Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

twinstead said:
"Important mission indeed. I'm sure every crackpot who believes every cockamamie theory, be it flat Earth, moon hoax, Christ is coming soon, the holocaust never happened, God hates fags, women should wear burkas, the world is coming to an end, vishnu is returning and boy is he pissed, whatever, thinks he is on an 'important mission'."
Click to expand...
It is interesting twinstead that you are willing to make such an insensitive comparison, to another's belief that the whole story behind the murder of thousands of innocent people on 9/11 has not been properly investigated.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Justice may never get served.

And in the future, we will all suffer more as a consequence.

MM
Click to expand...

And your OK with this? If it was me you would have seen me on the news driving my excavator across the white house lawn with "inside job" painted on it.

That's just me, I tend to get nut's when I know I right and no one listens.

:)
 
Yes how dare we disagree with crackpot architects, engineers their followers because there's more competent science out there than what they are able to process. Where do I turn myself in for treason?
 
Miragememories said:
It is interesting twinstead that you are willing to make such an insensitive comparison, to another's belief that the whole story behind the murder of thousands of innocent people on 9/11 has not been properly investigated.

MM
Click to expand...

You can start with the fact that 19 Arab Islamists hijacked 4 planes ...
 
Miragememories said:
Do tell.
Click to expand...
DRG spews lies; he is a liar who sells books and fools gullible people to believe his delusional lies. You can't take one of his claims and prove it! You will not even attempt to prove one. Just like you FAILED to list your "incriminating evidence"; you have none.

Miragememories said:
What in heck is an "implied lie"?
Click to expand...
When you use hearsay to spread lies. You are not telling the lie yourself you are telling what someone else said so you are not the liar. Like the idiot pilot Balsamo, claims he has no theory on 911 but clearly implies flight 77 was too high to hit the Pentagon; an implied lie. Or a delusion. Take your pick.

Miragememories said:
If excluding that which is irrelevant is quote mining, than I guess I do.
Click to expand...
No, you quote mine to make up things; like someone agrees with you. Or you quote mine to ignore the rest of the story. Is it to make you feel good as you spew lies and false information based on hearsay and lies. Lie, like you saying you have, or implying you have, or someone has incriminating evidence.


Miragememories said:
Apparently it wasn't for the NIST and they had all the resources anyone could hope for.
Click to expand...
8 years? Knew on 911 WTC 7 fell due to fire. What is your block?

Miragememories said:
Maybe you'd like to explain the missing heat, that Dr. Greening claims was required to make the NIST final solution work beachnut?
Click to expand...
Dr Greening does not support your moronic CD ideas. Ideas based on incriminating evidence? lol

The missing heat; it is not missing; Dr Greening is wrong. Explained! That was fast.

Miragememories said:
MM
Click to expand...
The only fact you post.

How does the eutectic play in your massive conspiracy and cover-up?

incriminating evidence - where is it? Source it, and list it; start a MM incriminating evidence thread! lol
 
DGM said:
And your OK with this? If it was me you would have seen me on the news driving my excavator across the white house lawn with "inside job" painted on it.

That's just me, I tend to get nut's when I know I right and no one listens.

:)
Click to expand...
Uh huh.

And what would kind of success do you feel that behavior would have achieved?

Certainly this forum would have had fun with it.

MM
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Yes how dare we disagree with crackpot architects, engineers their followers because there's more competent science out there than what they are able to process. Where do I turn myself in for treason?
Click to expand...
I suggest a few lessons in sentence structure first.

Your qualifications for treason should be much easier to fulfill.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Uh huh.

And what would kind of success do you feel that behavior would have achieved?

Certainly this forum would have had fun with it.

MM
Click to expand...
It would surely have been covered by every news agency in the world. Wouldn't that be a good way to get them to notice this "important" cause? :confused:
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
"8 years? Knew on 911 WTC 7 fell due to fire. What is your block? "
Click to expand...
Maybe you might also wish to define incoherent babble? That's my take on the quote above.

beachnut said:
"The missing heat; it is not missing; Dr Greening is wrong. Explained! That was fast."
Click to expand...
That is one of the most irrational responses I've ever seen in this forum. That's quite an accomplishment.

Apparently in your world, only others must suffer the burden of proof?

Dr. Greening sets out his case very succinctly.

His paper goes into great detail explaining how it was impossible for the NIST WTC7 Theory's required heat energy levels to have occurred.

And you wonder why myself and others can't be bothered to provide you with a technical argument?

Too funny.

MM
 
DGM said:
"...you would have seen me on the news driving my excavator across the white house lawn with "inside job" painted on it.

That's just me, I tend to get nut's when I know I right and no one listens.

It would surely have been covered by every news agency in the world. Wouldn't that be a good way to get them to notice this "important" cause?"
Click to expand...
So, you honestly believe that some nutcase, with "inside job" painted on his excavator, driving across the White House lawn (assuming you got near it), would have successfully promoted the cause of 9/11 Truth on the world stage?

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Maybe you might also wish to define incoherent babble? That's my take on the quote above.


That is one of the most irrational responses I've ever seen in this forum. That's quite an accomplishment.

Apparently in your world, only others must suffer the burden of proof?

Dr. Greening sets out his case very succinctly.

His paper goes into great detail explaining how it was impossible for the NIST WTC7 Theory's required heat energy levels to have occurred.

And you wonder why myself and others can't be bothered to provide you with a technical argument?

Too funny.

MM
Click to expand...
You can't provide a technical argument, you have no technical argument!

You have zero technical arguments and zero evidence. You can't list anything you have; it is the empty set.

You have a CD delusion, and you can't tie the eutectic to your theories.
 
If you believed, as I do, that 9/11 was an inside job, and that the 3,000+ people in the WTC Twin Towers were murdered by people still at large, would you feel right dismissing it as not a problem?
Click to expand...

No, I would see it as a good reason to go visit my Doc and ask for help......
 
The answers to the above questions are fairly simple, btw: Truthers are so desperate to find anything which can counter the 'Official Story'TM that they will seize on the proclamations of ANY person with a Dr. behind his/her name as definitive proof.
Dr. Jones, Dr. Fetzer, Dr. Griffin, Dr. Greening, Dr. Wood, Dr. Harrit.

Qualifications and experience of the above regarding:

1) Controlled demolition
2) nanothermite research and deployment
3) Structural Engineering
4) LS-DYNA Computer Modeling
5) Acoustic engineering

ZERO

Just a coincidence.....
 
Last edited:
I asked about 4 different times for the OP to give me some idea of what they wanted to focus on and apparently these people are too lazy to respond to a simple request. Watched the video from the OP myself. The man responsible took a steel beam and "simulated" conditions in the debris pile over a period of two to three days and claimed this was proof that the gypsum board could not have supplied the sulfur required to cause the corrosion. Probably the most glaring error of his little science experiment is the the limited time which he used to model everything. He erroneously assumes the corrosion of the beam would have occurred overnight, and has absolutely no 'control' condition to compare his results. The former should be a red flag that this man's research is grossly incomplete, especially if he aims to prove that something which happened to a steel sample over a period of months could not have happened. He also seems to feel that thermal expansion in a whole new made up scientific term... brilliant...
 
Miragememories said:
So, you honestly believe that some nutcase, with "inside job" painted on his excavator, driving across the White House lawn (assuming you got near it), would have successfully promoted the cause of 9/11 Truth on the world stage?

MM
Click to expand...
Yes I do. When things like this happen news agencies look into any claims made by the "nut case" to see if they have any validity. After all, if what this "nut case" claims was actually true it would be the biggest news story in the world.

Now you can dismiss this by saying that the world media is "in on it" or "controlled" but frankly I have never seen any evidence that this could possibly be true, there's way too many of them with too many agendas.
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
"So, you honestly believe that some nutcase, with "inside job" painted on his excavator, driving across the White House lawn (assuming you got near it), would have successfully promoted the cause of 9/11 Truth on the world stage?"
Click to expand...

DGM said:
"Yes I do. When things like this happen news agencies look into any claims made by the "nut case" to see if they have any validity. After all, if what this "nut case" claims was actually true it would be the biggest news story in the world.

Now you can dismiss this by saying that the world media is "in on it" or "controlled" but frankly I have never seen any evidence that this could possibly be true, there's way too many of them with too many agendas."
Click to expand...
Well I don't know what world you live in, but from what I've observed, when things like that happen, news agencies have a field day working as many laffs out of the story as they possibly can.

The last thing they will do is say; "omg, 9/11 was maybe an inside job? Get our best people investigating that right away!"

Sorry DGM but your belief is just too funny.

MM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom