How Loony are the Loons?

18postlayout1.png


15.png
The Quote button. This button allows you to start a new post for the current thread ("reply to thread"). The post text contains a quote of the full text of the post whose Quote button you clicked. See note (b) for the format of the quoted text. You can add your own commentary to the new post and then submit it; it will be appended to the thread. Back To Top
16.png
The Multi-Quote toggle. This toggle allows you to select multiple posts to be quoted in a reply. Once you have selected some posts (their toggles will turn red), then click the Quote button of one of the posts. All the selected posts will appear in your new reply message, in chronological order. Back To Top
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69887
 
RemoveBush said:
"And where in any of your nonsense have you actually told us that you wrote that tripe?"

Your really as NUMB as a punded THUMB aren't you?

If you would READ!

This is the VERY FIRST POST!

My god, I have seen people like Forrest Gump smarter than you!

"
How Loony are the Loons?
A long post on 911blogger.com by a deranged, semi-literate loon. It's fascinating that he gets NOTHING right. These are the people who want to change the world, who brand as "sheeple" others whose reasoning abilities are vastly superior. How can such an incredibly stupid person pontificate about subjects he can't begin to comprehend??

Submitted by RemoveBush on Mon, 12/25/2006 - 12:20am.

The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories
This is a reply that I wrote to them....
I encourage everyone to do something similar.
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=pubs-english&y=2006&m=A..."
Click to expand...


Reported.

Unsourced quoting of copyrighted material, in contravention of the membership agreement, after being warned that this would result in his posts being reported.
Click to expand...

You were warned.
 
RemoveBush said:
Your really as NUMB as a punded THUMB aren't you?

If you would READ!

This is the VERY FIRST POST!

My god, I have seen people like Forrest Gump smarter than you!
Click to expand...

RemoveBush, you need to stop quoting others without sourcing. If you wish to continue to ignore the quote feature of this board, you will need to provide another way of easily identifying the original posters who have said the things you quote.

As pointed out, refusing to do this can easily be seen as a violation of your membership agreement. Please stop immediately.

I would also advise you that ad hominem attacks have no place on this board. If you are unwilling to carry on a civil discussion, please refrain from posting. Claiming others have attacked you first does not excuse this behavior.

ETA: Oh yes, reported as well. You need to follow the rules better.
 
RemoveBush said:
Your really as NUMB as a punded THUMB aren't you?

If you would READ!

This is the VERY FIRST POST!

My god, I have seen people like Forrest Gump smarter than you!
Click to expand...

So, you come in at post 39, a day after the thread has started, and well after it had drifted from the original post, and drop an insult-laden screed, and expect everyone to pick up that you were the original author of the nonsense quoted in the first post.

It didn't occur to you to even mention, "Hey, guys, I'm the fool who wrote that piece of trash"? It didn't occur to you that that little comment would have cleared up any confusion, and made you look like less of a nutbag?

Learn to write, fool. We can't be held responsible for your failure to include important information. Tool.

Please abide by the Membership Agreement and do not use insults to argue your point.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
Last edited by a moderator:
" this is too easy

from NIST"

Really?

Then riddle me this! Since you people are so keen on asking everyone else for calculations to how they came to their conclusions, why are you NOT asking the same of NIST?

That would be called a DOUBLE STANDARD!

Notice that there is NO indication of where they came up with their determination in way of [Appendix #]! They provide ZERO, NADA, ZILTCH for this information to show how they calculated their results. At least they provided a few pictures, that was nice of them. How about upholding them to the SAME standards that you expect someone with less qualifications to provide you?

Where are the snap shots for the Computer Simulations showing the results they got from their analysis? I guess that would be too much to ask for such talented and highly educated people, according to you, right? However, you clearly have not problem demanding this type of information from others that question the validity due to lack of proof of their conclusions.

Though they have updated their files since I last looked at them, they still do NOT include any of this type of information. This information should be available for the public to analyze the results for accuracy! You people just ACCEPT their outcomes without even knowing how they got the answer. Sure thye provide detailed wording, but that is something a college student can do!

How about showing me where NIST provides the calculations and demonstrates how they obtained some of their results? As far as the steel analysis for temperature, this seems to be satisfactory and what I would expect the information to look like. The rest however, is insufficiant!

I won't hold my breath for you to show where their calculations are supporting their results, after all why would they need to they are the ones you believe!
 
18postlayout1.png


15.png
The Quote button. This button allows you to start a new post for the current thread ("reply to thread"). The post text contains a quote of the full text of the post whose Quote button you clicked. See note (b) for the format of the quoted text. You can add your own commentary to the new post and then submit it; it will be appended to the thread. Back To Top
16.png
The Multi-Quote toggle. This toggle allows you to select multiple posts to be quoted in a reply. Once you have selected some posts (their toggles will turn red), then click the Quote button of one of the posts. All the selected posts will appear in your new reply message, in chronological order. Back To Top
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69887
 
RemoveBush said:
As do I, but if you will notice through the posts most of these so called experts are merely attacking rather than debating. This is why I doubt their qualifications if the SIMPLE notion that there must be EVIDENCE to come to a conclusion, not beliefe or speculation. As a doctor, you should understand that by the fact that you probably take blood samples to diagnose someone. You don't simply look at them and determine that they suffer from AIDS without any further testing? Same points I am making here with many of these so called experts. They consider simply glosing over steel beams is adequate for a so called analysis.
Click to expand...

Fair enough on the last point, but I will defend those who are somewhat hostile, only by saying that you are probably the 4000th person that has come to these forums trying to convince them of the "inside job" theory, and brings in with him the same references that they have seen 4000 times. So excuse them for it out of their frustration, if nothing else.

"Try not to judge, but rather, ask someone what their qualifications are. R. Mackey, for example is an engineer with NASA, and he post here frequently."

Fair enough, provided they follow the same. This is a 2 way street here and being insulted because I THINK for myself is getting old!
Click to expand...

fair enough.

"1. You do realize you are accusing hundreds of your fellow engineers of allowing people to get away with murder simply to save their jobs. Not directly, but indirectly this is what you are saying."

You do realize that this sort of thing has been taking place and is taking place? Siebel Edmonds, an FBI translater is the MOST gagged person in HISTORY. The rescue people were not allowed to talk, via a gag order, and yet they still kept quiet. You really think that someone is going to speak out if their entire life is going to be destroyed? Think about that! If your going to be ridiculed and assaulted with names and other attacks, are you going to step up to the plate and throw your cushy job down the tubes so your family can starve?
Click to expand...

I will be honest with you. If I had the guilt in my heart that I knew who killed 3000 people, and that they were getting away with the crime, my job security would not prevent me from telling. Now if my families lives were threatened, than I might give it more consideration (keeping quiet).

In this case where we are dealing with the murder of 3000 people, I do not buy the idea that HUNDREDS are keeping quiet on it just to keep their jobs. Some of them may be single men or women with no family, so what would prevent them from telling?

"2. If you look at the MANDATE given to NIST, they in no way violated their SOP. Their report is a "BUILDING PERFORMANCE STUDY", not an FBI CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION."

Actually they did. Their SOP states that they will investigate ALL possible reasons for something happening. This violates their SOP. This would be like you taking your oath to help someone, and then because you believe that someone is going to die anyway you don't help them.
Click to expand...

No, it would be equivelent to me, as a physician, on the night shift in a hospital ER, pronouncing someone dead, but not looking into the exact cause. This infact is what happens, as it is the job of the medical examiner and police to determine the cause of death or if foul play was involved.

"3. Has one single scientist or engineer stated in anyway that they were prevented from investigating any aspect of the collapse initiation or building performance, and if so, by whom?"

Don't know! Have not heard, but would we? Everytime a whistleblower steps up to the plate, they are crusified! Seibel Edmonds, Mr. Tice, etc. etc. etc.
Click to expand...

see my comments above. I do not buy that hundreds have remained silent, or even the top 20 or so, given that we are talking about the murder of 3000 people. But this, like all argument on this part of the deal, is just speculation.

"4. Your comment on SOP is a little generic. For example as a Doctor, I have participated in drug trials. Now in these trials their are certain things that are looked at, examined, studied, and other aspects that are not. Either they are of no consequence, or not of concern to those performing the study. If NIST was not charged with looking into certain aspects of the collapse, then they had no need to, and in my opinion did not breech any SOP."

I guess that is a differnce of oppinion! If they are scientists, they have a duty to investigate ALL possibilites. That's like a part coming back to me for failure to deploy an airbag, and I simply rule out defects in the part and concentrate on the surrounding components for the board the part is on.
Click to expand...

See my comments earlier. Like I said, the job of scientists or engineers, I would think is to focus on the task given to them, and to keep within their mandate. Now if you are telling me that NIST itself has an SOP that specifically states they have to look into ALL POSSIBLE CAUSES of building collapse initiation wrt WTCs, then I'd like to see a copy of this SOP. Otherwise, if you look at their mandate, they have fulfilled it IMO.

"Based on 10,000 pages of data collection and analysis, the structural engineers of NIST feel the above statement reflects the MOST LIKELY cause of collapse. DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS INCORRECT, or do you have ANY EVIDENCE OF ANOTHER PLAUSIBLE THEORY, to the extent that it should be considered the MOST LIKELY cause, instead of the one NIST has proposed?"

Actually I just posted a bunch of information regarding this, but here is one link that is very good, and I am not saying everything is wrong.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/JonesAnswersQuestionsWorldTradeCenter.pdf
Click to expand...

I will try to get to the link. As for Jones, I have recollection of him stating that the NIST "most likely" cause of collapse is relatively sound, but that he simply wants the other possibility (CD) looked into. I could be wrong though.

"If there was proof of molten IRON or STEEL, than I would simply say that temperatures of the fires and embers underneath the debris would have to be of sufficient temperature to maintain such a state. Could this have occured in the collapse, I think so, via alternate fuel sources within the building and with the added heat derrived from the friction of the building collapse."

Really? May I ask you then how it ended up in the basement when the fires were at or near the top of the buildings??? How did they penetrate all that debris to create a furnace?
Click to expand...

I am not a structural engineer or an expert on building collapse. I will plead complete ignorance on that question, but I am confident there are people on this board who could answer it.

"However, there is no proof, direct or indirect, of molten IRON or STEEL."

Really again? How about this:
See page 80! This is UNDISPUTABLE evidence of molten metal! You can clearly see the molten metal. Also it was stated, in the same document, that the shoes of the workers would wear out quickly (I think they said in a few days) because of the heat under their feet.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I guess my all CAPS of the word METAL and IRON and STEEL wasnt enough. I am not disputing witness testimony and some photographic evidence of molten METAL. My point is there is NO EVIDENCE of that metal being IRON or STEEL and could easily have been aluminum with alot of hydrocarbon debris in it, or could have been copper from the plumbing.

"There is a decent amount of WITNESS TESTIMONY of molten METAL of some form. That is all I have seen. Color temperature charts mean little, when the molten metals are highly contaminated (not just a handful of wood chunks) with hydrocarbon products from the building, so bringing up the color of the molten METAL really has little validity here. I have seen the video and photos, and they prove nothing beyond possible molten METAL of unknown consistency."

Correct, but this points to something BELOW occuring rather than above. This metal should have been analyzed, which is part of my arguement that a complete investigation has been performed. No one determined what that metal was or what it could have been. Don't you think that if the local authorities botched a homicide by not trying to obtain DNA, fingerprints, or any of the other things they would need for an investigation that they would be laughed out of court when trying to pin it on a person 3,000 miles away who had an alibi. Without covering ALL the areas, whether it leads to anything or not, is PROPER investigative work.
Click to expand...

I am not a member of NIST, and all I have to work with is their mandate. To me, this was not a breech of their mandate. Perhaps a direct question posed to them asking why they did not analyse molten METAL at the scene might produce an answer.

"I have seen the interview with the SINGLE firefighter who stated they found nothing bigger that a few inches, no phones, no computers.

Here is what I will say about that:

1. I wouldn' t expect to find a whole lot of debris in big chunks, given the distance things fell, and the weight that came atop most of the debris."

This is true to a large extent, however there would be debris still from the building recognizable. The force to keep the building going was insufficient without help.
Click to expand...

Speculation unless you have scientific calculations that prove this assertion. NIST has stated that the kinetic energy as a result of the dynamic load of 18-30 storeys of building falling through several floors (the impact zone) would be of such a magnitude that the resistance offered by the remaining building below would be insignificant. Unless you have hard science to contradict this, then you are simply stating your opinion, an opinion of someone with good math skills, and really good electronic skills.

The Walls, as pointed out I think here, would have ADDED to the resistence which is why in a normal implosion they remove the drywal. So if they have to remove them in a normal implosion, what makes people think that without explosives the building would still maintain enough energy to continue when it has to destroy desks, and other bulky items? I know that desks are not enough to stop it, but it is enough with all the other items to take energy away without it receiving a boost from the removal of the structure.
Click to expand...

I think we are talikng a matter of "relativity" here. Yes, obviously there was "some" resistance, which is why the building did not collapse in "free fall" time, but somewhat close to it. There are numerous videos showing "free falling" debris falling at a much faster rate than the building collapse. I simply think (opinion, but backed up by NIST) that even that amount of resistance, was insignificant to the overwhelming force of the falling storeys above the impact zone.

"2. I doubt he had gone through ALL the debris, and was likely only speaking of what he himself saw, or did not see."

Probably true, but see my comment for item 1.

"3. 1" Phone pieces, chunks of concrete, are all much bigger than the micronized (50-60 microns I think some of the truther researchers claim) concrete they say was all was left of the WTC concrete."

That is true.... Just look through the link I provided. Please tell me where is the concrete? Though the building was mostly AIR, the floors were not! They were made of concrete, and that means that a large portion of that building was concrete.
Click to expand...

Actually, a user named "Gravy" here on JREF has several photos shoing large pieces of concrete at GZ. As well, there is a large peice of multiple floors compressed, that he has a phot of as well.

"4. You have not provided me with any proof that the "dust" was micronized concrete, as opposed to drywall."

See above....
Click to expand...

Like I said, I want proof that the dust we saw was micronized concrete and not drywall, which is the more likely culpret given how little energy is required to turn it to dust c/w concrete.

Finally, a person who debates what a pleasent, but surprising, pleasure.

I am going to bed and will pick up from this post, though I can see it will be much further than 16 when I get back so my replies will be lagging as I don't jump around! I believe in following the information so I answer as they come.

ciao
Click to expand...

I am newer to the scene, so I have less chronic posting fatigue syndrome than these guys. That said, post like you have posted to me, and you may find there are more here who will debate you, many better than me at it.

TAM:)
 
Wow! It's just gotten to the pathetic stage now!

How in the world can one small forum feature give you so much trouble?

Never mind, I know the answer.
 
"WHALA"

I had a hermetic seal once, but I ran out of fish and it died.
 
I had a pet tortoise named Speedy. He used to chase cars.
61974593f95cf3929.jpg

He died of frustration.
 
Horatius said:
That sounds like an alternate punchline to a joke that ends, "No, no, that's just frost in my beard."
Click to expand...

Not familiar with "6. Wet Dream - Kip Addotta Listen
notes_clear._V54608602_.gif
Listen " http://www.amazon.com/Dr-Demento-20th-Anniversary-Collection/dp/B0000032MK ?

It was April the forty-first
Being a quadruple leap year
I was driving in downtown Atlantis
My barracuda was in the shop
So I was in a rented stingray
And it was overheating

So I pulled into a Shell Station
They said I'd blown a seal
I said, "Fix the damn thing
And leave my private life out of it
Okay pal?"
Click to expand...
Full lyrics here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom