So, once again, we have EDD disintergrating steel. Why didn't the steel in the cars disintegrate, why did it just "wilt"? Why didn't the steel from the steel belted tires do either?
Only enough time/energy to wilt, not disintegrate. Stray beams. Second part answered above.
So you expect us to believe that a beam powerful enough to evapourate the really huge beams of the WTC, while they were falling I might add, just happened to only illuminate the much thinner steel sheeting of the cars just long enough to wilt it, but no longer? And it did that for every car or truck it hit? Random stray beams that all hit their targets for what must have been almost exactly the same amount of time?
And were they stray beams that hit WTC3, 4, 5? Why did these stray beams stay on target long enough to drill multi-story holes through the buildings?
Good questions. Why did the towers explode? There clearly had to be some source of tremendous energy, far beyond GPE.
Did you miss the bit where I said:
And that's accepting all your assertions at face value, which you know we don't do.
I accepted your "explosion" terminology just for the sake of argument, to show you why your ideas are flawed. Of course, as several calculations have shown, there was more than enough energy from GPE to produce the effects we saw. But enough of that "reality" business, let's get back to la-la land, it's more fun, right?
So, now we're back to EDD making buildings "disappear", oh, expcept for where WTC4 was "sliced clean off". So, now EDD produces nice clean, straight slices, where before it was producing uniform, round holes.
Again, how does one EDD produce such different effects?
If you move the beam in a line, it will make a straight-edged cut, ala WTC4. Most of the cuts appear scalloped.
I was hoping you'd say that. Why was this beam moved in a line, while the beams that "drilled the round holes" above were not moved in a straight line? Was the beam firing continuously, to let it slice a nice straight cut, or was it pulsed somehow, to let it form a hole right in the middle of a building, with no damage leading up to that hole?
How many firing modes does this thing have, anyways? And why would they use them all, and all in the space of the 10-20 seconds it took to cause all of this damage?
So, now we have EDD needing two shots to take down WTC3, when before it took down eachof the (much larger) towers in one go. So, how powerful is the EDD again? Did they just turn it up to 11 the first time? And why did it leave that one "sliced off" part of WTC4 again?
Yes they are. Got any good answers?
Speculating, of course. I'm starting to think of this like a focused microwave. Longer than visible light, between infrared and microwaves. It cooks steel from the inside out. The beam is round, a cylinder.
If the beam cooks steel from the inside out, and it does it fast enough to destroy the whole building in 10-20 seconds, why doesn't the steel explode from the massive internal heating? Why does it only shed some "dust" as it falls? Why do we see large piles of large, relatively intact (30 feet long) steel beams, and why don't we see any beams with evidence of internal explosions or fracturing?
There were optical effects, the afterglow recorded on many videos. I don't think it behaved differently at the same time.
This is the second time you've mentioned this afterglow, which I've never heard from anyone else. Could you explain what it is you're talking about? And if this is an actual effect, could you then explain why a glow after all this proves anything aboout a beam weapon, when such a beam would be expected to show such effect while it's operating, and not afterwards? Photons don't just loiter around, you know. They have places to go.
NOt to my satisfaction you can't.
That is becoming more apparent every day. Honestly, at this point I'm not even interested in getting you to admit your errors, although that would be nice. I'm actually more interested in seeing how much more outlandish a theory you will come up with before even you will admit that it's too outlandish.
