Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
Truthers never are. The just post nonsensical drivel.
If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II
- Thread starter Seymour Butz
- Start date
Truthers never are. The just post nonsensical drivel.
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
A good experiment is quantifiable, and repeatable, it endevers to understand the original conditions in which a reaction took place, and how the reaction took place.
That is why truthers screw up their experiments on purpose, they are only interested in perpetual fraud, to continue the cash flow. They are not and will never be interested in the truth, only the cash they can scam, in their Huckstering Fraudulent misrepresentations of facts.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
Evidence for the building leaning?
EDIT: It would appear that there is at least one quote by Peter Hayden about a transit detecting movement in the building. If so, when was this done and how could it relate to the perimeter bulge that was also witnessed, which in hindsight could in no way bring down a 47-story football field sized skyscraper? Either way, haven't seen any photographic evidence that shows leaning. Even if it was shifting and creaking all day, this still does not negate from the anomalous foreknowledge that probably originated from the engineer who talked to Hayden.
Last edited:
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
In other words, YOU have nothing. Sorry, iron microspheres are one of the reasons why a new investigation is warranted. I'm not even saying they couldn't form naturally!
Last edited:
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 68,972
This has been covered a number of times if you can be bothered to read through even the threads in this forum.
Unless you want to claim that the Fire Department are liars and in on the conspiracy.
Are we stuck in some kind of time warp?
Last edited:
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 68,972
I can make iron microspheres by burning paint or drywall or even paper and textiles.
Welding and grinding make them. amy car brakes make them.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
There is like one or two sparse quotes about a transit detecting movement of the building. Still no photographic evidence presented to make the case that it was "leaning". I'm not claiming they're liars, just sometimes wrong, like the firefighters who claimed that all 47 stories were involved in fire.
None of this proves that anybody had any basis to predict, at 12-1 PM, that the building was going to collapse at 5-6PM.
The fires were small card is being played, instant fail
Are you in the steel can't fail in fire camp of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/woodbeambentsteel-full.jpg[/IMGw]
Or are you in the fire can't do damage school of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/onemeridiansag.jpg[/IMGw]
Just like 7 WTC, a floor burned, and the floors did not sag... oops, darn, you 9/11 truth believers fail at every failed opinion based silly claim.
Or are you in the small fire camp of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtc7fire3.jpg[/IMGw]
Why not stay at your desk, it is a small fire, it will go out... and the floor can't sag, it is steel... lol, 9/11 truth, the movement of overwhelming ignorance and infinity BS.
Why go on a tangential BS opinion fest? You have no evidence for CD after 14 years of 9/11 truth failure to make one valid claim.
Why are Cole's experiments so bad? Why can't 9/11 truth present their overwhelming evidence? It is a lie.
Done
Were WTC 7 fires too cold for 9/11 truth?
Are you in the steel can't fail in fire camp of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/woodbeambentsteel-full.jpg[/IMGw]
Or are you in the fire can't do damage school of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/onemeridiansag.jpg[/IMGw]
Just like 7 WTC, a floor burned, and the floors did not sag... oops, darn, you 9/11 truth believers fail at every failed opinion based silly claim.
Or are you in the small fire camp of woo?
[IMGw=500]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtc7fire3.jpg[/IMGw]
Why not stay at your desk, it is a small fire, it will go out... and the floor can't sag, it is steel... lol, 9/11 truth, the movement of overwhelming ignorance and infinity BS.
Why go on a tangential BS opinion fest? You have no evidence for CD after 14 years of 9/11 truth failure to make one valid claim.
Why are Cole's experiments so bad? Why can't 9/11 truth present their overwhelming evidence? It is a lie.
Done
Last edited:
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
Scientific literature?
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
Yes, we've all seen the noodle steel picture.
I'm not really denying that the fires were huge on the floors they were on. They may have actually been set by arson, but that's a whole different topic.
playing the insane thermite claim from Jones, who lied
To say iron microspheres are a sign of thermite, with zero damage to any steel, is silly BS. Iron microspheres form in fires from iron bearing substances - you believe in BS.
You seem to be unable to comment on Cole's failure; this is not making Cole look better, your attempts to back in thermite make Cole and 9/11 truth look dumber. Where is the damage to WTC steel?
Produce evidence steel was damaged by thermite. Why can't you do it? Cole can't, why can't you do something other than lie about microspheres, repeating BS you googled from 9/11 truth.
To say iron microspheres are a sign of thermite, with zero damage to any steel, is silly BS. Iron microspheres form in fires from iron bearing substances - you believe in BS.
You seem to be unable to comment on Cole's failure; this is not making Cole look better, your attempts to back in thermite make Cole and 9/11 truth look dumber. Where is the damage to WTC steel?
Produce evidence steel was damaged by thermite. Why can't you do it? Cole can't, why can't you do something other than lie about microspheres, repeating BS you googled from 9/11 truth.
Last edited:
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
I think you have it backwards. The iron microspheres, when found, should be the thing that begins an inquiry into why they are there and what purpose they could serve.
Geez. Just forget about the spheres. The high-order damage alone is enough IMO.
911 truth can't find evidence for CD after 14 years
Now you Gish Gallop to arson... yes it was arson, terrorists in two planes set the fires with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, two counts. Thus it was the biggest case of arson in history by 10 failed nuts who figured out 9/11 14 years or maybe more years than you.
That is sad, when suicide idiot terrorists know who did 9/11 (they did) and how it was done before 9/11 truth, and you, and Cole.
What a failed movement all based on BS, nonsense, and fantasy based opinions.
You did deny the fires are a factor by making up BS.
Either you have evidence of CD, for thermite or you don't. You don't have anything but opinions born in paranoia and ignorance, plagiarized from 9/11 truth.
Can you comment on topic, on Cole's failed experiments? No
Total nonsense. Iron is 5 to 6 percent of our dirt... Iron found in WTC dust is not more than background... and you think it is some plot of thermite; big fail based on your gullibility.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0050-02/fs-050-02_508.pdf you failed to understand, no one can find thermite, it was not used on 9/11. Your fantasy remains such.
It is a fact, the iron microspheres are a product of fire where iron bearing stustance are. You are gullible, you can't figure out why this means nothing but BS from 9/11 truth.
You can't produce one piece of steel damaged by thermite on 9/11. Makes you need to study, which was already done many years ago, a study already done total BS, and after 14 years dumber than dirt.
Where is your evidence for thermite, now you understand iron microspheres are products of fire where iron bearing substance are? Why do you ignore valid dust studies?
How come you can't get on topic and discuss Cole's failure to make valid experiments?
You come unarmed, zero evidence, and whine for a new investigation based on your failure to understand the many investigations, papers, and studies on the record; did you fail to read them?
Even Jones fake thermite paper concludes without evidence their dust sample might be thermite, yet not one sample matches the energy of thermite. You failed to make a valid point, and ignore reality based evidence.
Produce evidence for thermite, damage to steel, and win a Pulitzer. It is that simple, plus you need to get the people who did your fantasy version of 9/11 you can't detail. Can Cole help you? No
Where is your evidence? You failed to read any studies - steel fails in fire... why does 9/11 truth fail on the facts.
You don't seem to understand the noodle steel, where steel fails in fire - where do you find silent explosives now that thermite evidence is not to be found? How can you wake up 14 years after 9/11 and be fooled by 9/11 truth CD claims?
Yes, we've all seen the noodle steel picture.
I'm not really denying that the fires were huge on the floors they were on. They may have actually been set by arson, but that's a whole different topic.
Now you Gish Gallop to arson... yes it was arson, terrorists in two planes set the fires with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, two counts. Thus it was the biggest case of arson in history by 10 failed nuts who figured out 9/11 14 years or maybe more years than you.
That is sad, when suicide idiot terrorists know who did 9/11 (they did) and how it was done before 9/11 truth, and you, and Cole.
What a failed movement all based on BS, nonsense, and fantasy based opinions.
You did deny the fires are a factor by making up BS.
Either you have evidence of CD, for thermite or you don't. You don't have anything but opinions born in paranoia and ignorance, plagiarized from 9/11 truth.
Can you comment on topic, on Cole's failed experiments? No
http://www2.usgs.gov/blogs/features...he-dust-from-the-world-trade-center-collapse/
Total nonsense. Iron is 5 to 6 percent of our dirt... Iron found in WTC dust is not more than background... and you think it is some plot of thermite; big fail based on your gullibility.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0050-02/fs-050-02_508.pdf you failed to understand, no one can find thermite, it was not used on 9/11. Your fantasy remains such.
It is a fact, the iron microspheres are a product of fire where iron bearing stustance are. You are gullible, you can't figure out why this means nothing but BS from 9/11 truth.
You can't produce one piece of steel damaged by thermite on 9/11. Makes you need to study, which was already done many years ago, a study already done total BS, and after 14 years dumber than dirt.
Where is your evidence for thermite, now you understand iron microspheres are products of fire where iron bearing substance are? Why do you ignore valid dust studies?
How come you can't get on topic and discuss Cole's failure to make valid experiments?
You come unarmed, zero evidence, and whine for a new investigation based on your failure to understand the many investigations, papers, and studies on the record; did you fail to read them?
Even Jones fake thermite paper concludes without evidence their dust sample might be thermite, yet not one sample matches the energy of thermite. You failed to make a valid point, and ignore reality based evidence.
Produce evidence for thermite, damage to steel, and win a Pulitzer. It is that simple, plus you need to get the people who did your fantasy version of 9/11 you can't detail. Can Cole help you? No
Where is your evidence? You failed to read any studies - steel fails in fire... why does 9/11 truth fail on the facts.
Last edited:
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
3 of us in New Mexico watching on television predicted collapse, as did at least 4 in Colorado, plus 2sophomore engineering students from NMSU, all of which I know personally.
NoahFence
Banned
He predicted a historical first while witnessing a historical first. Up to that point, nobody had ever seen a 47 story building get mangled by a 110 story building collapsing on it, with zero firefighting efforts to save it.
Do you think firefighters just stop fighting fires in buildings after everyone's out? No, they keep fighting to try to save the building. They know that steel will ultimately fail in a fire. This is common sense. Nobody can refute that. It's fact.
Thus the prediction. In addition, they were there. They had access to senses that the keyboard warrior doesn't. Sense of hearing. Sense of sight. There is no way you will ever have as much information as the people standing in front of the damn thing. INSIDE the damn thing.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
They said that the collapse, over the entire time the entire structure was falling, was less than free fall.
AND
They were correct then and as far as that goes it still IS correct.
When pressed they acknowledged that a short period of ~free fall did occur. That short period comes ~1.75 AFTER the entire structure begins moving.
THEREFORE, the part of the collapse sequence that starts when the entire structure begins moving CANNOT have been due to the removal of all load bearing columns. IF it had then free fall would begin WHEN the entire structure begins moving.
IF one is to make such a claim it would be that this removal of columns occurred AT that 1.75 second mark. Now one must wonder why this would be important at all. The structure is already doomed, obviously. So why require this supposed explosive take out of all columns at that point?
Really MJ, I am asking; why require this at all when the structure is already doomed? What's the point?
P.S. don't say 'to reduce collateral damage' because that pig won't fly when its part of a plot that saw a dozen high value Manhattan buildings wrecked, thousands of people killed, and the loss of tens of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of police, fire, and rescue vehicles, the loss of 4 large airliners, the destruction of a wing of the Pentagon(one of the largest office structures in the USA), shut down Wall Street, shut down airlines, and wrecked the global economy.
Last edited:
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
Are you citing yourself as a source, using a post you made on a website that you were eventually banned from?
If so, are you related to Fletcher Prouty?
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 68,972
Any substance that contains iron will produce microspheres whrn it burns.
Why don't you do some basic chemistry research..
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 68,972
You don’t believe them and don't even know what was said. You are calling thrm liars.
It's a little early for you to be getting snarky, Junior.
Virtually every single argument that you've offered has been the product of utter technical ignorance or factually wrong. You have absolutely zero background or knowledge of any of the topics that you are raising. Care to share with us what is your educational & work experience?
All of those topics, without exception, have been raised, dissected & debunked here many years ago.
Everyone here has heard the same old crap, over & over & over. Each kid thinking that they are the first to bring this earth-shattering, paradigm shifting revelation to our attention.
I'd recommend that you take the chip off your shoulder, and start opening your ears & listening for a change.
ALL of your arguments have been wrong. Baselessly wrong.
Just like this one:
http://tinyurl.com/k5o8ef6
Firehouse Magazine
April 2002
FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden said:
Every single building in the world, in which the rate of creep of the structural framework is not zero, is going to collapse. Soon.
This is especially true for tall buildings, in which the amount of "lean" is much less & more critical than for short ones.
This info was NOT "a first, with no basis". It was not some leap of intuition.
It was the FDNY, using a tool that they had used for decades, for the express purpose that it was intended, in a manner that it was intended, to evaluate exactly the metric that it was intended (continuous, progressive change in a building's geometry).
And the FDNY reached exactly the same conclusion which that motion demanded, dozens of times in the past: "the building is unstable".
Note the date on this article.
And you, micah, are bringing up the same, lame, idiotic assertions that some "mystical foreknowledge of WTC7's collapse proves, uh, ... something nefarious" over 14 friggin' years later.?!!
Cowards will never say what you think it really means.
Step up to the plate, Junior.
Show a little integrity & courage.
Tell us EXACTLY what you believe that this foreknowledge proves.
Say it. Directly.
No innuendo.
No allegations.
Just state what you think that it means.
Do you think that the FDNY was a part of the "CD conspiracy"?
__
Also:
Chief Nigro statement on 9/11 CTs
https://sites.google.com/site/911guide/danielnigro
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94103
__ref said:
I am also now certain that you lied to us when you said earlier:
beachnut said:
Like most adults, I don’t like being lied to by kids.
Surely you don’t think that you’re the first (or 10th, or 50th) person to try the "stealth truther" routine here, do you?
__
One last comment: Look at the title of this thread: "If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong".
I don't believe that a single one of your 30 something posts in the last two days has mentioned the word "experiment" ... once.
It's considered polite to keep your posts at least a tiny bit "on topic".
Just a suggestion...
Last edited: