If it were a collapse, the side with the most weight pushing down would collapse faster and the top part would continue its fall to the side and fall off. This is basic physics that anyone should be able to understand.

The top broke up as its not designed to stay together unless supported by a stationary, even solid building below it. It was the floors pancaking down that destroyed the rest of the tower above. This is basic engineering physics that anyone should be able to understand

I don't mean to be rude but you are not being realistic here. You seem to be looking for reasons to deny the physics.

You probably don't intend either to be ill-educated either, but you are.
I did Physics at College and Mechanical Engineering, did you?

 

[NoahFence]

Foreknowledge:
Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

No one could have predicted that a building would collapse five hours in advance. Furthermore, the fires had not even reached the area where the collapse began at that time. It appears that the engineer was "in on it" and knew the building would be brought down at about 5 PM.

Pure, unadulterated, military grade idiocy.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Foreknowledge:
Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

No one could have predicted that a building would collapse five hours in advance. Furthermore, the fires had not even reached the area where the collapse began at that time. It appears that the engineer was "in on it" and knew the building would be brought down at about 5 PM.

Why could no-one have predicted that? Some people are what is called "Experts". And how do you know that others may not have agreed with him and he was simply lucky in being as accurate as he was? Do you think it would have made any difference if it had fallen in 4 hours or 8 or 12 or not at all? do you think he would have been hung drawn and quartered for being wrong? If he had inside information why on earth would he give the correct time?

 

[Edx]

Foreknowledge:
Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

No one could have predicted that a building would collapse five hours in advance. Furthermore, the fires had not even reached the area where the collapse began at that time. It appears that the engineer was "in on it" and knew the building would be brought down at about 5 PM.

So you DO believe the entire FDNY lying about the conspiracy.
You JUST told us how horrible it was of us to say you believe that and then you turn right around and say it again.

As I said in another post, even if truthers didnt just come right out and say they were in in it, which they do, how can the FDNY firefighters have foreknowledge of the demolition, lie about the state of 7's fire, lie about the state of 7's damage, lie about the reason for the collapse zone and with no dissenting opinions from any of them in over a decade or even a hint of surprise that it collapsed... yet at the same exact time these same firefighters are "not" in on it and how could we ever suggest that is what truthers believe.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I answered that in post #479

They know that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporizes [volatilize] at 3182^oF. Those are the high temperatures they are considering.

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC Dust.

ETA; At that time, the "experts" were saying that the jet fuel melted the steel.
http://911review.com/coverup/fantasy/melting.html

they also said it was expected......why do you keep avoiding that? And what "expert" said jet fuel melted the steel? Expert in what? obviously not jet fuel or steel. Or maybe the expert was simply keeping it simple and easy to understand and used melt when he should really have used "soften"? Most people didn't know or care that it was technically incorrect, Experts already knew and didn't really care and really its only twoofers who fixate on it and who really gives a sugerlump what they think?.

 

[Edx]

I answered that in post #479

They know that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporizes [volatilize] at 3182^oF. Those are the high temperatures they are considering.

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC Dust.

You answered nothing, do you really not understand the point?

RJ Lee cannot be said to be high credible authorties that are unquestionably right one moment and then you completely ignore something else they said in the SAME REPORT which would make them incompetent and ignorant if your claims are correct. They cannot be experts and incompetent at the same time, Chris.

ETA; At that time, the "experts" were saying that the jet fuel melted the steel.
http://911review.com/coverup/fantasy/melting.html

Yea, except the fact is its common for people and experts to say that fire melts steel. If you actually look at how people use these words in hundreds of other fires you can see that its either a common mistake, common to refer to weakening steel as melting, or refer to other metals as steel. If you actually look how other people use these words.

But the fact remains, how can they be experts if they believe that fire melts steel, Chris? Clearly they are not experts if what you're saying is true.

How can RJ Lee be highly competent credentialed credible experts one moment and then bafflingly incompetent fools the next? You are the one REQUIRING them to be incompetent.

 

[Christopher7]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6554205#post6554205

Eat your words C7

Eat this:
Originally Posted by twinstead
No, the problem is people like YOU implying the first responders were "in on it", therefore complicit in mass murder, with NO evidence whatsoever to support it.

RedIbis reply
I never suggested anything of the sort. And your pathetic attempt at claiming so is nothing but pure desperation, with a large dose of poor reading skills.

 

[beachnut]

Foreknowledge:
Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

No one could have predicted that a building would collapse five hours in advance. Furthermore, the fires had not even reached the area where the collapse began at that time. It appears that the engineer was "in on it" and knew the building would be brought down at about 5 PM.

You present evidence an engineer predicts, if you let a building burn it could collapse in 5 hours. Then you make up delusions of foreknowledge, and "in on it".

Illogical nonsense. And all you do with this moronic claptrap? Nothing

Chief Peter Hayden
And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him, if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse, and if so, how soon?
And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said, ‘In its current state, you have about five hours.’” Hayden will not reveal the name of this engineer. [BBC, The Third Tower 7/6/2008]

This is proof that engineers know fire causes buildings to collapse. Unfought fires cause building to collapse. A fact you fail to comprehend due to some unkown learning disability.

 

[Christopher7]

So you DO believe the entire FDNY lying about the conspiracy.

You seem to have the reading comprehension of a 4 year old. I said the engineer was in on it, not the firefighters. This is just more pathetic intentional misinterpretation like Twinstead.

 

[plague311]

You seem to have the reading comprehension of a 4 year old. I said the engineer was in on it, not the firefighters. This is just more pathetic intentional misinterpretation like Twinstead.

So...the structural engineer wired the building for demolition?

 

[chrismohr]

Richard Gage disagrees with you. Add the media and NYPD also.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Chris
Did you address this point in your videos?

If you're talking about foreknowledge of destruction of Building 7, YES, it is in this video of mine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajIr2G4wFn4 (7 minutes in)
Here's another rather less respectful but extremely accurate take on the same subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMr3ZSL6l-4&feature=player_embedded
There was foreknowledge all right. These dudes knew what they were seeing and made the difficult call but called it right, saving hundreds of lives of first responders.

 

[DGM]

You seem to have the reading comprehension of a 4 year old. I said the engineer was in on it, not the firefighters. This is just more pathetic intentional misinterpretation like Twinstead.

Have you had anyone you trust explain the RJ Lee report to you yet?

 

[Edx]

You seem to have the reading comprehension of a 4 year old. I said the engineer was in on it, not the firefighters. This is just more pathetic intentional misinterpretation like Twinstead.

The firefighters were the ones saying it was probably going to collapse. They had engineers also look at it. There are dozens and dozens of examples of them talking about it.

But hey, why doesnt a single firefighter have a dissenting view to this engineer? Why didnt anyone question it in over a decade? Why cant you even find a firefighter that was surprised it collapsed? Why cant you find a firefighter that said they thought the collapse zone was unnecessary?

The firefighters have to be in on it OR they are simply mindless incompetent drones. Is that what you believe?