Blown to Kingdom Come

[tsig]

Prove that you aren't. If you fail to do so, then you are. I know you agree with me, because you use this logic all the time.

Go right ahead. Prove that you're not Killtown. If you cannot, then you are in violation of forum rules, which prohibit Killtowns.

Talks like Killtown...

Hummm

The one mistake you made is accusing BR549 or whoever, of using logic. Logic has no place in his/her mind, once the conclusions is reached the facts must be cut to fit the conclusion.

 

[Puggy]

Total science buff here. I accept evolution as having overwhelming evidence to support it. Indeed, spontaneously self-organizing systems can appear designed to the casual observer, but actually, it is the exceedingly complex systems, such as biology, which cannot have been designed "top-down", but only spontaneous order can explain them. For the most part, ID's fail to appreciate the anthropic principle, or natural selection, or the time-scales involved.

I don't believe astrology, talking to the dead, or any so-called paranormal powers. I am a skeptic in the tradition of the Amazing Randi. Randi became famous as a magician who explained how his tricks did not violate physics.

9/11 was a trick.

Interesting.

So You're using the "God of the gaps" argument in this whole CD thing? I mean, if complex organisms can evolve through non-random events, what's the difference with the WTC 1, 2, and 7 collapses? Can't a step by step process account for the collapses?

Each one started fairly simple. In the case of 1 and 2, planes hit them. Lots of burning, combined with the flame retardant being removed from the steel made them weak. Many minutes later, the collapses started exactly were the planes hit. etc etc. 7 was hit by lots of debris, lots of burning, damaged side fell first, then the rest followed, etc.

Sure, You can bring up some gaps in the official report, but most gaps have been explained with the data at hand. The thing is You wont accept it, since You've already made up Your mind, which contradicts Your "science buff" description of Yourself. So what happens when these gaps have been filled?

The comparison with ID is uncanny, since evolution has gaps, ID is true.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

thats thermites per Steve Jones

No it's termites.

Jones will be correcting the next version of his paper.

In my last communication with Jones, he said he's leaning towards termates, which are termites that eat wooden matches.

Would those be nano-nija termites then?

Special steel-eating concrete destroying ones?

i think we need to clear soemthign up here

you got your termites, which eat wood

termates, which eat wooden matches

but neither of those were involved in 9/11, it was the sooper-sekrit naotech-enhanced termates that eat steel (SIDEWAYS no less)

 

[Gravy]

I am a skeptic in the tradition of the Amazing Randi. Randi became famous as a magician who explained how his tricks did not violate physics. 9/11 was a trick.

You, sir, have come to the absolute best place in the universe to prove that contention! Just email Randi, explain your position about 9/11, and post his reply here.

That is my challenge to you. Agreed? If not, why?

 

[negativ]

As our English friends might say, I couldn't be arsed to read this entire thread, but I'd just like to point out that I want to strangle CTers with banner-sized enlargements of the photos in this thread whenever I read the phrase "fell in its own footprint" and/or "symmetrical collapse".

I'm really getting bored with the Truthers. It's been a nice diversion from televangelists, faith healers, and intelligent design proponents, but they seem to be pretty much operating on cruise control at this point. I suppose that's a good thing, but now I have to retreat back into the real world of jihadists with bombs and christian fundies with legislative power. Bleh.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

As our English friends might say, I couldn't be arsed to read this entire thread, but I'd just like to point out that I want to strangle CTers with banner-sized enlargements of the photos in this thread whenever I read the phrase "fell in its own footprint" and/or "symmetrical collapse".

I'm really getting bored with the Truthers. It's been a nice diversion from televangelists, faith healers, and intelligent design proponents, but they seem to be pretty much operating on cruise control at this point. I suppose that's a good thing, but now I have to retreat back into the real world of jihadists with bombs and christian fundies with legislative power. Bleh.

im tryign to stir up some flat-earth discussion in another thread, your welcome to swing by there

although i think flat-earthers arent even on cruise control, they are in Park with the e-brake on, lol

 

[tsig]

i think we need to clear soemthign up here

you got your termites, which eat wood

termates, which eat wooden matches

but neither of those were involved in 9/11, it was the sooper-sekrit naotech-enhanced termates that eat steel (SIDEWAYS no less)

It was the command and the control of the n-e termates that was so difficult,

they way they stood the fire and explosions was truely heroic, then they ate down the building around themselves and turned into fuel to melt the steel, well my heart goes out to those little guys.

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

Only one... HUSHABOOM! (tm)

So, the true 9-11 conspirators are revealed:

Hookie Smoke!

 

[LashL]

Are we once again getting TS1234 confused with the original Truthseeker, who is an incredibly smart Skepchick?

Good Ed, no! Nobody could ever confuse TS1234 with the original Truthseeker!

 

[Horatius]

I have seen no evidence that the buildings fell down. I began by stating that it appears to me that some very large percentage of the non-metallic mass of the twin towers was rendered into fine powder. Though JREF's have had no shortage of statements to the contrary, I have seen no evidence to the contrary. You have shown me pictures accounting for, at most, 1/10th of 1% of the concrete.

So, pictures are the only evidence you will accept? And why exactly do you think anyone would have taken such pictures of the rubble? Why would anyone on the day have expected they would need to address such questions years after the fact?

As far as "similar pieces of debris", I'm looking for acre-sized slabs, with a rectangular hole, like giant square donuts, 220 of them. Thus far I have found zero.

And what leads you to expect "acre-sized" slabs? You claim to be such fan of physics, please explain how an acre-sized slab of concrete can fall any distance and not shatter into smaller pieces. Have you ever worked with concrete paving stones? They're brittle. They break when they fall. Any major project that uses them expects a certain amount of loss due to such breakage. Please explain how your expectation is in any way reasonable.

When the event is over, we observe shredded steel strewn about upon a vast field of dust. JREF members have shown pictures of rescue efforts and such that show pieces of concrete that escaped disintegration. My generous estimates are that these pictures show 200 tons, total. Tops. That would be 1/10th of 1%, using the figure 200,000 tons of concrete.

So, these 1/10th of 1% numbers you keep tossing off are "generous estimates". Please explain how you made these estimates, beyond just looking at a few pictures. Again, anyone who has worked with concrete will tell you, it produces way more dust than you would expect. I've shown my calculations about the dust on at least two occasions. If you've really done any serious attempts at estimating how much dust there was on the day, please show me, with numbers, where you think my analysis went wrong. As I said in the previous threads, I figure about 3.5%-7.6% of the original mass turned to dust.

Please don't just ignore this again. You claim to be a fan of science, try doing some. Address my analysis, and perhaps we can both learn something new. I already know what pictures you've looked at, so don't bother posting those again. Show us some real work.

So here is the hierarchy. Gravity collapse (least disintegration) > standard controlled demolition (some disintegration) > twin towers (near total disintegration)

Take a look at this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6yK9XLRb1u8

Demolition of the Landmark Tower in Forth Worth, Texas, which left this as a debris pile:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/atomicglee/115419262/in/set-72057594084335155/

So, where in this debris pile do we see "slabs" of concrete? Why don't we? What force "disintegrated" them in this case?

And while we're at it, where did all the dust come from in the video?

And I think that's enough for now.

 

[jhunter1163]

I move we change Christophera's official nickname to "Invisicretin".

 

[eeyore1954]

i think we need to clear soemthign up here

you got your termites, which eat wood

termates, which eat wooden matches

but neither of those were involved in 9/11, it was the sooper-sekrit naotech-enhanced termates that eat steel (SIDEWAYS no less)

I was under the impression it was the sooper-sekrit naotech-enhanced termates that have flame throwing antenae.

 

[ihaunter]

Not completely intact, but still macroscopic. Physics suggestes that objects do not pulverize themselves. Even if you accept the notion that the force due to the acceleration of gravity is enough for the upper section to pulverize the lower section (ridiculous, but let's go with it), what pulverizes the upper section before it hits the ground?

Before it hit the ground? Nothing. When it hit the ground? The ground.

Do you have a rudimentary understanding of physics? The gravitational potential energy supposedly employed to explain all the work was mostly spent just accelerating the mass toward the ground, as the "collapse" was so rapid. Thus, only a small percentage of the PE was available to do any other work. From this small percentage of PE, you have to explain the complete pulverization of all the non-metallic contents of the structure into fine powder, you have to explain the shredding of the entire steel superstructure into pieces, the expansion of the dust cloud, and a lot of other phenomena.

Thus a gravity -only theory would seem to violate conservation of energy.

Guys, look at the pictures. Those buildings disppeared. You got some explaining to do. Please pick up where NIST left off.

I will admit that I don't know enough physics to explain exactly what is wrong with this, but it is demonstrably wrong. Take an egg, hold it a couple feet above a cement floor, and then, drop it. Did it break? Why? Wasn't the gravitational potential energy being used to accelerate it? Now, look at the eggs "debris". You will probably find a few large (relative to the egg) pieces of shell. Take a similar egg and drop it from a height of twenty feet. It breaks again, even though it was still accelerating. You will also find fewer large pieces of shell.

I know that an egg is not the same as the towers, but the principle remains the same.

 

[twinstead]

I will admit that I don't know enough physics to explain exactly what is wrong with this

At least you admit it; troothydude1234 doesn't have any idea what he is talking about, but it doesn't prevent him from basing his theories on it.

 

[Elizabeth I]

By gosh, he's right! Now that I think about it, I find it extremely suspicious that I haven't seen ANY of these things in the rubble:

A complete table setting from Windows on the World.

Kind of sad - on my one and only trip to NYC, I went to Windows on the World for a drink.

 

[PerryLogan]

I'm just glad the conspirators were willing to leave such monumental clues in plain site. If I were planning a big hoax, I definitely wouldn't do that--on the theory that some clever fellow like Truthseeker might come along and spot it.

 

[LashL]

I'm just glad the conspirators were willing to leave such monumental clues in plain site. If I were planning a big hoax, I definitely wouldn't do that--on the theory that some clever fellow like Truthseeker might come along and spot it.

Raging clues, even.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Steel beams and piles of rubble...

http://www.avenueofthestrongest.us/home.html

1. Piles of rubble
2. Steel beams and building skeleton that have not been "disintegrated" or "vaporized" or whatever the word was

Also an amazing photo exhibit, taken by a photographer whose studio was two blocks away from the WTC and was walking to work when the planes hit. We had the show at the San Antonio Public Library until September 11 this year.

I also think that the first four photos are especially telling. From my perspective at least, it's very obvious that the hole in the building was made by something rather wide crashing into it.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

http://www.avenueofthestrongest.us/home.html

1. Piles of rubble
2. Steel beams and building skeleton that have not been "disintegrated" or "vaporized" or whatever the word was

Also an amazing photo exhibit, taken by a photographer whose studio was two blocks away from the WTC and was walking to work when the planes hit. We had the show at the San Antonio Public Library until September 11 this year.

I also think that the first four photos are especially telling. From my perspective at least, it's very obvious that the hole in the building was made by something rather wide crashing into it.

Hi Elizabeth nice link. All I see is obliteration, no sign of floor assemblies anywhere, and nowhere near 100% of the steel either.

I stand by my claim that about 99% of the non-metallic contents of both towers were rendered into fine powder.

Thank you for the excellent photos.

 

[Garb]

Hi Elizabeth nice link. All I see is obliteration, no sign of floor assemblies anywhere, and nowhere near 100% of the steel either.

I stand by my claim that about 99% of the non-metallic contents of both towers were rendered into fine powder.

Thank you for the excellent photos.

All you have is claims. Care to show EVIDENCE for a change?