• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
geggy said:
Hey there it is...I'll try my best to answer...please believe, I wasn't ignoring your question. Just that I'm being bombarded with different questions that Im having hard times catching up.

The 1975 fire,on the 11th floor fire was burning intensely at 700 degrees census for three hour. The fire then subsequntly spread from 9th floor to the 19th floor (yes it did as the repport indicated it), although it was small, the firemen were able to control and subside it. Yet the trusses and the core did not fail despite the weight load of the upper 90 floors that it held up . On sept 11, the fire was not as intense as it was in 1975, could not have reached anywhere near the melting temp point of the steel. Because the plane was flying at a high speed as it flew through the building as if it was a pin, and the flames shot out of the building hence only causing local damages in the area of the impact. The damages made to the concrete slabs that were embedded in the trusses had to be at least minimal. The fire could have not affected the trusses whatsoever, because the fire was nowhere burning intensely. Fuel only evaporizes in in a short period of time. You saw that most of fuel bursted into flames during the impact, thus very little puddle of fuel on the floor in the area of the impactwere burning off. The burning of office supplies couldn't have been hot enough for the core columns to fail.
Click to expand...
As I said, one thing at a time, tiger. Slow and easy. We provide backup for our claims. Please provide backup for the 10 claims you made in this paragraph.
 
geggy said:
The 1975 fire,on the 11th floor fire was burning intensely at 700 degrees census for three hour.
Click to expand...

Can you provide a conversion formula for this "census" scale?

Now you owe me a link as to what started the fire in wtc7 AND a short video clip of your osama tape. I'll crap in my pants if you do.
Click to expand...

Oh, like you weren't going to do that anyway! ;)
 
geggy said:
Hey there it is...I'll try my best to answer...please believe, I wasn't ignoring your question. Just that I'm being bombarded with different questions that Im having hard times catching up.

The 1975 fire,on the 11th floor fire was burning intensely at 700 degrees census for three hour. The fire then subsequntly spread from 9th floor to the 19th floor (yes it did as the repport indicated it), although it was small, the firemen were able to control and subside it. Yet the trusses and the core did not fail despite the weight load of the upper 90 floors that it held up . On sept 11, the fire was not as intense as it was in 1975, could not have reached anywhere near the melting temp point of the steel. Because the plane was flying at a high speed as it flew through the building as if it was a pin, and the flames shot out of the building hence only causing local damages in the area of the impact. The damages made to the concrete slabs that were embedded in the trusses had to be at least minimal. The fire could have not affected the trusses whatsoever, because the fire was nowhere burning intensely. Fuel only evaporizes in in a short period of time. You saw that most of fuel bursted into flames during the impact, thus very little puddle of fuel on the floor in the area of the impactwere burning off. The burning of office supplies couldn't have been hot enough for the core columns to fail.

And as for the still frames of the fake osama video came from this site, in which that piece o' crap site 911myths linked in their site...look into it and tell me if you think they were manipulated in any way....

http://www.september11news.com/OsamaEvidence.htm

My strongest point would be the fact that sept 11 was staged as PSYOP (which I've already covered), the history of bush crime familia and the excess /obstructing of investigation/cover up which I've not gotten to yet. be prepared

Now you owe me a link as to what started the fire in wtc7 AND a short video clip of your osama tape. I'll crap in my pants if you do.
Click to expand...


Holy cow, Geggy, you did it! You convinced me! I see it all now....the government...the media...the thermite...Cinncinati...you finally got through to me! I believe! How could I have been so blind? The physics, the expert testimony, the eyewitnesses...they all mean nothing. I see it now. Thank you so much. I am forever in your debt for having opened my eyes to the vast conspiracy that surrounds me.

Hey, do you happen to know anything about alien abductions? Id love to shuck off those misconceptions as well....
 
So "Geggy" is the latest Loose Change-er, eh? They are still perpetuating this thread by sending in uninformed drones that spout the same drivel over and over again.

They then take a screenshot of this forum and post it on their own, showing everyone how the JREF is captivated by the 60+ page Loose Change thread.

These guys aren't even putting up a good fight anymore. The Loosers must have a boot-camp where these drones are shown only the basic conspiracy theory "facts" before they are sent here to troll around a bit only to be shot down.

They are BBSB's...Bulletin Board Suicide Bombers.
 
geggy said:
On sept 11, the fire was not as intense as it was in 1975, could not have reached anywhere near the melting temp point of the steel. Because the plane was flying at a high speed as it flew through the building as if it was a pin, and the flames shot out of the building hence only causing local damages in the area of the impact. The damages made to the concrete slabs that were embedded in the trusses had to be at least minimal. The fire could have not affected the trusses whatsoever, because the fire was nowhere burning intensely. Fuel only evaporizes in in a short period of time. You saw that most of fuel bursted into flames during the impact, thus very little puddle of fuel on the floor in the area of the impactwere burning off. The burning of office supplies couldn't have been hot enough for the core columns to fail.
Click to expand...

So many claims and so little gray matter.

And as for the still frames of the fake osama video came from this site, in which that piece o' crap site 911myths linked in their site...look into it and tell me if you think they were manipulated in any way....
Click to expand...

... denial.
 
Last edited:
geggy said:
Paragshenis...

Nano-nookular containing thermite...

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=nanotech&sc=&id=14105&pg=1
Click to expand...

Ok, that link that you gave discusses "superthermites" to be used for:

underwater explosive devices, primers for igniting firearms, and as fuel propellants for rockets.
Click to expand...
as well as

"cave-buster" bombs using nanoaluminum
Click to expand...
On the last half of the last page, discusses nano nuclear bombs. They're two separate things though. There is no nano nuclear thermite weapon. Why would you need it? Superthermites are not a weapon, they're a catalyst to increase a chemical reaction. It would absolutely not increase the effectiveness of a nuclear weapon in any signifigant way.

Either way, thermite explosives, whether nano or not, would not leave pools of molten steel for several days. A nano nuclear bomb not only would not leave pools of molten steel for several days, it would also leave a radioactive fallout. Do you have another example of an explosive that leaves pools of molten steel for several days?
 
List of sept 11 activists debunking the no plane theory at pentagon...
http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-truth.html

I think the real mystery of the attack on pentagon you all should talk about instead is the failure in communication between the faa and norad. It's odd that the pentagon was struck by AA77 45 minutes after the second wtc strike in nyc, 75 minutes after faa was notified that AA77 had been hijacked and no fighter jets were visible in the skies of DC to defend the hijacked plane.

Was it an incompetent failure or was the system designed to fail on that day?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0819/p12s05-altv.html
 
Last edited:
emperorchaos said:
Or is it the same old:
Conspiracy Theorist suggests evidence
Sceptics show evidence wrong or otherwise insufficient
Conspiracy Theorist suggests additional evidence more bizarre than the first
Which is also shown to be wrong.
Click to expand...

Nope, he hasn't suggested anything additional that's more bizarre. He's still going on about his molten steel since the beginning. The Popular Mechanics and National Geographic media conpsiracy isn't any more bizarre than his original "molten steel means thermite!" logic, and he has yet to top it.
 
geggy said:
I think the real mystery of the attack on pentagon you all should talk about instead is the failure in communication between the faa and norad.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we'll do that! In the meantime, I'm afraid you will be far to busy addressing all the unanswered questions in THIS thread.

It's odd that the pentagon was struck by AA77 45 minutes after the second wtc strike in nyc, 75 minutes after faa was notified that AA77 had been hijacked and no fighter jets were visible in the skies of DC to defend the hijacked plane.

Was it an incompetent failure or was the system designed to fail on that day?
Click to expand...

And will Katherine, now that she knows she is carrying Greg's baby, propose to Paul before Tim awakes from his coma?

Tune in tomorrow! ;)
 
geggy said:
The 1975 fire,on the 11th floor fire was burning intensely at 700 degrees census for three hour.
Click to expand...

Source for that figure? I'm assuming you meant celsius, though I certainly have no proof of that.
The fire then subsequntly spread from 9th floor to the 19th floor (yes it did as the repport indicated it), although it was small, the firemen were able to control and subside it. Yet the trusses and the core did not fail despite the weight load of the upper 90 floors that it held up . On sept 11, the fire was not as intense as it was in 1975, could not have reached anywhere near the melting temp point of the steel.
Click to expand...

Guess what? I'm going to ask for a source for that claim as well. And please, get it through your head that THE STEEL DID NOT HAVE TO GET TO THE MELTING POINT FOR THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TO BE COMPROMISED!

The burning of office supplies couldn't have been hot enough for the core columns to fail.
Click to expand...

Fascinating. Do tell, what was burning in the WTC back in 1975 that was NOT burning in 2001, that would have caused the temperatures to soar higher in the fire that was eventually controlled over the one that was not?

Dang, I wish I could get answers to these questions - they're sure to be worth their weight in gold. However, we know g only occasionally answers questions posed to him.

By the way, geggy, you may have missed the question - what do you do for a living?
 
schplurg said:
So "Geggy" is the latest Loose Change-er, eh? They are still perpetuating this thread by sending in uninformed drones that spout the same drivel over and over again.

They then take a screenshot of this forum and post it on their own, showing everyone how the JREF is captivated by the 60+ page Loose Change thread.

These guys aren't even putting up a good fight anymore. The Loosers must have a boot-camp where these drones are shown only the basic conspiracy theory "facts" before they are sent here to troll around a bit only to be shot down.

They are BBSB's...Bulletin Board Suicide Bombers.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how the Geggmeister is any different from the other trolls we've seen on this board- except the Elementalist, he was completely stoned all the time- but the rest are the same. Repetitive and unable to learn or adapt, they find one thing to latch onto and it has to be something illogical and EVERYTHING has to depend on it. Franko had his TLOP Goddess, Muscleman had his threats, Jedi Knight had his stealth atheists everywhere, Lucianarchy had annoying drama, 1inChrist had the Hellfire! and "I win the debate!" and so on.
 
aggle-rithm said:
By the way, if the government DID design something to fail, there's a good chance it would fail to fail.
Click to expand...

<hijack> I seem to remember a story about Wolfgang Paul (of the Pauli exclusion principle) that nothing ever worked right around him. Rumor is that as a joke, some colleagues rigged a bunch of glassware (like in the mad scientists lab) to collapse the moment he walked in the room, as a joke about things falling apart around him. He came in, the jokester pulled the string....and nothing happened.

Has anyone else heard this story? Is there truth to it? </hijack>
 
c4ts said:
I fail to see how the Geggmeister is any different from the other trolls we've seen on this board- except the Elementalist, he was completely stoned all the time- but the rest are the same. Repetitive and unable to learn or adapt, they find one thing to latch onto and it has to be something illogical and EVERYTHING has to depend on it. Franko had his TLOP Goddess, Muscleman had his threats, Jedi Knight had his stealth atheists everywhere, Lucianarchy had annoying drama, 1inChrist had the Hellfire! and "I win the debate!" and so on.
Click to expand...

Except that geggy has multiple things to latch onto, and he will leap from one to the other like a monkey when he gets cornered.

Witness his recent shift to the Pentagon after failing to answer questions about the WTC.
 
NobbyNobbs said:
<hijack> I seem to remember a story about Wolfgang Paul (of the Pauli exclusion principle) that nothing ever worked right around him. Rumor is that as a joke, some colleagues rigged a bunch of glassware (like in the mad scientists lab) to collapse the moment he walked in the room, as a joke about things falling apart around him. He came in, the jokester pulled the string....and nothing happened.

Has anyone else heard this story? Is there truth to it? </hijack>
Click to expand...

Who cares? It's a great story! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom