Witnesses Corroborating Rodriguez's Claims?

[Arus808]

Totovader and Arus808 are off by a lot more than some zeroes. They're not even worth replying to because they're obviously still in high school...

your ad hom is seriously tiring. retract this insult or be reported.

 

[LashL]

Yes this is conjecture,

Yes, of course it is. The "Truth" movement has never proffered anything other than conjecture and utter nonsense, to date.

Actual facts and evidence would be nice for a change, but none have been forthcoming for the past 6 years from the conspiracy crowd.

but it's informed conjecture,

No. There is no such thing as "informed conjecture". Please, stop with the inanity already. Either present evidence in support of your conspiracy theories or admit that you have none.

It really is that simple.

 

[Gravy]

Yes, in post #45, paragraph 4, I said I had read parts of it earlier today. You're not reading everything i'm writing either, apparently.

brasil, you claimed that I ignored claims of explosions in the basement. That means you didn't even read the first page of my Rodriguez site.

Pathetic. Please go away and come back when you're prepared to act like a halfway rational human being.

 

[brasil]

One guy's opinion? You mean others in the LDEO may disagree with him? How about Won Young-Kim? How about seismologists at other centers? Or should we take your completely uninformed opinion over the evidence analyzed by career experts?



Serious question: are you kidding about all this? Is this a big put-on? Because this is some of the most ridiculous 9/11 denialist nonsense that I've seen. And I've seen a lot of that.

It is serious. Are you going to deny the power of professional level "peer pressure" to get people to tow the official line and not say anything controversial? I was one of the first people to have the balls to question the "war on terror" at Columbia University in public forums, in one case to an army colonel who came to speak (he was a blatant salesman for the war on terror). Someone with the power to fire me was at that forum and the pressure to not say anything that would be seen as too "questioning of authority" was intense.

Don't you remember what happened to one Nicholas DeGenova when he stood up in front of the Columbia community and made a blistering indictment against the colonialist history of the United States? He received death threats, a professional smackdown, and had to go into hiding.

 

[Arus808]

It is serious. Are you going to deny the power of professional level "peer pressure" to get people to tow the official line and not say anything controversial?

Oh please. what kind of "pressure" would a lowly professor from columbia be under? YOU do know those graphs have been out in the public for the last 6 years; if anyone wanted to go against his claims, they would have made that known.

And realize that not only american seismologists have seen those graphs. Scientists from ALL OVER THE WORLD have seen those graphs (even from those that HATE america), yet not a peep out of anyone? not even a seismologist who would "lie" to say that the professor is wrong

Please before you state any more stupid things, READ the nist report

 

[332nd]

The 50 ton press again.... Smegin 'ell!

 

[Gravy]

brasil, reading your posts is like sitting in front of an open hydrant of ignorance, irrelevancy, denial, and arguments from incredulity. Unless you can shape up and start discussing these topics in a rational manner, I suspect you'll find that many of the smart, informed rational people here won't bother engaging with you at all. And that would be a shame, because this is a great place to learn about critical thinking.

 

[NYCEMT86]

<Snip>

I skimmed R.Mackey's post about the energy potential stored in jet fuel. My first reaction to it is if jet fuel is so amazingly packed with explosive power, why is it never used as a high explosive on its own for demolition work? (i have never heard of it being used for anything of that nature, correct me if i'm wrong).

He rather boldly states: "What matters is that 290 kg of jet fuel is a totally acceptable amount of jet fuel to pour down the elevator shafts. The damage seen in the basement is, therefore, perfectly reasonable."

I agree that 290 Kg of jet fuel could have poured down the elevator shafts, however, it requires a very large jump in logic to link that to the amount of damage reported in the basement. This brings me back to my minor error with numbers regarding detonation velocity vs. pounds per square inch (psi) of pressure. Jet fuel in an unconfined state is not to my knowledge going to have much blast potential at all, in terms of fps or psi. I could imagine a fireball bursting out of a confined elevator shaft, but this will not even come close to creating the blast required to turn solid objects to "rubble." Even in a totally confined state, I'm don't think jet fuel will explode in a way that's anything comparable to TNT. If this were the case, blasting would always be done with the much more "energy rich" jet fuel than the "inferior" TNT. We know it's not, so I don't understand how R.Mackey can prove his point with equations that have no bearing on what actually is used in the real world. Jet fuel is not used for blasting. TNT and other high explosives are, regardless of how much more "energy rich" jet fuel is.

(Bolding Mine)

There is a strong possibility that the damage in the lobby could very well indeed have been caused by exploding jet fuel.


You should see what happens when an liquid accelerant as simple as gasoline explodes.

 

[brasil]

brasil, reading your posts is like sitting in front of an open hydrant of ignorance, irrelevancy, denial, and arguments from incredulity. Unless you can shape up and start discussing these topics in a rational manner, I suspect you'll find that many of the smart, informed rational people here won't bother engaging with you at all. And that would be a shame, because this is a great place to learn about critical thinking.

Now I see that what they say about you was true. You're all diversion and sneaky maneuvers, and are not really actually replying to the content of what I'm posting. I think my posts have been very rational and open to further understanding, considering that I am not professing to be a working engineer, architect, demolitions expert, or any such thing (I'm a computer security/database/server expert by day and a published fashion photographer - I would like to hear what the specific credentials are of the people who are attacking me, like R. Mackey: are you a trained demolitions expert through the military, or are you just a guy who likes to play with equations on paper? I bet it's the latter).

I have considerably more knowledge across these disparate subjects (off the top my head) than almost anyone I know. I don't need to be told by you that I need to "learn critical thinking." My accomplishments in life stand on their own, and I don't need to prove them to anyone on this forum.

I haven't seen any poster on here truly come to my defense or help me back up my arguments, and the reason for that is that this forum is so hostile and such an echo chamber for people who have already made up their mind and already agree with each other that anyone who could help me never sticks around. It's more like a shark tank where the sport is to insult and intimidate the "new blood."

I'll probably post here again at some point in the future, but this has been a monumental waste of a day.

Edited by chillzero: 

Edited for civility

This deck is as stacked as it gets.

 

[Gravy]

I have considerably more knowledge across these disparate subjects (off the top my head) than almost anyone I know.

Well there's yer problem! [/Adam Savage]

This deck is as stacked as it gets.

Yes, this deck is as stacked as it gets against ignorance and fallacious thinking. I'm sorry that you didn't come here to learn.

 

[R.Mackey]

I would like to hear what the specific credentials are of the people who are attacking me, like R. Mackey: are you a trained demolitions expert through the military, or are you just a guy who likes to play with equations on paper? I bet it's the latter).

I've said here numerous times that I do not use arguments from authority. I am quite well qualified to talk about fluid and combustion effects, thank you, but that really doesn't matter at all. Find a problem with my arguments, not with me. If you can't, then you should try to learn something.

I haven't seen any poster on here truly come to my defense or help me back up my arguments, and the reason for that is that this forum is so hostile and such an echo chamber for people who have already made up their mind and already agree with each other that anyone who could help me never sticks around. It's more like a shark tank where the sport is to insult and intimidate the "new blood."

That's one theory. Another theory is that you're totally wrong. And if you can't find errors in my replies, then you should conclude the latter.

 

[Arus808]

Now I see that what they say about you was true. You're all diversion and sneaky maneuvers, and are not really actually replying to the content of what I'm posting.

He is doing nothing of the sort. YOU are the one dodging, posting logical fallacies, claims from personal incredulity and posting quote mined claims as if they were true.

YOU are however have been shown to be lacking in evidence, despite us asking SEVERAL times of you to present it. NONe has been provided by you thus far. All you have is given your speculation on how "fuel" should react, of cousre, without any source of claims to back up your opinions. YOU are simply 100% wrong about what you think fuel will do, and have not even attempted to understand how volatile fuel can be when introduced to a source of heat.

All that you have posted thus far are claims from various truthers who have done drive by postings. YOUR issues have been dealth with NUMEROUS times here, in varying posts over the last year and a half. However, if you had BOTHERED to use the SEARCH feature on this forum you will see that GRAVY has also answered these issues, and finding that he had been repeating himself to closed minded inviduals like yourself, he wrote SEVERLA papers that are found in the Gravy thread in the sticky porition of this FORUm. IF you had bothered to spend the last day READING those papers he took the time to write, insted of posting your ignorance in this thread, you would have had all your issues answers, but then again, YOU;d ignore those answers anyway.

YOU are not interested in the truth. YOU are only interested in seeing yourself talk, and thinking that youre the first person to bring up your issues.

YOU are not, and dont think that you are.

Gravy has no obligation to engage in topics with people who refuse to learn; and you have demonstrated repeatedly that you have no idea what the real explanation to 911 is, and that is telling in your posts.

I think my posts have been very rational and open to further understanding, considering that I am not professing to be a working engineer, architect, demolitions expert, or any such thing (I'm a computer security/database/server expert by day and a published fashion photographer -

then maybe instead of posting, you should be READING the various threads that cover the exact topics you are engaging in. That is poor form to a new forum user; agin YOUR topics have been addressed numerous times. Why dont you take this time and search for your answers.

I would like to hear what the specific credentials are of the people who are attacking me, like R. Mackey: are you a trained demolitions expert through the military, or are you just a guy who likes to play with equations on paper? I bet it's the latter).

If you bothered to search, R Mackey has stated who he is and his expertise. But then again you're not interested in learning anything

I have considerably more knowledge across these disparate subjects (off the top my head) than almost anyone I know.

No, you have a considerable amount of assumption about WHAT you know about what amounts to be nothing.

I don't need to be told by you that I need to "learn critical thinking." My accomplishments in life stand on their own, and I don't need to prove them to anyone on this forum.

if you want to be taken seriously, anywhere, you need to learn that making absurd claims requires proof. making judgements based on your opinion, and passing them off as fact is intellectually dishonest. I hope that you tell everyne you meet when you're spreading yoru 911 fanaticism that you aren't a engineer or architect and that EVERYTHING yous tate on the subject should be taken with a grain of salt.

You can all wank yourselves thinking I'm leaving because I can't hold my own in the debate, but that's simply not true. This deck is as stacked as it gets.

and this is the kind of idiocy that you could do without. Why dont you just leave us and come back when you are ready to act like an adult?

 

[Zlaya]

He is doing nothing of the sort. YOU are the one dodging, posting logical fallacies, claims from personal incredulity and posting quote mined claims as if they were true.

YOU are however have been shown to be lacking in evidence, despite us asking SEVERAL times of you to present it. NONe has been provided by you thus far. All you have is given your speculation on how "fuel" should react, of cousre, without any source of claims to back up your opinions. YOU are simply 100% wrong about what you think fuel will do, and have not even attempted to understand how volatile fuel can be when introduced to a source of heat.

All that you have posted thus far are claims from various truthers who have done drive by postings. YOUR issues have been dealth with NUMEROUS times here, in varying posts over the last year and a half. However, if you had BOTHERED to use the SEARCH feature on this forum you will see that GRAVY has also answered these issues, and finding that he had been repeating himself to closed minded inviduals like yourself, he wrote SEVERLA papers that are found in the Gravy thread in the sticky porition of this FORUm. IF you had bothered to spend the last day READING those papers he took the time to write, insted of posting your ignorance in this thread, you would have had all your issues answers, but then again, YOU;d ignore those answers anyway.

YOU are not interested in the truth. YOU are only interested in seeing yourself talk, and thinking that youre the first person to bring up your issues.

YOU are not, and dont think that you are.

Gravy has no obligation to engage in topics with people who refuse to learn; and you have demonstrated repeatedly that you have no idea what the real explanation to 911 is, and that is telling in your posts.

then maybe instead of posting, you should be READING the various threads that cover the exact topics you are engaging in. That is poor form to a new forum user; agin YOUR topics have been addressed numerous times. Why dont you take this time and search for your answers.

If you bothered to search, R Mackey has stated who he is and his expertise. But then again you're not interested in learning anything

No, you have a considerable amount of assumption about WHAT you know about what amounts to be nothing.



if you want to be taken seriously, anywhere, you need to learn that making absurd claims requires proof. making judgements based on your opinion, and passing them off as fact is intellectually dishonest. I hope that you tell everyne you meet when you're spreading yoru 911 fanaticism that you aren't a engineer or architect and that EVERYTHING yous tate on the subject should be taken with a grain of salt.





and this is the kind of idiocy that you could do without. Why dont you just leave us and come back when you are ready to act like an adult?

Its funny how you see all that based on few postings...

Great job debunker-ooo

 

[Dave Rogers]

Mike Pecoraro says that the machine shop was reduced to rubble and the hydraulic press was "gone." He didn't say "moved around." He said "gone" which I take to mean "completely destroyed." Since he worked there, I have to assume he was plenty familiar with the exact layout of the room and whether the press had merely moved.

If it was one of the objects pictured elsewhere in the thread, all it would take is for it to have been knocked over and covered with rubble, and it wouldn't be visible. The question is, is that a more simple explanation than the presence of high explosives sufficiently powerful to destroy this press entirely?

"You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming."

If they couldn't see through the smoke, how far would the press have to have been moved for them simply not to be able to see it, no matter how well they knew the layout of the machine shop?

Dave

 

[chillzero]

Please remember to be civil in these discussions, and do not personalise the comments.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

 

[SDC]

I know we shouldn't personalize this, but still, if he never returns (as he threatened he would not), this has to count as a truly remarkable performance. A wannabee engineer, able to absorb vast amounts of knowledge with a simple google search, a published fashion photographer, a hit with female persons, in demand for dancing, a computer jockey at a great university, bold enough to stand up to a "blatant" military apologist (a colonel, no less!) for the war on terror...

Actually, this has been such a performance that I hope he doesn't return, because it would spoil the effect. Gild the lily. All that stuff. Yesterday/ last night should live in memory as the Day Brasil Came to Call. What's that quote about St Crispin's Day?

 

[Totovader]

OH SORRY, i was off by a couple of zeroes because I'm trying to single handedly fend off an attack of bullies in a hostile forum where I can only type and research simultaneously at the same time. Excuuuuuse Me. Totovader and Arus808 are off by a lot more than some zeroes. They're not even worth replying to because they're obviously still in high school...

Wow. You're really satisfied with this as an excuse?

If you're wrong, it's your own problem. If you think that being off by "a couple zeros" is nothing, then perhaps you should actually address the consistency of your claim- as I pointed out in my previous post.

But if all you can do is throw temper tantrums like this- I'm betting you won't bother to address the facts.

 

[RedIbis]

I'm betting you won't bother to address the facts.

Uh, you might want to stay away from that strategy.

 

[Totovader]

Uh, you might want to stay away from that strategy.

Uh, you might want to address the replies that you abandoned as well.

Not sure why you think the facts are on your side- clearly you have a consistency problem as well.

 

[DavidJames]

I know we shouldn't personalize this, but still, if he never returns (as he threatened he would not), this has to count as a truly remarkable performance. A wannabee engineer, able to absorb vast amounts of knowledge with a simple google search, a published fashion photographer, a hit with female persons, in demand for dancing, a computer jockey at a great university, bold enough to stand up to a "blatant" military apologist (a colonel, no less!) for the war on terror...

Actually, this has been such a performance that I hope he doesn't return, because it would spoil the effect. Gild the lily. All that stuff. Yesterday/ last night should live in memory as the Day Brasil Came to Call. What's that quote about St Crispin's Day?

When referring to CTists, I often use the phrase "a combination of arrogance and ignorance."

In the past 2 years of listening to them, brasil is the hands down champion owner of this perfect storm of attributes.