Moderated The NYPD and Molten Concrete

HAHAHAH! That pic again! lmao! You should do some research on that one. :D

Why do you think I posted it?

Because there was no molten metal, but because of rumors started by the NYPD and the FDNY, photos like that were all the rage as proof of molten metal.

But we know there wasn't any.

So why did YOU think I posted it? What was it that made you lyao?
 
Are you saying concret CAN melt without melting steel, and then turn back to concrete? Were they lying or incompetent? Hint: "miistaken" is the same as "incompetent".


I expect no one to believe anything anyone says without checking the facts. I welcome it, but I notice no one does that around here.

Thank you for the admission of your incompetence...

/thread
 
Why do you think I posted it?

Because there was no molten metal, but because of rumors started by the NYPD and the FDNY, photos like that were all the rage as proof of molten metal.

But we know there wasn't any.

So why did YOU think I posted it? What was it that made you lyao?


Eh! Wrong... Try again!

(You'll see the humor when you find out who "enhanced" that pic and why. HAHAHA)
 
Everyone loves the TeeVee. Especially people who like to label other people.

Seems the NYPD has a robust forensics lab that is currently seeking help. What sort of work does a criminologist do?



And how about the museum (don't say propaganda). Are they indoctrinating school children about what happened on 9/11?

http://www.nycpolicemuseum.org/


Here's the floor plan where you can see the exhibits. Seems they're still exploiting 9/11. On the first floor there's an interactive exhibit for children designed to teach the skills and fundamentals of police work; such as verifying whether concrete can melt before one builds a museum exhibit that might give school children the impression concrete CAN melt.

http://www.nycpm.org/PDF/floorplan/Floorplan_English.pdf

Perfect example of your ongoing problem of seeing things that aren't actually there. The advertised post is not for a criminologist.
 
Eh! Wrong... Try again!

(You'll see the humor when you find out who "enhanced" that pic and why. HAHAHA)

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves"
~Vladimir Lenin


Why would "truthers" be pushing the same fake "hot fires" meme as the government? Golly, for the life of me I just can't figure this one out, maybe I should ask a scientist like Steven Jones or Judy Wood, eh?
 
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves"
~Vladimir Lenin


Why would "truthers" be pushing the same fake "hot fires" meme as the government? Golly, for the life of me I just can't figure this one out, maybe I should ask a scientist like Steven Jones or Judy Wood, eh?

You posted the doctored photo as if it was actually from the FDNY. Why lie?
 
Now that we can see how the ironically-named truth movement was pushing the false hot-fires meme that was started by such government organizations as the FDNY, NYPD and FEMA, can anyone answer why the USGS claims of hot spots are legitimate?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/docs/hotspots_usgs.jpg

Edited by LashL: 
Changed hotlink to regular link. Please see Rule 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now that we can see how the ironically-named truth movement was pushing the false hot-fires meme that was started by such government organizations as the FDNY, NYPD and FEMA, can anyone answer why the USGS claims of hot spots are legitimate?

[qimg]http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/docs/hotspots_usgs.jpg[/qimg]

You know there was a parking garage underneath full of cars, which in turn, were filled with gasoline. That's just one of thousands of possible sources.
 
Thank you for the admission of your incompetence...

/thread

I'm not sure what that means. Am I incompetent for asking whether the USGS maps can be trusted?

What does that make everyone who won't answer such a simple question?

Since the authorities and the "truthers" are on the same side on the "really hot fires" meme, ARE THE USGS MAPS ACCURATE? Yes or no?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/docs/hotspots_usgs.jpg

Edited by LashL: 
Changed hotlink to regular link. Please see Rule 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crikey Steve, you've packed a lot of fail into the last page-and-a-half :boggled:

Beachnut's idea is a good one:

What did they say?
The New York City Police Museum
100 Old Slip
New York, NY 10005
tel: 212-480-3100
fax: 212-480-9757
email: [email protected]

What did they say, when you discovered they might of made a mistake when the gun was crushed and corroded on 911?

If a mislabeled exhibit bothers you so much, you should ask them directly about it, get some closure.


Did you get a chance to look through these links yet?

 
You know there was a parking garage underneath full of cars, which in turn, were filled with gasoline. That's just one of thousands of possible sources.

Sooo - you're saying the gas in the cars in the parking garage reached 900 kelvin?

You don't think the maps might be just as much BS as the fake photos from the truth movement, and the bogus stories of molten steel from the fire department, and the museum exhibit of molten concrete from the police department?

You're leaning on the cars, or is that just the first straw you're clutching for to avoid looking at the evidence with a clear mind? You said the cars were just one reason of thousands. Okay, I've got the time, give me a couple hunded explanations. Or a couple. What other explanations do you have for the firefighters being mistaken about the molten steel, the police museum indoctrinating children AND now the USGS maps?

The cars? That's it?
 
Sooo - you're saying the gas in the cars in the parking garage reached 900 kelvin?
Given that gas alone burns at 800 Kelvin, and there were other combustibles present, where's the problem?

You don't think the maps might be just as much BS as the fake photos from the truth movement, and the bogus stories of molten steel from the fire department, and the museum exhibit of molten concrete from the police department?
Nope.

You're leaning on the cars, or is that just the first straw you're clutching for to avoid looking at the evidence with a clear mind? You said the cars were just one reason of thousands. Okay, I've got the time, give me a couple hunded explanations.
Well, 110 storeys x2 of offices and services have quite a lot of combustible materials. Have you never been in an office? Surely, even you can list combustion sources found in a typical office.

What other explanations do you have for the firefighters being mistaken about the molten steel, the police museum indoctrinating children AND now the USGS maps?

The cars? That's it?
Desks, chairs, paper, partitions etc, etc. from 2x 110 storey offices. I refuse to believe anyone in the world could be this obtuse.
 
Given that gas alone burns at 800 Kelvin, and there were other combustibles present, where's the problem?

Nope.

Well, 110 storeys x2 of offices and services have quite a lot of combustible materials. Have you never been in an office? Surely, even you can list combustion sources found in a typical office.

Desks, chairs, paper, partitions etc, etc. from 2x 110 storey offices. I refuse to believe anyone in the world could be this obtuse.

Is this your way of saying yes the USGS maps are correct, that the ground was 1100 degrees. Under ground. No air to 'combust' all that slow-burning gasoline.

I'll take this as a "yes", as if I ever doubted it.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom