Moderated The NYPD and Molten Concrete

[yankee451]

Your definition of "argument" is very generous. This could be a more appropriate description. That is a topic of psychology which is probably unrelated to 9/11.

Speaking of psychology:

Stockholm syndrome, or capture–bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

Now, what was that you were saying about how you believe authoriity despite their having lied about the fires being so intense they melted concrete and steel?

 

[beachnut]

Fires were intense, Fire did collapse the WTC, and hot spots did exist for months.

Since so many of you spend your time naysaying anything and everything that doesn't agree with the official story, I just wanted to see one of you state what exactly you do believe. But I notice you don't so much speak for yourself, as speak for "the debunkers here". ...

You say the concrete did not melt; everyone agrees the concrete did not melt except the 911 truth followers who ban you all over the internet because your claims of missiles was proved wrong on 911 by RADAR, video, eye witnesses and aircraft debris from 4, aircraft. Your no plane claims are anti-intellectual, and hateful as you ignore those murdered on 911 by spreading delusional nonsense about missiles, and lie about a mistake made calling debris fused together by heat and pressure.

The point of this thread is to highlight the fact that such falsehoods were propagated by people in positions of authority. This doesn't stop you and the debunkers from believing the rest of the story told by the authorities though does it? They were wrong about molten concrete and steel, but that didn't stop them from building a museum exhibit to indoctrinate school children. ...

The museum exhibit is labeled wrong - you failed to do anything but make up lies about why it is a mistake.

None of this bothers the "debunkers" though - they're just harmless mistakes that resulted in the murder of hundreds of thousands. ...

Complete nonsense. You make up lies about 911, and become exactly what you are against.

Fool me once...

You are trying to fool people with your missile fantasy, and you call fire fighters and police liars behind their backs.

Every average person I talk to about 9/11 (except the "debunkers" like you lot) believes the fires were so intense they collapsed the buildings, that "hot spots" existed for months after the attack. ...

The fires were intense, and the fires did collapse the buildings. Hot spots did exist for months. Those are facts.

You spread lies of no planes, silly delusional missiles.
You spread lies of no jumpers, a most disgusting claim.
You spread lies people are spreading lies on purpose, and you have not confronted the people you spread lies about.

I think it's obvious why they make such claims - because people believe authority by virtue of their authority, and nothing else (except debunkers who believe authority in spite of their proven lies)

I never believe authority, this is your projecting false properties to people.
You make up lies now about JREF posters, so you can be happy with your no plane lies of missiles and claim those in authority are liars.

You are upset about war - most people are anti-war. You spread lies about 911 to support an anti-war stand, silly, and ineffective. Drop your lies about 911 and protest war, a more worthy cause than spreading nonsense about 911.


Fires were intense, Fire did collapse the WTC, and hot spots did exist for months. This is what happens when you have over 220 acres of office material confined to 19 acres of debris. Burning plastic, more heat energy than TNT; burning wood, more heat energy than TNT, etc.

Hot spots which helped form the aggregate of debris around the gun, not melted concrete, just junk mislabeled, has you making lies about who labeled and why. A big non-issue.

The only people who believe your silly claims are idiots like the Boston Bombers. People too stupid to form rational thoughts, or make rational conclusions.
No one said steel melted, or concrete melted from NIST, or any other engineer, or scientist who is rational. Zip. you spread lies about this, and offer zero evidence. You have quote-mined the MSM and failed.

You keep spreading lies about JREF. I know of no JREF posters who accepts authority on face value, as you spread false information about your fellow humans.

 

[Jono]

Every average person I talk to about 9/11 (except the "debunkers" like you lot) believes the fires were so intense they collapsed the buildings, that "hot spots" existed for months after the attack.

I think it's obvious why they make such claims - because people believe authority by virtue of their authority, and nothing else (except debunkers who believe authority in spite of their proven lies)

A bit of a gamble ain't it though, provided you are correct with what you suspect to be evidently clear? No, given what I wrote in my former reply about it (if you were willing to consider that information), I'd have to say you are confusing incompetence for a greater, unfalsifiable malice, something that I think 911-truthers do far too easily and far too often.

Furthermore, the "hot spots" did exist for months after the collapses. We have a pretty good idea of how and why they came to be. Thermite, tnt etc can not produce that kind of long lasting temperatures. Combustibles can, however. And there was a heap of very good combustibles to that end in those piles, which we know were in them, without the need to invoke remarkable, extraordinary and ultimately sensational stuff from left field.

 

[jaydeehess]

Since so many of you spend your time naysaying anything and everything that doesn't agree with the official story, I just wanted to see one of you state what exactly you do believe. But I notice you don't so much speak for yourself, as speak for "the debunkers here".

ahhhh-hahahaha
It is quite obvious that such is my opinion of the consensus on this topic, among the debunker group of posters here. Perhaps I erroneously assumed that it was also obvious which camp I belong to and that if I offer an opinion on the consensus of that camp, that it would apply to me as well. That you seem confused in this regard and I have to explain it may be indicative of a lack of logical reasoning on your part

The point of this thread is to highlight the fact that such falsehoods were propigated by people in positions of authority.

What you characterize as falsehood many of us would regard as error or mistake. The difference is in the connotations of the words of course, and you immediately leap to the assumption of deliberate error with deep malicious intent to deceive.

Again I would ask why but as ozeco points out that is a psychological question that may not belong here.

This doesn't stop you and the debunkers from believing the rest of the story told by the authorities though does it? They were wrong about molten concrete and steel, but that didn't stop them from building a museum exhibit to indoctrinate school children.

Again with the assumption of deliberate error and deception. Care to tell us what effect schoolchildren indocrination would have on politics to get the USA into the invasion of either Afgahnistan or Iraq?
Are we to also assume that a memorial to the events in Manhattan is supposed to be a technically and scientifically precise docuementation of those events?

None of this bothers the "debunkers" though - they're just harmless mistakes that resulted in the murder of hundreds of thousands.

Really? this memorial is what led to the decision to invade two contries? Leap of logic, or does your paranoid ramble include more than that?
btw, I do see the wording of speeches made by members of the US admin were designed to garner support for invasion of Iraq. Most of the world in fact did not buy the WMD claim, or the tenuous and even laughable supposed AQ-Iraq collaboration.

Fool me once...

no need to, you seem quite capable of fooling yourself, imo all no-planers are.

 

[jaydeehess]

According to yankee , not only are all debunkers affected by a supposed Stockholm syndrome (oddly enough this would require that we had at one time felt that we were being held hostage by TPTB) and therefore in the thrall of some ephemeral controlling group that caused the destruction, he also tells us that all the non-no-planers of the truthers are wrong.
In fact it appears that absolutly everyone is wrong, wrong, wrong and only yankee is correct, supposedly no doubt about it!

what are the odds?

 

[jaydeehess]

Your definition of "argument" is very generous. This could be a more appropriate description. That is a topic of psychology which is probably unrelated to 9/11.

It would seem that no one could be as deluded as one would have to be in order to post as yankee does and that he must be an attention seeking POE.
It is also, unfortunately, possible that he is what he purports to be.

 

[ozeco41]

It would seem that no one could be as deluded as one would have to be in order to post as yankee does and that he must be an attention seeking POE.
It is also, unfortunately, possible that he is what he purports to be.

Both options are plausible.

 

[yankee451]

A bit of a gamble ain't it though, provided you are correct with what you suspect to be evidently clear? No, given what I wrote in my former reply about it (if you were willing to consider that information), I'd have to say you are confusing incompetence for a greater, unfalsifiable malice, something that I think 911-truthers do far too easily and far too often.

Furthermore, the "hot spots" did exist for months after the collapses. We have a pretty good idea of how and why they came to be. Thermite, tnt etc can not produce that kind of long lasting temperatures. Combustibles can, however. And there was a heap of very good combustibles to that end in those piles, which we know were in them, without the need to invoke remarkable, extraordinary and ultimately sensational stuff from left field.

What combustibles are you assuming were there that could account for the alleged "hot spots"?

 

[yankee451]

According to yankee , not only are all debunkers affected by a supposed Stockholm syndrome (oddly enough this would require that we had at one time felt that we were being held hostage by TPTB) and therefore in the thrall of some ephemeral controlling group that caused the destruction, he also tells us that all the non-no-planers of the truthers are wrong.
In fact it appears that absolutly everyone is wrong, wrong, wrong and only yankee is correct, supposedly no doubt about it!

what are the odds?

Yes, you are held hostage, but by your own volition.

 

[yankee451]

A bit of a gamble ain't it though, provided you are correct with what you suspect to be evidently clear? No, given what I wrote in my former reply about it (if you were willing to consider that information), I'd have to say you are confusing incompetence for a greater, unfalsifiable malice, something that I think 911-truthers do far too easily and far too often.

Furthermore, the "hot spots" did exist for months after the collapses. We have a pretty good idea of how and why they came to be. Thermite, tnt etc can not produce that kind of long lasting temperatures. Combustibles can, however. And there was a heap of very good combustibles to that end in those piles, which we know were in them, without the need to invoke remarkable, extraordinary and ultimately sensational stuff from left field.

That you judge people in power by your own capacity for empathy does not make them any more cuddly.

 

[twinstead]

Yes, you are held hostage, but by your own volition.

That you judge people in power by your own capacity for empathy does not make them any more cuddly.

Neither of these is a real answer.

 

[aggle-rithm]

What combustibles are you assuming were there that could account for the alleged "hot spots"?

Perhaps the many, many tons of office supplies, equipment, and furniture made from paper, plastic, and wood?

 

[leftysergeant]

Yes, you are held hostage, but by your own volition.

Not a bit of it. We have seen that the merry morons who were running the government at the time of 9/11 were inept. They certainly made a mess of their response, wasting billions of dollars and achieving nothing of lasting value.

We have also seen where some of the people who want to "liberate" us from this nightmare are comning from. Most seem to slither up out of the white nationalist snake pit or the anarcho-nihilist swamp.

Not gonna go there.

 

[GlennB]

What combustibles are you assuming were there that could account for the alleged "hot spots"?

The hot spots were well in the range of temperatures experienced in office fires*. There was plenty of combustible material in the debris pile. What's the problem?

*take care when you look at those reports. iirc the temperatures are primarily quoted in °K

 

[jaydeehess]

Perhaps the many, many tons of office supplies, equipment, and furniture made from paper, plastic, and wood?

how many cars were there in the several underground parking lots?

 

[jaydeehess]

Perhaps the many, many tons of office supplies, equipment, and furniture made from paper, plastic, and wood?

How many oil filled electrical transformers were in the buildings and the underground levels?

 

[jaydeehess]

Yes, you are held hostage, but by your own volition.

By whom am I, a Canadian btw, being 'held hostage'? One would assume that if I were being held hostage and identifying with my hostage taker that I would be aware of that person or group's identity.

No, imho you are the one who is a slave, to your our paranoia.

That or you are a deeply disturbed attention seeker who purports to believe a truly fantastical scenario in order to garner interaction, be it positive or negative, with others on the internet.

 

[beachnut]

What combustibles are you assuming were there that could account for the alleged "hot spots"?

Holy denial. There were 220 acres of office material to burn.

On 911 the WTC tower fires burning before collapse were equal in heat to 2,500 tons of TNT. Do you know what ton means? Yes, no, you don't care?

If the fires were about 20 acres before, that left 10 times more heat energy left to burn for months, the heat energy equal to 25,000 TONS of TNT.

Not to mention the other buildings crushed on 911, and the cars underneath the WTC, and the floors under the WTC.

Hot spots, mean fire. Hot spots does not mean melted steel.
http://yankee451.com/ Oops, you believe in fantasy; you make up fantasy using nonsesne.
http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/ Your OP from your web page; has photos which debunk/refute your missile claims. The OP exposes your hate of police and fire fighters.
Have you contacted the museum?

 

[Dash80]

Holy denial. There were 220 acres of office material to burn.

On 911 the WTC tower fires burning before collapse were equal in heat to 2,500 tons of TNT. Do you know what ton means? Yes, no, you don't care?

If the fires were about 20 acres before, that left 10 times more heat energy left to burn for months, the heat energy equal to 25,000 TONS of TNT.

Not to mention the other buildings crushed on 911, and the cars underneath the WTC, and the floors under the WTC.

Hot spots, mean fire. Hot spots does not mean melted steel.
http://yankee451.com/ Oops, you believe in fantasy; you make up fantasy using nonsesne.
http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/ Your OP from your web page; has photos which debunk/refute your missile claims. The OP exposes your hate of police and fire fighters.
Have you contacted the museum?

From yankee's page:

Corruption in big-city police departments is legendary.* Countless movies about dirty cops litter the video shelves; movies like Serpico, Internal Affairs, and the Godfather depict corruption everywhere.**

Bwahahahaha, this is hilarious coming from a guy who claims "teevee" is so bad for us.

Also he bangs on about the NYPD, claiming they are all lying scum. Umm yankee... what about the Port Authority cops? Corrupt too?

 

[yankee451]

From yankee's page:



Bwahahahaha, this is hilarious coming from a guy who claims "teevee" is so bad for us.

Also he bangs on about the NYPD, claiming they are all lying scum. Umm yankee... what about the Port Authority cops? Corrupt too?

Nowhere do I say the NYPD are all lying scum - those are your words.

If art imitates life, then referring to the plethora of films that depict police corruption is relevant. Are you claiming police corruption only exists in the movies? Do tell.

I'm sure there are "good" cops in the NYPD and the PANYNJ. All it would take would be a few corrupt people at the top to taint the whole department. What's with the all or nothing black and white thinking from you all?