Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[Macgyver1968]

..and what is that maximum temperature?

??

 

[WTC Dust]

Either you plainly didn't see the question or just flat out dodged it, I'll ask again.



Please pay close attention Tracy. I mentioned carbon based smell test

Does paper/wood, plastic, or synthetic carpet fumes have the same smell while they are burning? Or does each have a unique smell of their own?

I'm telling you that I smelled different smells. One smell was similar to a carbon-based fire. One smell was the deceased human beings. And there was another smell that lasted for many months. The first and second smells went away rather quickly.

You're silly if you suggest that everything made of carbon smells the same when burned. I'm not the one suggesting this.

 

[WTC Dust]

Really, do me a favor. Stop quoting the official hijack conspiracy theory. I've already heard it many, many times and discarded it as unreasonable.

Did you read the whole post?

First, I said straight up that I didn't know if any part the fire reached the ignition point of aluminum.

Second, you made the flat statement that aluminum doesn't burn, to which I pointed out your error.

Third, I did ask your opinion regarding the provenance of all of the serial-numbered aircraft parts.

Let me ask you this, with apologies to those that have asked it before:

At what temperature does jet fuel burn?

At what temperature does steel start to lose structural strength?

What happens if you heat a steel structure unevenly?

 

[dafydd]

I'm telling you that I smelled different smells. One smell was similar to a carbon-based fire. One smell was the deceased human beings. And there was another smell that lasted for many months. The first and second smells went away rather quickly.

You're silly if you suggest that everything made of carbon smells the same when burned. I'm not the one suggesting this.

You are suggesting that a smell proves that there were no planes and an energy beam weapon. I don't know what to call that, but it is certainly not science.

 

[DGM]

I'm telling you that I smelled different smells. One smell was similar to a carbon-based fire. One smell was the deceased human beings. And there was another smell that lasted for many months. The first and second smells went away rather quickly.

You're silly if you suggest that everything made of carbon smells the same when burned. I'm not the one suggesting this.

How do you know this smell was not from a carbon based source?


BTW: Humans are carbon based.

 

[WTC Dust]

So what is the maximum combustion temperature of a carbon item?

You can't look that up in a table somewhere? Whatever, just say it's lower than 3000 degrees Farenheit.

 

[dafydd]

Really, do me a favor. Stop quoting the official hijack conspiracy theory. I've already heard it many, many times and discarded it as unreasonable.

And holographic projections and buildings turned to dust by an imaginary super weapon is reasonable? You cannot be serious.

 

[WTC Dust]

Electric currents are intrinsically magnetic.

Yes, thanks for asking.



Intrinsically related, but not relevant to the operation of a taser, as it does not emit its energy electromagnetically. A taser operates by passing a direct electric current through the victim. Quite incidentally, the current flows because of a large voltage difference between the terminals and that has an associated electric field, and the current has an associated magnetic field. These fields are established as the taser is fired but then remain static while it is in operation. The taser does not operate by alternating the electric current so there are no associated alternating electric and magnetic fields. Electromagnetic radiation has therefore no involvement in the operation of the taser. It emit its energy electrically, but not electromagnetically.

Irrelevant, sis.

 

[DGM]

You can't look that up in a table somewhere? Whatever, just say it's lower than 3000 degrees Farenheit.

Are you claiming this is not enough to weaken steel?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Really, do me a favor. Stop quoting the official hijack conspiracy theory. I've already heard it many, many times and discarded it as unreasonable.

Yes, that's unreasonable but a physically impossible super-weapon that turned a pair of huge buildings to dust is perfectly reasonable.

 

[WTC Dust]

Orbiting? I don't think Jammonius supports this idea. I know I don't, and we already know Judy Wood doesn't.

I just love you. You give a whole new, fresh meaning to the idea of Truth insanity.

Yes, yes...the commonly understood events of 9/11 are "in serious jeopardy." It is clear now to America that the WTC towers were turned to dust by orbiting energy weapons. Thousands...or should I say millions...are marching in the streets for the truth of this. It is the issue on lips of every candidate as Americans go to the polls. Romney, Santorum, Obama...this is the question they are faced with every time they speak in public...Who built the energy weapons? Where are they? How do they work? The explanations given on Star Trek are not good enough. Americans want to know what really happened. They want to know why Captain Kirk didn't stopped them and what role the Romulans played in all this.

Good show my friend. Thanks for putting the issues where they really belong.

 

[WTC Dust]

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?

Aluminum doesn't burn at office fire temperatures. We aren't talking about aluminum in a certain composition inside an engine. You're suggesting that the WTC was suffering from an office fire.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Orbiting? I don't think Jammonius supports this idea. I know I don't, and we already know Judy Wood doesn't.

So where is the weapon? At least have a guess.

 

[dafydd]

Orbiting? I don't think Jammonius supports this idea. I know I don't, and we already know Judy Wood doesn't.

We already know that the insane Judy Wood doesn't know anything.

 

[Macgyver1968]

You can't look that up in a table somewhere? Whatever, just say it's lower than 3000 degrees Farenheit.

Dangit!!! I knew I should have applied for the MDC!!

Sure I'm clairvoyant. Here watch this: (closes eyes, and rubs fingers against his temples) I'm getting something....It's becoming clearer. I see you....in the near future...I see you refusing to give a clear answer to Phunk's post #1031http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8278640&postcount=1031!

 

[WTC Dust]

The error of commission is the use of seismic data to assess the relative strengths of surface explosions. This is simply invalid. Seismic measurements such as the Richter scale were developed solely to judge the relative energy of earthquakes...

Except for the obvious fact that it has been done. Do you really think that merely because the Richter scale was developed for a certain purpose that it can't be used for any other purpose?

Judy Wood isn't the only person who has considered the seismic data in reference to the destruction of the WTC. Official sources investigated this. It's ridiculous to say that this line of inquiry is invalid.

 

[WTC Dust]

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.

Exactly. Steel was made in olden times using a bellows, not an open air carbon fire. What are you saying about coal softening steel?

 

[dafydd]

Except for the obvious fact that it has been done. Do you really think that merely because the Richter scale was developed for a certain purpose that it can't be used for any other purpose?

Judy Wood isn't the only person who has considered the seismic data in reference to the destruction of the WTC. Official sources investigated this. It's ridiculous to say that this line of inquiry is invalid.

What was the conclusion of the official sources and to what other use can the Richter scale be put to? Not that I am expecting an answer, you don't do answers.

 

[WTC Dust]

They have a blast furnace there? Pretty interesting. It proves you can't melt or significantly weaken steel with an open air carbon fire, doesn't it?

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?



[qimg]http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/l564/dgmwood/116760-050-C779F32E.jpg[/qimg]



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.

 

[dafydd]

Exactly. Steel was made in olden times using a bellows, not an open air carbon fire. What are you saying about coal softening steel?

Steel, lol. Steel was not made in olden times. Never heard of a guy called Bessemer? I think you meant iron. Your lack of knowledge on these subjects is truly impressive.