2 questions re 1120 'Missing bodies' from WTC 1&2 & media complicity in mass murder

ergo said:
If you knew the answers, you wouldn't ask such a silly question.

:D

Yes, you are. You replied to a post of mine requesting a pulverization model for the Towers' collapses. You haven't defended your model. You need to stop asking and start answering some questions.
Click to expand...

You are incapable of answering the questions:

  • Is the potential energy of 1 ton of solid steel 400 meters above ground the same as, or different than the potential energy of 1 ton of loose feathers 400 meters above ground?
  • A ton of solid steel and a ton of loose feathers move 400 meters in 16 seconds. Which was faster?
Embarrassed?

You also dropped a question:

You say a significant portion of that mass may still have hovered high above the ground after 20 seconds. How much? How high? Or do you retract that claim, since it is clearly silly?

Can you answer the questions, or will you admit, by not answering them, that you lack the education and / or intelligence to answer them?
They are questions that require modest intelligence and mediocre education. I am sure you can do it.

Alternatively, admit you lack the ability, and politely ask to receive an education.
 
Here's what we're actually talking about. When you want to answer these questions, get back to me.

I don't really believe that you don't understand gravitational potential energy, and the differences that you would find in such between feathers and solid steel, however some of your posts are beginning to make me wonder. Is this simply an avoidance tactic, or would you like to explain what it could possibly have to do with your pulverization model of the WTC "collapses"?
 
ergo, thanks for your implicit admission that you are incapable of ansewering my easy questions.

I respect your decision not to seek an education.

Bye bye.
 
Oystein said:
O Rly?

  • Is the potential energy of 1 ton of solid steel 400 meters above ground the same as, or different than the potential energy of 1 ton of loose feathers 400 meters above ground?
  • A ton of solid steel and a ton of loose feathers move 400 meters in 16 seconds. Which was faster?
Click to expand...

Oy... why do you bother? This is the same ergo who appeared on JREF and immediately didn't understand what center of mass was... he still can't explain how that car got crushed, or how an avalanche works.

And we all know his list of gaffes... I mean how can you forget how he doesn't understand the difference between into and onto????
 
TruthersLie said:
Oy... why do you bother? ...
Click to expand...

Read the last words of my previous post. I stopped bothering. ergo understood, he stopped bothering too. He understands that (once more) e demonstrated both his ignorance of facts and physics as well as his dishonest evasive tacticts for all the world to see. I doubt he is as embarrassed as most other people would be, though. I guess he is counting his losses, and plans on keeping away for a while. Eventually he will resurface and demonstrate his ignorance and dishonesty all over again. I won't see it then.
 
Oystein said:
Read the last words of my previous post. I stopped bothering. ergo understood, he stopped bothering too. He understands that (once more) e demonstrated both his ignorance of facts and physics as well as his dishonest evasive tacticts for all the world to see. I doubt he is as embarrassed as most other people would be, though. I guess he is counting his losses, and plans on keeping away for a while. Eventually he will resurface and demonstrate his ignorance and dishonesty all over again. I won't see it then.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, the "Fringe Reset", an old CTer staple...
 
The fact that ergo cannot do the simple maths of plugging the values Oystein gave him into this equation

P.E. = mgh

is a testament to his complete lack of understanding. It's also hilarious. A 10 year old could do it.
 
Sunstealer said:
The fact that ergo cannot do the simple maths of plugging the values Oystein gave him into this equation

P.E. = mgh

is a testament to his complete lack of understanding. It's also hilarious. A 10 year old could do it.
Click to expand...

"moon-sized field of rubble." Ergo's piece de resistance of ignorance.
 
LSSBB said:
Ahhh, the "Fringe Reset", an old CTer staple...
Click to expand...
Plus the goals of trolling are different to the goals of a truther.

Being proved "wrong" is of little consequence if the intent was trolling. The act of responding gives the trolling poster a "Win" and that is the primary goal.

...and it is a long time since we saw any genuine truthers. In fact the term "genuine truther" is almost certainly oxymoronic these days. Long gone the reasoned discussions of 2006-7-8. :(
 
Sunstealer said:
The fact that ergo cannot do the simple maths of plugging the values Oystein gave him into this equation

P.E. = mgh

is a testament to his complete lack of understanding. It's also hilarious. A 10 year old could do it.
Click to expand...

Maybe I answer for ergo :)

Uhh, all the steel was shipped to China, --> m=0 --> very suspicious --> Inside job!
 
Hi Chris,

Here's a question for you which has not been answered by anyone in the debunker-crowd, please give me your best answer:

Here's some facts that I think we can agree on:
-about 1120 victims remain missing, 20000 pieces of bodies were found, 6000 small enought to fit in a test tube. 300 out of 2800 bodies were intact. So we can agree that 1000-1500 of the people inside turned in to small or very small pieces, if not dust.

-if we exclude the 200 people in the planes and offices hit by planes, we are still left with +1000 people that turned into small pieces.

-debris from the towers was scattered in a 600 feet radius
fig3.jpg

-also human remains were found in approximately 600 feet radius from the towers:
911-body-part-graphic-fox-news.jpg

a fall from 300-400meters to ground might crush all your bones, but the body stays pretty much intact:

Edited by Myriad: 
Hotlinked image from adults-only Web site removed. Do not hotlink images unless the hosting site gives explicit permission to do so (which was definitely not the case here). Gory or otherwise disturbing images should be inside NSFW tags; links to such should have clear NSFW warnings. Normally I would replace a disallowed hotlink with a normal link, but in this case though the image itself is not porn, the link would go to an adults-only site with porn advertising, which would still breach Rule 2 of the Member Agreement.
(apologies for this awful pic).
so that shredding of the bodies to little pieces can not be accounted to the fall.

Debunkers here in JREF have speculated that a the bodies went to small pieces because the collapsing floors smashed the people inside to small pieces. Normally in building collapses people stay usually intact, or severe a limb at most.

They have also said, that the aircurrent blew their bodies 600 feet. In e.g. verinages we can see that aircurrents from collapsing building doesn't blow the dust more than some 10 meters and for the aircurrent to blow a human body part further than dust is not likely.

On the other hand we know that if a suicide bomber blows up his vest, he flies in all directions in small pieces. Also we know that if you are shot with shotgun at close range, you will have your guts fly in small pieces. Small human pieces scattered evenly can only be explained by having WTC tower blown up and the people inside instantly shred into pieces either by blastwave the threw shattered and pulverized building parts throught their bodies or molten iron that was eventually found in the dust.

So there remains a question: How did these people end up up to 600 feet away from the towers in small pieces, if they either had to be fying in the air to reach the 600feet, or be inside the towers for their bodies to suffer the damage to be ground up in small pieces. How can they be in two places at the same time? Also, which theory, if not explosion, would you use for scattering of the bodies to 300-600 feet radius: "ping pong"-theory or the "spring"-theory?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey jbui,
Why not address you question to the jref truthers, they have all the answers ;)
 
Jbui said:
Hi Chris,

Here's a question for you which has not been answered by anyone in the debunker-crowd, please give me your best answer:

Here's some facts that I think we can agree on:
-about 1120 victims remain missing, 20000 pieces of bodies were found, 6000 small enought to fit in a test tube. 300 out of 2800 bodies were intact. So we can agree that 1000-1500 of the people inside turned in to small or very small pieces, if not dust.

-if we exclude the 200 people in the planes and offices hit by planes, we are still left with +1000 people that turned into small pieces.

-debris from the towers was scattered in a 600 feet radius
[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/reprehensor/911/fig3.jpg[/qimg]
-also human remains were found in approximately 600 feet radius from the towers:
[qimg]http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff475/TwitchingLima/911-body-part-graphic-fox-news.jpg[/qimg]
a fall from 300-400meters to ground might crush all your bones, but the body stays pretty much intact:
Edited by Myriad: 
Image link removed
(apologies for this awful pic).
so that shredding of the bodies to little pieces can not be accounted to the fall.

Debunkers here in JREF have speculated that a the bodies went to small pieces because the collapsing floors smashed the people inside to small pieces. Normally in building collapses people stay usually intact, or severe a limb at most.

They have also said, that the aircurrent blew their bodies 600 feet. In e.g. verinages we can see that aircurrents from collapsing building doesn't blow the dust more than some 10 meters and for the aircurrent to blow a human body part further than dust is not likely.

On the other hand we know that if a suicide bomber blows up his vest, he flies in all directions in small pieces. Also we know that if you are shot with shotgun at close range, you will have your guts fly in small pieces. Small human pieces scattered evenly can only be explained by having WTC tower blown up and the people inside instantly shred into pieces either by blastwave the threw shattered and pulverized building parts throught their bodies or molten iron that was eventually found in the dust.

So there remains a question: How did these people end up up to 600 feet away from the towers in small pieces, if they either had to be fying in the air to reach the 600feet, or be inside the towers for their bodies to suffer the damage to be ground up in small pieces. How can they be in two places at the same time? Also, which theory, if not explosion, would you use for scattering of the bodies to 300-600 feet radius: "ping pong"-theory or the "spring"-theory?
Click to expand...
Would explosions blow them to tiny bits, and where were those explosions that would have been large enough to account for the distribution?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jbui said:
... Debunkers here in JREF have speculated that a the bodies went to small pieces because the collapsing floors smashed the people inside to small pieces. Normally in building collapses people stay usually intact, or severe a limb at most. ...?
Click to expand...
You never seen a body hit by 10 tons of steel? Lucky for you.

Debunkers at JREF? Wrong, it is called physics, what you failed to do before spewing some gish gallop nonsense, backed with essentially nothing but gullibility as you try to float lies from 911 truth, debunked years ago.

E=mgh, the energy stored in the WTC. Can you do the math. The energy was released during the collapse, it is was greater than 130 tons of TNT.

Are you listening? Greater than 130 2,000 pound bombs from each tower.

Now please give me the energy it takes to reduce a human to pieces. There is a number, you can express it in joules, or equal energy of TNT. You were asked to supply some physics, but you failed.

Got the number yet? No, why can't you do the math? Why are you so gullible? Where did you find the silent explosives. Did you know most of 911 truth is pushing thermite, it is not an explosive. What is your claim?

Why can't you produce some numbers?

Sick science for failed 911 truth claims of explosives.
With about 20 pounds of TNT you could disperse a horse or frozen cow. Thus, the WTC collapse, both towers had enough energy to totally destroy 26,000 humans, into tiny pieces. There you go, gross math, the murder side of physics; physics you can't do. good for you
 
Last edited:
Whether it's a human body or a couch or a desk, everything in the WTC Towers were subjected to similar catstrophic collapse consequences. That inludes (if I recall) around ten million pounds per floor crashing into the floor below at 100+ mph, 7-10 floors per second crashing and crashing and crashing. According to an FDNY first responder I have talked withe extensively, huge fires burning for weeks on end in the debris utterly destroyed over 1000 bodies. Once a body is repeatedly crushed by 10,000,000 pound floor after 10,000,000 pound floor, if they were near the outside perimeter, the pulverized remains can fly ouwards along with the dust... a half million cubic feet of air per floor being pushed outwards at up to 482 mph... you have no doubt seen the videos of all the dust pouring down the streets, overtaking fleeing people on the ground... hard to even contemplate. I always get a little sick contemplating the bodies and am reluctant to use them as debating points because they trigger such deep emotions in people including me. Plus we are talking about the loved ones of thousands of family members and friends. Better to talk about what happened to flammable office furniture, which were subjected to the same extreme forces and were utterly destroyed in the same manner.
 
Jbui said:
...
On the other hand we know that if a suicide bomber blows up his vest, he flies in all directions in small pieces.
...
Click to expand...

Does the same happen to victims several meters away?
I think you hit upon the solution here: the 2000+ victims in the towers were all suicide bombers who blew up their vests! :boggled:



Alternatively, you form an Argument from Incredulity: "It could not have been the force of a hundred thousand tons falling at high velocity, because I can't imagine that!"
 
Oystein said:
ergo, thanks for your implicit admission that you are incapable of ansewering my easy questions.

I respect your decision not to seek an education.

Bye bye.
Click to expand...

Wow. You destroyed ergo's argument with a variation of the old, "which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of lead?" chestnut, which I first encountered (and answered correctly) at around age 8.

It's something I've seen among many truthers: The idea, that because the top part of the building had been broken up into pieces, it was no longer capable of doing any damage. Yet these same people will go on about how the "official story" violates the laws of physics, even though they haven't a ghost of a clue what any of the laws of physics actually are.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom