Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[MIKILLINI]

NOT ME. I've smelled dead bodies before during the course of my profession. I wasn't confused. Yes, I smelled dead bodies after the attacks, but there was a different smell that lasted much longer. After the dead body smell went away (in a few days), THIS smell stayed. Whenever the wind would blow our direction, we'd smell it.

This post was # 922 and you mentioned....smell

Congratulations, you've acknowledged fuel sources available for a smoldering fire to consume.
Carbon based smell sample test: Burn a piece of paper, then burn a piece of plastic, then burn some synthetic carpet. Do they all smell alike? Or different?

This is post #952 where I questioned you about carbon based smells.

Wrong. I didn't mention a carbon based smell test. The carbon discussion was about maximum burning temperatures.

This is where you avoided answering MY question. That's what you do..avoid direct questions because you refuse to give a direct response to indelible evidence. Just like Judy; You're an attention seeking crackpot.

 

[phiwum]

Blacksmiths do not rely on open air carbon fires for a purpose.

Pardon?

I admit I don't know much about smithing, but near as I can figger, they used a forge burning coal, perhaps with a moving air source. Now, you said carbon doesn't burn hot enough to soften steel, but coal contains carbon (right?) and evidently was used to soften steel.

So, I'm a bit confused.

 

[WildCat]

How can somebody be so completely wrong about everything?

A mind is a terrible thing to lose, how true that is!

 

[Macgyver1968]

So, I'm a bit confused.

Me too. From a website from a company that actually makes trusses:

Fire Resistance

Myth #1: Steel framed buildings are more resistant to fire and easier to get approved for fire code.

Though steel is less flammable than wood and doesn't contribute fuel to a fire, it still performs poorly in fires. Any urban firefighter can tell you that when steel gets hot it expands and twists, which often causes the roof system to fail and fall down - endangering the lives of firefighters and people trying to escape from the building.

In a fire, the hot air collects at the top of the room or building, heating the truss system to 1500F - 2000F. Since steel loses 80% of its strength at 1000F, this often causes the roof and floor systems to collapse much sooner than in a wood structure under the same conditions. By contrast, wood retains its structural strength even at temperatures above 2000F and while it is burning. When coated with intumescent paint wood structural members can withstand temperatures of 2,000F for up to one hour without failing.

http://www.oregontruss.com/truss-info/applications/wood-vs-steel

 

[tsig]

Aluminum does burn.

ETA: It is used as rocket fuel. Go here to see a picture of the aluminum hull of HMS Sheffield burning.

How can somebody be so completely wrong about everything?

Apparently it takes years of study.

 

[DGM]

Blacksmiths do not rely on open air carbon fires for a purpose.

Sorry, very wrong.

This is a place I volunteer and have put on many demonstrations. Is this something you would like an actual education on?

The site has been fully restored and everything except the blast furnace is functional (although it could be). If you're in Massachusetts someday, stop by.

 

[DGM]

Not to beat the point to death.

 

[MIKILLINI]

Game over, season over

For the twoof movement it has been for quite some time.

 

[GlennB]

Aluminum does burn.

ETA: It is used as rocket fuel. Go here to see a picture of the aluminum hull of HMS Sheffield burning.

How can somebody be so completely wrong about everything?

While I agree with all of your sentiments, I'll have to be picky here in the interest of fairness and scientific rigour

HMS Sheffield didn't have a burning aluminium hull or even a melting Al superstructure. It's a commonly held fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_(D80)
and
http://www.hazegray.org/faq/smn6.htm#F7

 

[MIKILLINI]

Pardon?

I admit I don't know much about smithing, but near as I can figger, they used a forge burning coal, perhaps with a moving air source. Now, you said carbon doesn't burn hot enough to soften steel, but coal contains carbon (right?) and evidently was used to soften steel.

So, I'm a bit confused.

No need to be confused. You are correct. Tracy isn't correct, only trolling: That's what attention seekers do.

 

[CompusMentus]

Dr. Wood informs us that S and P waves were absent for all three building demises (WTC1,2,7), but are present in the Kingdome implosion in Seattle and the gas tank explosion in nearby New Jersey.

Noted that jammonius give no source other that of Dr. Judy Wood for this claim. I must conclude the reason for this is that such a source does not exist.

I myself have no reason to doubt the work of those people in the authors list of that paper. I am happy that the paper is from the reputable and knowledgable source given. I accept their findings without any misgiving. When they write that:-

The gravitational potential energy associated with the collapse of each tower is at least 10¹¹ J. The energy propagated as seismic waves for ML 2.3 is about 10⁶ to 10⁷ J. Hence, only a very small portion of the potential energy was converted into seismic waves. Most of the energy went into deformation of buildings and the formation of rubble and dust.

I have no reason to dispute it. Dr. Wood has shown no evidence that I should.

And also I see no reply to my simple, direct question from the other day:-


If, as Judy Wood insists, the towers were "dustified" and "wafted to the heavens", what caused the seismic disturbances during the collapse(s)?



Compus

 

[Oz1976]

Not to beat the point to death.

What's this?!?!?! Steel becoming "molten" red from a simple open air fire?!?!?! What kind of sorcery is this!?! Admit it, it was persistantly burning nano thermite in that grill!!!!

 

[DGM]

it was persistantly burning nano thermite in that grill!!!!

.....or lump charcoal...............same thing.











(it's the "special air" that's blown in from under the grill)

 

[Craig4]

I'm the one who made the sign, therefore I'm the one who gets to tell you what my thought processes were. You aren't clairvoyant, and it shocks me to hear you profess to be clairvoyant.

Actually there's no need for clairvoyance with regard to your thought processes. You're pretty obvious in addition to being a liar. How is that combination working for you? Wait, don't bother to answer; I already know.

 

[CompusMentus]

Jammonius, I believe your post contains two very important -- and in my view fatal -- flaws. One is an error of commission, the other an error of omission.
<snip>
So although you may find Dr. Wood's material compelling, I cannot, because basic science indicates it fails on multiple counts.

Thank you for an informative and interesting post Stella.


Compus

 

[TSR]

Pardon?

I admit I don't know much about smithing, but near as I can figger, they used a forge burning coal, perhaps with a moving air source. Now, you said carbon doesn't burn hot enough to soften steel, but coal contains carbon (right?) and evidently was used to soften steel.

So, I'm a bit confused.

You're confused because you are expecting rationality and truth from Blevins's posts.

That's not her goal.

Her goal is "look at me, give me something I can use to pretend I'm soooo clever < insert image of Blevins playing the baby game "sooo big" here >"

She appears to be the epitome of The Lecture Student (The Lecture being a process by which information passes from the notes of the instructor to the notes of the student, without having passed through the minds of either). She certainly does not understand the concept of a chain of custody, without which her whole delusion comes crashing down.

 

[CompusMentus]

Caption Competition (cont)

Compus

 

[dafydd]

I'd rather you paid attention to the data than to me, the person who presents the data.

When are you going to present some data?

 

[swright777]

While I agree with all of your sentiments, I'll have to be picky here in the interest of fairness and scientific rigour

HMS Sheffield didn't have a burning aluminium hull or even a melting Al superstructure. It's a commonly held fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_(D80)
and
http://www.hazegray.org/faq/smn6.htm#F7

My bad. I always heard it was aluminum burning. I guess I should have checked into it more before I posted. I can't believe I pulled a twoofer moove.

 

[MIKILLINI]

I have no idea about any passengers on any flights on 9/11. Lots of strange stories that I cannot independently verify.

You would rather not take the effort to verify? You can ask the victim's families if their deceased loved ones were scheduled to fly on 9/11.