Friday, July 22, 2011

Kibbles and Bits



Truther lady trying to give out pamphlets in Massachusetts. Not much interesting here, but I do find the musical choice which opens it particularly appropriate:

I'm a fool to do your dirty work, oh yeah,
I don't want to do your dirty work, no more...


Note as well that when they gave out lightsticks, they got interest, but when they ran out, the reception turned more ambivalent.

Remember the nutty professor, Anthony J. Hall? He was caught puffing himself up on Wikipedia:

Should there be an entry on him at all....? He is actually better known for being a conspiracy theorist. He has recently started publishing in Holocaust denial publications (see his article in "Veteran's Today" which is not linked to any formal veterans organisation)and is known as a conspiracy theorist. Most of his stuff is not taken seriously by almost anyone...If you look at some of the videos he posts on the web he appears rather unbalanced.

Hat Tip: Commenter Richard Gage's Testicles

Indeed. The Truthers have maintained their silence on the arrest and continuing incarceration of Manny Badillo. Here's Manny improperly interjecting the wacky NYC-CAN nonsense at the reading of the names on September 11, 2010:

149 Comments:

At 23 July, 2011 06:23, Blogger Ian said...

Since this thread appears to be a roundup of news, the guy responsible for the massacre in Norway is being described as a right-wing extremist. How long before we find out that he's a truther?

 
At 23 July, 2011 07:12, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

How long before we find out that he's a truther?

Looks like just the opposite. The guy is very worked up about multiculturalism/immigration in general and Islam in particular.

Exactly how that squares with his apparent actions, I have no freaking idea.

 
At 23 July, 2011 07:25, Blogger Mads said...

Not a truther, but still a conspiracy loon who believes that the left-wing is actively importing Muslims to Norway in some sinister ploy to gain extra voters. Which is also why he attacked left-wing politicians.

 
At 23 July, 2011 10:09, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Sounds like another Timothy McViegh charactor going nuts.

 
At 23 July, 2011 10:22, Blogger Ian said...

Sounds like another Timothy McViegh charactor going nuts.

Yeah, that's who I compared him to on my Facebook post on this subject. Given the paranoia about American power among the far-right parties in Europe, I figured most of them would be truthers. Maybe not.

 
At 23 July, 2011 10:37, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Captain Obvious (Brian) has been squealing alot in the other threads.

Ian, it's a wonder why Brian hasn't gone off the deep end.

 
At 23 July, 2011 13:35, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 July, 2011 14:03, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, I've been swimming in deep water since I was a kid. Unlike you I needn't restrict myself to the pissy kickboard end of the pool.

I've swum in water 1000 feet deep.

 
At 23 July, 2011 14:27, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

Last night on Coast to Coast they featured Joe Lani:

http://theghostcop.com/

Maybe we can hire him to communicate with the spirit of Brian's long dead brain.

Why Lani was interesting was not the ghost stuff, but his description of the Fresh Kills recovery effort. How there were over 500 professionals from every relevant state and Federal agency sifting through the wreckage.

In a way it is a frightening story for troofers because it makes their theory of hidden evidence impossible.

I noticed that George didn't bring up the conspiracy crap last night as well.

 
At 23 July, 2011 14:29, Blogger Ian said...

I love the pointless "facts" that Brian posts about himself here. "I learned integral calculus before I was toilet trained! I read 'The Brothers Karamazov' before I learned to tie my shoes! I swam from Hawaii to Japan!"

It's clear that Brian is desperate for us to take him seriously. Of course, we just laugh at him. Then he gets pissed and calls us "girls". It's hilarious.

 
At 23 July, 2011 15:00, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, the fact that you think swimming in deep water is a bogus claim only shows your idiocy.

 
At 23 July, 2011 15:04, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, the fact that you think swimming in deep water is a bogus claim only shows your idiocy.

See what I mean?

 
At 23 July, 2011 15:04, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, if 500 professionals from every relevant state and Federal agency were sifting through the wreckage, how come NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it?

How come NIST can not support their theory with physical evidence? NIST has admitted they are "unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse".

 
At 23 July, 2011 15:59, Blogger Ian said...

MGF, if 500 professionals from every relevant state and Federal agency were sifting through the wreckage, how come NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it?

Who says they don't? You? You're a liar and lunatic and sex stalker, so of course you think they don't. It explains why you're so confused about 9/11.

How come NIST can not support their theory with physical evidence? NIST has admitted they are "unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse".

See what I mean?

 
At 23 July, 2011 16:27, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, the report says they don't.

 
At 23 July, 2011 19:53, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"MGF, if 500 professionals from every relevant state and Federal agency were sifting through the wreckage, how come NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it?"

This month's Skeptical Enquirer has pictures of suspect steel.

Also, who gives a fuck?

 
At 23 July, 2011 20:37, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 July, 2011 20:44, Blogger snug.bug said...

Right, nobody expects the government to give us believable reports. After all, government employees are all a bunch of contemptible schlubs who don't do anything to earn their paychecks, and the only ones who are actually real men are there for graft and corruption. Right? Isn't that your attitude?

Skeptical Enquirer is not NIST.

 
At 23 July, 2011 22:15, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"Skeptical Enquirer is not NIST."

SE visited NIST and photographed steel from the WTC.

"Right, nobody expects the government to give us believable reports."

No. You are the only one who thinks the NIST report is unbelievable.

"After all, government employees are all a bunch of contemptible schlubs who don't do anything to earn their paychecks, and the only ones who are actually real men are there for graft and corruption. Right? Isn't that your attitude?"

No. I know most government folks work hard. I just think that it's sad that they are targets for mentally ill asswipes whose distrust and paranoia (because of daddy issues)make their jobs 100-times as hard as it needs to be.

So who gives a fuck if they found melted steel? How could they tell what part of the tower it came from? The fire burned for many days underground so there is now way to tell when the steel melted, nor where it came from.

 
At 24 July, 2011 06:32, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

how come NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it?

You're saying they found evaporated steel, but that wasn't hot enough to weaken it?

 
At 24 July, 2011 09:50, Blogger Ian said...

You're saying they found evaporated steel, but that wasn't hot enough to weaken it?

Yup, he babbles about molten steel in one thread while babbling about no evidence of heated steel in the other. It's keeping in tune with him babbling about explosions in one thread and thermite in another, or "bin Laden did it" in one thread and "Bush did it" in another.

He's Brian. He doesn't have to make any sense.

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:41, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF: SE visited NIST and photographed steel from the WTC.

So what? Jesse Ventura photogtaphed steel from the WTC, and he could have visited NIST if he wanted to. Dews that make Jesse NIST?

I am not the only one who thinks the NIST report is unbelievable. There are 1500 architects and engineers for one thing, who have publicly declared that it's unbelievable. There are probably 15,000 more who think the report unbelievable but don't have the guts to say so in public. And there are probably a million more who know in their hearts that it's unbelievable and just don't want to think of it. And that's just the architects and engineers.

If Richard Gage is selling snake-oil then every time he appears in any city anywhere there should be a picket line of 100 architects and engineers protesting his slanderous claims about the honest scientists of NIST. It doesn't happen. You won't see even one.

You can't name even one independent engineer who has endorsed NIST's report on the collapse mechanism. UtterFail goes on and on about Dr. Ed Harris. Harris has written a NIST report. Harris is NIST.

Who gives a fuck if they found melted steel? Because jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel. If there was melted steel, there were explosives or incendiaries or both. The steel assemblies were marked with stamped ID numbers and so their position in the building can easily be identified. It wold have been a relatively simple operation to identify the impact zone components at Ground Zero and reconstruct portions of the tower structure at Fresh Kills for expert analysis. That's what Dr. Astaneh wanted to do. Here's what he told cbs:

"My wish was that we had spent whatever it takes, maybe $50 million, $100 million, and maybe two years, get all this steel, carry it to a lot. Instead of recycling it, put it horizontally, and assemble it. You have maybe 200 engineers, not just myself running around trying to figure out what's going on. After all, this is a crime scene and you have to figure out exactly what happened for this crime, and learn from it. But that was my wish. My wish is not what happens."

It doesn't matter how long the fires burned underground. It takes blast furnaces and coke to melt steel. Heat only flows from hotter to colder. You can't melt steel unless you have a 3000 F fire.

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:52, Blogger Ian said...

I am not the only one who thinks the NIST report is unbelievable.

Right, there's a tiny group of crackpots and liars and charlatans who agree with you (or pretend to).

There are 1500 architects and engineers for one thing, who have publicly declared that it's unbelievable.

See what I mean?

There are probably 15,000 more who think the report unbelievable but don't have the guts to say so in public.

Wow, 15,000! That's almost as many people as the Kansas City Royals get for a Wednesday night game against the Baltimore Orioles!

I love how Brian just throws this out there too. Hey, why wouldn't a lot of other people agree with an unemployed janitor and lunatic like Brian?

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:54, Blogger Ian said...

If Richard Gage is selling snake-oil then every time he appears in any city anywhere there should be a picket line of 100 architects and engineers protesting his slanderous claims about the honest scientists of NIST. It doesn't happen. You won't see even one.

...or maybe they just ignore him because they have better things to do than waste time arguing with a lone charlatan who is clearly out to scam gullible idiots like you...

But I'm sure you know what you're talking about, Brian. I mean, who doesn't want to know what an unemployed janitor who wears women's underwear thinks?

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:55, Blogger Ian said...

You can't name even one independent engineer who has endorsed NIST's report on the collapse mechanism. UtterFail goes on and on about Dr. Ed Harris. Harris has written a NIST report. Harris is NIST.

I've named Uncle Steve. You lose again, Brian.

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:56, Blogger Ian said...

It doesn't matter how long the fires burned underground. It takes blast furnaces and coke to melt steel. Heat only flows from hotter to colder. You can't melt steel unless you have a 3000 F fire.

Hey guys, we'd better listen to him. He's a professor of materials science at Carnegie Mellon.

Oh wait, no, he's a failed janitor and liar who wears women's underwear and was expelled from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet.

 
At 24 July, 2011 10:57, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, I said what I said: NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it.

"They" found evaporated steel. NIST doesn't have those evaporated samples because NIST pretends they don't exist, even though they appear in the FEMA Appendix C report

Ian, did you never study set theory and Venn diagrams? When I say "that car has a flat tire", I am not saying that all cars have flat tires. And then you jump in and start claiming I'm inconsistent because I say this car has a flat tire and that one doesn't. You're only trying to fool 8-year-olds into thinking you know what you're talking about.

 
At 24 July, 2011 11:42, Blogger Ian said...

RGT, I said what I said: NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to weaken it.

"They" found evaporated steel. NIST doesn't have those evaporated samples because NIST pretends they don't exist, even though they appear in the FEMA Appendix C report


Yes, you said what you said because you're a liar and lunatic. Now you're squealing because we've pointed out your endless lies.

Ian, did you never study set theory and Venn diagrams? When I say "that car has a flat tire", I am not saying that all cars have flat tires. And then you jump in and start claiming I'm inconsistent because I say this car has a flat tire and that one doesn't. You're only trying to fool 8-year-olds into thinking you know what you're talking about.

See what I mean?

 
At 24 July, 2011 11:43, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

"They" found evaporated steel.

If that's true, doesn't it prove that temperatures got hot enough to weaken steel?

 
At 24 July, 2011 12:34, Blogger snug.bug said...

Temperatures get hot enough to melt steel--if you use thermite. Jet fuel doesn't get hot enough to melt steel, nor do office fires.

Gene Corley said the jet fuel burned off in 60 seconds.

 
At 24 July, 2011 13:12, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Temperatures get hot enough to melt steel--if you use thermite.

You're saying thermite was used?

 
At 24 July, 2011 13:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

Why is it necessary for you to constantly ask is I'm saying something other than what I said?

I said thermite can melt steel. I said jet fuel can't. I haven't seen anybody provide any plausible explanation for the melted steel other than thermite, but I don't know what was used.

Do your own research, form your own conclusions, don't take wooden nickles, and your actual mileage may vary.

 
At 24 July, 2011 13:43, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

I haven't seen anybody provide any plausible explanation for the melted steel other than thermite, but I don't know what was used.

Is it possible that the material reported as melted steel wasn't really melted steel?

 
At 24 July, 2011 14:09, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"There are 1500 architects and engineers for one thing, who have publicly declared that it's unbelievable. "

Translation: There are 1500 people who claim to be architects and engineers. Big fucking deal, I can find 1500 pilots who believe in or have seen UFOs, doesn't make them real.

"There are probably 15,000 more who think the report unbelievable but don't have the guts to say so in public."

Translation: There are probaly 15,000 people who sobered up and had sex with another person for the first time, and moved out of their parent's basement.

"If Richard Gage is selling snake-oil then every time he appears in any city anywhere there should be a picket line of 100 architects and engineers protesting his slanderous claims about the honest scientists of NIST. It doesn't happen. You won't see even one."


See real architects HAVE JOBS to go to. They understand that most people know that Gage is full of shit. They also understand that the people who are stupid enough to pay to listne to Gage deserve to have their money taken from them.

There's a Brain Goode born every minute.

"You can't name even one independent engineer who has endorsed NIST's report on the collapse mechanism."

I don't need to. I'm not the one making outrageous claims.

"Because jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel."

Guess what, dipshit, it wasn't jet fuel that was burning in the pile, it was everything else flamable.

There was no melted steel, not like you say, there was melted alloy sure, but it's doubtful there was molten steel.

You can lie and misquote people all you want to but it won't change the facts.

 
At 24 July, 2011 14:17, Blogger Ian said...

Why is it necessary for you to constantly ask is I'm saying something other than what I said?

Yeah, RGT, you're asking Brian to actually back up his ridiculous beliefs with EVIDENCE! That's so unfair! Stop putting words in his mouth!

I said thermite can melt steel. I said jet fuel can't.

That's nice, Brian.

I haven't seen anybody provide any plausible explanation for the melted steel other than thermite, but I don't know what was used.

You certainly haven't provided any plausible evidence that there was melted steel.

Do your own research, form your own conclusions, don't take wooden nickles, and your actual mileage may vary.

We have, which is why we know that you're a delusional liar who is hopelessly confused about 9/11.

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:04, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, of course it's possible that the molten material was not steel. Of course NIST's lack of interest in performing any experiments or chemical assays are quite notable.

I think a professor of structural engineering who was hired by the NSF to study the steel knows a melted steel girder when he sees one. I think a professor of engineering at MIT knows what he's talking about when he says the photo evidence of molten steel is very good.

And there's that 40-pound ingot of the stuff, don't forget.

MGF, please identify the material in the debris pile that you believe was capable of producing temperatures able to melt steel. Understand that temperature is not cumulative. You can put steel on a 1800 F bunsen burner flame for a week, for a month, for ten years and it will never get hotter than 1800 F. That's the second law of thermodynamics and if you had half the education you claim you would know that.

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:11, Blogger Ian said...

RGT, of course it's possible that the molten material was not steel.

Right, so maybe you should stop babbling about molten steel then?

I think a professor of structural engineering who was hired by the NSF to study the steel knows a melted steel girder when he sees one.

Nobody cares what you think.

I think a professor of engineering at MIT knows what he's talking about when he says the photo evidence of molten steel is very good.

Nobody cares what you think.

And there's that 40-pound ingot of the stuff, don't forget.

Don't worry. We don't forget your hilarious lies.

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:14, Blogger Ian said...

MGF, please identify the material in the debris pile that you believe was capable of producing temperatures able to melt steel.

Nuclear weapons can melt steel. Hell, the steel tower that held the 1945 trinity bomb was mostly evaporated after the detonation, so I think we have some strong evidence of where your evaporated steel came from.

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

False.

So once again, all of Brian's evidence leads towards a hypothesis of micro-nukes planted by modified attack baboons. Too bad he's too stupid to realize it.

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:17, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian you lie, and lie and lie and lie.

Why would anybody do that about an event that killed 3000 of his fellow citizens, leaving thousands of widows and orphans? What kind of freak would do that?

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:24, Blogger Ian said...

Ian you lie, and lie and lie and lie.

Poor Brian. I've pwn3d him again and all he can do is squeal about it.

Why would anybody do that about an event that killed 3000 of his fellow citizens, leaving thousands of widows and orphans? What kind of freak would do that?

See what I mean?

Brian, nothing makes me sleep easier than knowing that Laurie Van Auken will never have her questions answered. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:35, Blogger snug.bug said...

Thanks for proving my point, freak.

Do you ever mention your trash-the-widows fetish at work? How does that go over for you?

 
At 24 July, 2011 15:48, Blogger Ian said...

Thanks for proving my point, freak.

It's amusing being called a "freak" by an unemployed janitor who wears women's underwear, was expelled from the truth movement for stalking and harassing members, believes in 9/11 truth nonsense, and looks like a homeless insane person in every photo I've seen of him.

Do you ever mention your trash-the-widows fetish at work? How does that go over for you?

Of course. I'm actually working with a number of people at my office to lobby Congress to pass a resolution that would fine the widows $100,000 for every question they re-submit to Congress. The money would then be used on tax breaks for BP.

Doesn't that sound great, Brian?

 
At 24 July, 2011 16:23, Blogger snug.bug said...

See what I mean? It thinks it's funny.

 
At 24 July, 2011 16:31, Blogger Ian said...

See what I mean? It thinks it's funny.

"It"? Wow, now it makes sense. Brian is like Buffalo Bill from "The Silence of the Lambs", hence the obsessive loner behavior and the cross-dressing.

If overweight women in the Bay Area suddenly start disappearing, at least we can give the FBI a hot lead.

 
At 24 July, 2011 17:18, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"You can put steel on a 1800 F bunsen burner flame for a week, for a month, for ten years and it will never get hotter than 1800 F."

What? Something can't get hotter than the thing it's heated by? I will write that one down.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.

What will happen is that steel will weaken and warp. Also, not all steel melts at the same temperatures, many steel types melt at lower temps. There were many different steel types in the WTC complex.

"I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that."

You do it all the time. You can't help it because you are mentally ill.

 
At 24 July, 2011 17:31, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, please do note that something can not get hotter than its heat source. That's the 2d law of thermodynamics (not to be confuised with Newton's 2d Law) and if you had half the education you claim you would know that.

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

 
At 24 July, 2011 17:40, Blogger Ian said...

MGF, please do note that something can not get hotter than its heat source. That's the 2d law of thermodynamics (not to be confuised with Newton's 2d Law) and if you had half the education you claim you would know that.

Does this dumbspam have a point, Brian?

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

False.

 
At 24 July, 2011 17:59, Blogger snug.bug said...

Yes, the point is quite clear. According to the 2d law of thermodynamics (with which MGF should be familiar) something can not get hotter than its heat source.

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

 
At 24 July, 2011 18:50, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

I think a professor of structural engineering who was hired by the NSF to study the steel knows a melted steel girder when he sees one.

Of the two broad possibilities -- secretly planted thermite, or visual misidentification of metals by several people (including experts) -- which strikes you as more plausible?

 
At 24 July, 2011 18:54, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

If overweight women in the Bay Area suddenly start disappearing, at least we can give the FBI a hot lead.

Ha! Ditto if Willie Rodriguez's head turns up with a moth in it.

 
At 24 July, 2011 19:14, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, why should I make the judgement? Let's have a credible investigation and find out!

Nobody's going to kill Willie R. Letting him live his shame is far more cruel.

 
At 24 July, 2011 19:40, Blogger Ian said...

Yes, the point is quite clear. According to the 2d law of thermodynamics (with which MGF should be familiar) something can not get hotter than its heat source.

I meant in relation to 9/11. That is what this blog is about, Brian.

I didn't misquote anybody and anybody who bothers to google Astaneh PBS or Sunder NOVA bombs can see that.

Does this dumbspam have a point, Brian?

 
At 24 July, 2011 20:05, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"MGF, please do note that something can not get hotter than its heat source. That's the 2d law of thermodynamics (not to be confuised with Newton's 2d Law) and if you had half the education you claim you would know that."

The second law of thermodynamics says that heat cannot flow from a colder body to a hotter body. It has to do with energy transfer in the form of heat as energy.

It has nothing to do with metallurgy.

Dumbass.

 
At 24 July, 2011 20:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, the 2d law of thermodyanics tells us that the only way to melt steel is to create a fire that is hotter than 2700 F. I'm still waiting for someone to explain how, without employing aluminothermic incendiaries or a forced-air blast furnace, that is possible.

 
At 24 July, 2011 20:33, Blogger paul w said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 24 July, 2011 20:34, Blogger paul w said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 24 July, 2011 20:38, Blogger paul w said...

I am unbelievable. Don't have the guts to say so in public. There are probably a million more who know.

A fuck? My wish is not what happens.

I…never study. I'm inconsistent. Only trying to fool 8-year-olds.

I'm saying something other than what I said. I haven't any plausible explanation.

I...lie, and lie and lie and lie.

I've been swimming in...the pissy kickboard end of the pool.

A fuck?

I'm still waiting


To understand Brian, read between the lines.

 
At 24 July, 2011 22:06, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 24 July, 2011 22:23, Blogger snug.bug said...

And if you lack the intellectual capacitance for that, shrink the lines to fit your intellect.

 
At 24 July, 2011 23:20, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Captain Crackpot wrote, "...intellectual capacitance...[blah][blah][blah]."

[GB shakes his head in amazement]

"...[I]ntellectual capacitance"?!?!?!?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 
At 24 July, 2011 23:41, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Before he deletes the comment.

"....snug.bug said...And if you lack the intellectual capacitance for that, shrink the lines to fit your intellect."...24 July, 2011 22:23.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 
At 25 July, 2011 00:08, Blogger snug.bug said...

Yeah I thought "capacitance" might have some resonance with those who were smart enough to appreciate it.

Which obviously you are not. Thanks for stepping in it, UtterFool.

 
At 25 July, 2011 02:01, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...Hey Beavis! Captain Crackpot said 'intellectual capacitance,' Huh huh! huh huh!" Hey Brian, Huh huh! huh huh! Is our children learning, huh huh! huh huh?"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 
At 25 July, 2011 09:40, Blogger snug.bug said...

Obviously the "resonance" issue was above your head.

 
At 25 July, 2011 11:36, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...the 'resonance' issue."

Here we see the ever-shifting rational, which is the defining characteristic of a liar. Good job, Captain Crackpot. And it took you how long to cook up that crock of bull? 9 hours?

As we can see by reading your comment at 24 July, 2011 20:20, the distinction between melting and intergranular melting are "above your head." As I've demonstrated in the past, you deliberately conflate the terms melting and intergranular melting in order to sow confusion.

First of all, intergranular melting is defined as high temperature corrosion by a combination of sulfidation and oxidation, which produces a small quantity of liquid iron oxide and sulfur slurry from grain boundary melting. As I've explained to you on numerous occasions, the steel didn't "melt" like something out of a comic book. The steel eroded at the microscopic-level, grain-by-grain, over a minimum period of 8 days. The amount of slurry produced by each truss was less than 20 u (microns) wide.

Next, there's the origin and quantity of the trusses (beams) that underwent sulfidation. Ultimately, only two horizontal beams (trusses) were found: [1] from the 53 floor of one of the towers. This beam was not considered relevant to the investigation because the beam was from the 53rd floor, which is well below the point of collapse initiation; [2] the second horizontal beam (truss) was from somewhere in building 7.

As FEMA 403, Appendix-C makes clear, the corrosion took place in the pile.

The presence of sulfidation is proof against the thermite, thermate and "nanothermite" controlled demolition theories. The high temperatures produced by the alleged thermitic reaction would have prevented the sulfidation process altogether.

Given your demonstrated ignorance of the fundamentals, it's clear that the specifics of the World Trade Center Towers collapse are "above your head." But the again, who cares what a college dropout who wears women's underwear thinks?

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:38, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...MGF, the 2d law of thermodyanics tells us that the only way to melt steel is to create a fire that is hotter than 2700 F. I'm still waiting for someone to explain how, without employing aluminothermic incendiaries or a forced-air blast furnace, that is possible."

The phenomenon was explained by FEMA and NIST.

Steel melts at 2750 degrees F, which is well above the temperature one would expect to find in a normal office fire.

The structural steel, however, didn't reach 2750 degrees F, nor did it need to reach that temperature in order for the sulfidation attack to proceed. Why? The answer is simple. The eutectic temperature of melting steel is 1740 degrees F, which is well within the temperature one would expect to encounter in a normal office fire.

SITA, Isle of Man's leading energy-from-waste (EfW) production facility tells us, "...Many waste streams and fossil fuels contain sulphur. Sulphur is present in the waste stream from batteries, plastics, waste oil, and gypsum-filled wallboard. The sulphur is released into the combustion gases during incineration. The sulphur can react with the oxygen in the air to produce sulphur dioxide."

SITA: Sulphur dioxide Management: How is Sulphur Dioxide formed?

There's no mystery, Captain Crackpot. There were many sources of sulfur dioxide in the pile--and the sources of sulfur dioxide were abundant.

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:43, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian's new handles: Captain Crackpot and Captain Obvious.

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:48, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:51, Blogger snug.bug said...

Did it take me nine hours? No, it took me half a second. I was typing "intellectual capacity" and I said to myself, "Why don't I just have a bit of fun and say 'intellectual capacitance' because in invoking radio waves it will resonate nicely with the aetheric theme of reading between the lines. And then we can see who's dumb enough to demonstrate their ignorance and make a fool of themselves?"

And that was you, who doesn't know the difference between rational, a rationale, a ratatouille, and a rat's ass.

I'm not going to indulge in your semantic quibbling. The NYT attributed to Dr. Barnett the observation that the steel was "partly evaporated" and I don't he's ever complained that he was misquoted. Whether it was vaporized, melted, or eroded is immaterial. The fact is, molten steel observed by many people around the pile, the Appendix C samples suffered a chemical attack, the mechanism for that attack was unknown, and NIST pretended that the samples didn't exist.

I don't know where you get the idea that melting of steel is something in a comic book.

Your confident claim that the steel eroded over a period of 8 days is your usual nonsense. Appendix C says the rate of corrosion is unknown and it is not known if the corrosion took place in in the ground or prior to the collapse so that it accelerated the weakening of the structure.

Jonathan Cole was able to "erode" an I-beam to razor thinness in seconds by blasting it with thermate.

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:55, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's right, goat fucker, ignore or dismiss all the scientific evidence that proves you're wrong.

By the way, you utterly fail to grasp the concept of intergranular melting. And your alleged eyewitness accounts aren't worth the ASCII characters you waste to post them.

 
At 25 July, 2011 12:56, Blogger snug.bug said...

UtterFail, 1800 f is not a normal range for an office fire. There is no evidence that the fires were that hot.

If there's no mystery about where the sulfur came from, how come the NYT called it ""perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation"? And how come NIST didn't run a few tests by burning shower curtains with steel? And how come we've never seen eutectic sulfidation attacks in other fires? And how come Appendix C concluded that no clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified?

Jonathan Cole burned gypsum with steel for three days. It didn't hurt it a bit.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:08, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

it took me half a second...who's dumb enough to demonstrate their ignorance...who doesn't know the difference between rational...and a rats ass...to indulge...Dr. Barrett...I don't know...steel is something in a comic book...usual nonsense

Reading between the lines, Captain Obvious is saying that what he says is the "usual nonsense".

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:10, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...UtterFail, 1800 f is not a normal range for an office fire. There is no evidence that the fires were that hot."

Squeal squeal squeal.

Contradicting yourself again, Captain Crackpot? Of course you are. One moment the conflagration is hot enough to melt structural steel and reduces it to "rivers of molten steel" when it suits your argument, and the next moment, "[t]here is no evidence that the fires were that hot."

Tsk, tsk tsk. Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive...

Pathetic.

"...If there's no mystery about where the sulfur came from, how come the NYT called it ""perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation"? And how come NIST didn't run a few tests by burning shower curtains with steel? And how come we've never seen eutectic sulfidation attacks in other fires? And how come Appendix C concluded that no clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified?"

Squeal squeal squeal.

I just explained it to you, cretin. Why must I be forced to explain everything to you twice (or, in most cases, more often)? Learn to read.

"...Jonathan Cole burned gypsum with steel for three days. It didn't hurt it a bit."

Squeal squeal squeal.

Irrelevant. The wanking of Jonathon "I work backwards to a predetermined conclusion" Cole proves less than absolutely nothing.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:13, Blogger snug.bug said...

UtterFail, are you callimg Captain Philip Ruvolo, Leslie Robertson, William Langewiesche, Father Malloy, Dr. Ahmed Ghoniem, Dr. Astaneh-Asl, and Dr. Alison Geyh liars?

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:15, Blogger GuitarBill said...

No, I'm calling you a liar. How many times must I repeat myself? Learn to read.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:19, Blogger snug.bug said...

I'm not contradicting myself. Your mind is like a child's.

There is no contradiction between the fires being unable to melt steel and the fact that there was melted steel. You simply have to be rational enough to recognize that something other than the fire must have melted the steel.

Unlike you I don't insist on rewriting reality to fit my psychological needs.

Cole proves stuff. He proves that thermite can make vertical cuts in steel, and it can cut steel columns. He proves that you can cheaply test the effects of cooking steel with gypsum or other putative sulfur sources--which leads to serious questions about why NIST didn't.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't lie, UtterFail. Captain Philip Ruvolo, Leslie Robertson, William Langewiesche, Father Malloy, Dr. Ahmed Ghoniem, Dr. Astaneh-Asl, and Dr. Alison Geyh all testified to molten steel.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:24, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brain did say this in "9/11 Was a Soap Opera Job" thread:


They piled up 180 pounds of thermite and set it off, and it didn't touch the steel. The mythbusters set off 1000 pounds of the stuff and they couldn't even cut all the way through the roof of a car.

So he's contradicting himself! LMAO what a fucking idiot!

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:35, Blogger snug.bug said...

I'm not contradicting myself. Jeez, you guys are dense.

What exactly is the contradiction that you think you see between some experiments done for TV in New Mexico and what people saw at Ground Zero?

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:39, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

I'm not contradicting myself.

What you call this then retard?:

You simply have to be rational enough to recognize that something other than the fire must have melted the steel.

And the contradiction:

They piled up 180 pounds of thermite and set it off, and it didn't touch the steel. The mythbusters set off 1000 pounds of the stuff and they couldn't even cut all the way through the roof of a car.

Something other than fire you said. That something wouldn't happen to be magical thermite would it? And since you agree that EMRTC and Mythbusters couldn't melt steel or a SUV with thermite, then you've contradicted yourself into a 6 foot hole you dug for yourself.

See, your words alone,prove once and for all who the liar truely is.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:52, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...UtterFail, are you callimg Captain Philip Ruvolo, Leslie Robertson, William Langewiesche, Father Malloy, Dr. Ahmed Ghoniem, Dr. Astaneh-Asl, and Dr. Alison Geyh liars?"

No, I'm calling you a liar. Learn to read.

Are you calling Fire Officer Vincent Palmieri a liar?

"...I understand that there were a few pieces of steel that were corroded by sulfur, but in the massive piles I worked on I never saw a single example of sulfidized steel." -- Fire Officer Vincent Palmieri

That's eyewitness testimony from a man who handled large amounts of steel at Ground Zero. How did all that "molten" and sulfidized steel manage to elude Officer Vincent Palmieri and his men? Are you calling the FDNY liars?

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:55, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

GB,

Yes, Captain Obvious is calling the FDNY a bunch of "liars". Because Cpt. Obvious doesn't want to admit that he's a compulsive liar. He then shifts his burden of proof onto us and then says it didn't happen the way THEY (the FDNY) told everyone.

 
At 25 July, 2011 13:58, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

And like a coward Cpt. Obvious runs away like usual.

Can't handle the truth that he's a lying sack of shit.

 
At 25 July, 2011 14:14, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Cpt. Obvious isn't posting in the other threads.

Chickenshit!

 
At 25 July, 2011 15:17, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, do I really have to explain it to you?

1. Something melted the steel at Ground Zero.
2. That something was not jet fuel.
3. Some guys in New Mexico set off some thermite and it just boiled away and did nothing.

Now what makes you think there's a contradiction between 1 and 3? What makes you think there's a connection?

UtterFail, "the pile" was 16 acres in extent. I'm sure hundreds of people never saw sulfidated steel. So what? We know from FEMA Appendix C and from Dr. Astaneh's photos that it was there. And a couple of dozen people testified to melted steel. A 40-pound ingot of the stuff was taken.

 
At 25 July, 2011 17:36, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"1. Something melted the steel at Ground Zero.
2. That something was not jet fuel.
3. Some guys in New Mexico set off some thermite and it just boiled away and did nothing."

Wow, sounds like you're on top of this, Spalding.

"1. Something melted the steel at Ground Zero."

Something or someone. Superman can melt steel with his heat-vision. You might as well blame Superman because it is as plausible as anything else in your fairy tale.


"2. That something was not jet fuel."

No, but it was something that started buring because of the jet fuel. Hmmm...what could possibley been inside a 110 story office building full of paper, office equipment, snack bars, natural gas, cooking oil, sheetrock, furniture, non-plenum-grade wiring, urinal cakes, cars, vans, industrial UPSs, and probably a few Hostess Twinkies that could have caught on fire?

Wow, that's a whale of a mystery you've got going here. Hmmm...

"3. Some guys in New Mexico set off some thermite and it just boiled away and did nothing."

Was it the space ship that crashed at Roswell? Because I heard that thing was impervious to heat. Wait, you don't think aliens were behind 9/11 do you? I mean they're the same size as baboons and could be mistaken for them.

Plus Superman is an alien. **cue dramatic music - dun dun dun - *

 
At 25 July, 2011 17:51, Blogger snug.bug said...

1. It's not a fairy tale but a fact that a couple of dozen witnesses reported molten steel at Ground Zero.
The NYT reported "evaporated" steel.

2. Nothing on your list of combustibles is capable of melting steel.

3. The guys in New Mexico were EMRTC researchers at New Mexico Tech, one of the premier explosives research labs in the world. They ran the test for National Geographic, who concluded wrongly that thermite can not cut steel.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:10, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Captain Crackpot squeals, "...'the pile' was 16 acres in extent. I'm sure hundreds of people never saw sulfidated steel. So what? We know from FEMA Appendix C and from Dr. Astaneh's photos that it was there."

Squeal squeal squeal.

I'm well aware how large the pile was, asshole. And all that structural steel yielded a grand total of two specimens that experienced a sulfidation attack. One sample was from the 53rd floor of the towers, which means it was well below the point of collapse initiation. In both cases, the samples were a horizontal beam (truss) not a column. As a result, it's illogical (a leap of logic to be precise) to conclude that "a thermitic reaction" was responsible for the collapse. After all, failure of a horizontal truss could not possibly explain a global collapse.

The temperature of the eutectic reaction for steel, which is 1740 degrees F, proves that it was not necessary to heat the steel to 2750 degrees F in order for the sulfidation attack to proceed. Furthermore, the presence of a sulfidation attack is the best evidence against alleged "controlled demolition by thermitic reaction." The high temperatures produced by a thermitic reaction would simply obliterate the sulfidation structures, thereby excluding the possibility of a sulfidation attack.

Captain Crackpot squeals, "...And a couple of dozen people testified to melted steel. A 40-pound ingot of the stuff was taken."

Squeal squeal squeal.

I don't care what they testified to, goat fucker. It's not possible to eyeball a glob of metal and determine whether it's composed of molten steel, aluminum or another substance. Only an assay performed by a qualified metallurgist or chemist can conclusively make that determination. The alleged 40-pound "ingot" you reference is best described as "stuff" because no one has ever performed an assay on the "ingot" to conclusively determine its composition.

So let's review your latest reign of error:

[1] Your characterization of the class of corrosive attack named intergranular melting as "melting" is deceptive, uninformed twaddle designed to mislead the reader;

[2] The horizontal beams you tout as evidence have never been proven to originate from a suspected point of collapse initiation. This means the horizontal beams are of marginal use to an investigator who's studying the collapse;

[3] The presence of sulfidation is the best proof against thermite, thermate and "nanothermite" controlled demolition theories. The reaction temperature of thermite (or an analogue) would obliterate the sulfidation structures, thereby precluding "controlled demolition by thermitic reaction";

[4] The sulfidation attack didn't need to reach 2750 degrees F, as you claim, in order for the sulfidation attack to proceed. 1740 degrees F is all that's required for the sulfidation attack to proceed. 1740 degrees F is also well within the temperature range one would expect for a normal office fire;

[5] The presence of sulfur dioxide at Ground Zero is easy to explain, and in fact should be expected, when one considers that "[s]ulphur is present in the waste stream from batteries, plastics, waste oil, and gypsum-filled wallboard. The sulphur is released into the combustion gases during incineration. The sulphur can react with the oxygen in the air to produce sulphur dioxide." The conditions in the pile were ripe for a potential sulfidation attack. There's nothing surprising about this phenomenon at all.

So go ahead and contradict yourself again. We all know that in the world of Captain Crackpot, the fire was hot enough to "melt steel" when it suits your propaganda, and the fire was not hot enough to weaken the structural steel when it suits your propaganda.

Pathetic.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:23, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"1. It's not a fairy tale but a fact that a couple of dozen witnesses reported molten steel at Ground Zero."

A couple of dozen? How many, Spalding? 1 dozen? 2 dozen? 3 dozen?

There were thousands of professionals working on the pile at Ground Zero who didn't see it. Why is that? (hint: there was no molten steel).

"The NYT reported "evaporated" steel."

Whoopdy fucking do.

"The guys in New Mexico were EMRTC researchers at New Mexico Tech, one of the premier explosives research labs in the world. "

Neet-O-Mosquito!

"They ran the test for National Geographic, who concluded wrongly that thermite can not cut steel."


...well if they're one of the "premier explosives research labs in the world" then you just need to shut you cunt mouth about it don't you. See, being the "premier explosives research lab" means that everyone there knows what they're talking about...unlike Brian Goode who has zero explosives experience. Just because you disagree with their findings (because their finding flush your controlled demo theory down the toilet) doesn't make them wrong. It makes you a jackass.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:38, Blogger snug.bug said...

UtterFail, so thanls for once again showing that you don't know what you're talking about. Appendix C says there are several samples: "Severe erosion found in several beams warranted further consideration."

The samples in Appendix C were 1) from a WTC7 beam and 2) from a tower column.

Your belief that "failure of a horizontal truss could not possibly explain a global collapse" is a hoot, because that's what the "pancake theory" was that was conventional wisdom in the engineering community for three years.

There's no reason to pay any attention to your unsupported assertions when you demonstrate such ignorance. I'm still waiting for you to explain why the NRDC's claim that all the WTC concrete was pulverized was absurd. You can't because you don't know the first thing about the construction of the WTC.

For you to try to dispose of eyewitness accounts by mewling that they're not conclusive proof only shows your dishonest lawyering. The eyewitness accounts are a basis for investigation. To demand proof before you will permit an investigation is unscientific, obstructionist, illogical, and dishonest.

There is no contradiction. Office fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel. Therefore something else melted the steel. NIST has not one piece of core steel to support its claims that fires weakened the steel. Further study is needed. That was the situation when Appendix C was published in 2002 and it remains the situation today.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:41, Blogger Ian said...

Hey Brian, have the widows had their questions answered yet?

You do realize that every day that goes by without the widows having their questions answered is just another success for me and another failure for you.

Given that I'm an accomplished professional with years of successful schooling, and you're an unemployed janitor who wears women's underwear and believes in magic thermite elves, it's not very surprising that I always succeed and you always fail.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:55, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Another 100% fact-free non-response from the goat fucker. That's right, goat fucker, simply dismiss all the evidence that proves you're wrong. And you're lying about the alleged column that was subject to a sulfidation attack. Both specimens were horizontal beams (trusses), not columns. Furthermore, you're lying about the "pancake theory," as you lie about everything else. You dismiss the remainder of my argument, because you know I'm right, and you have no rebuttal. All you can do is try to kick dirt on my explanation, while you hide behind idiotic and irrelevant babbling about the NDRC. Typical troofer: When your back's against the wall, CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

Pathetic.

 
At 25 July, 2011 19:57, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The remainder of your argument is simply another exercise in contradicting yourself.

Pathetic.

 
At 25 July, 2011 20:03, Blogger paul w said...

Once again…don't know. Such ignorance. Unscientific, obstructionist, illogical, and dishonest. Don't know the first thing about the construction of the WTC.

A fuck?

I'm still waiting.


To understand Brian, read between the lines.

 
At 25 July, 2011 20:22, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker squeals, "...There's no reason to pay any attention to your unsupported assertions when you demonstrate such ignorance."

Squeal squeal squeal.

You can always tell when the goat fucker is in distress. He whips out his 100% fact-free straw men accusations and flogs them to death.

Tell us more about how intergranular melting is "melting"--you cretin. As I've explained to you up thread, the steel didn't "melt" like something out of a comic book. The steel eroded at the microscopic-level, grain-by-grain, over a minimum period of 8 days. The amount of slurry produced by each truss was less than 20 u (microns) wide.

The ignorance is yours and yours alone, goat fucker.

Pathetic.

 
At 26 July, 2011 02:28, Blogger snug.bug said...

GutterBall, Appendix C says the second sample was from a column, not a beam. You don't know whereof you speak.

The "pancake theory" was conventional wisdom until the NIST report came out in 2005.

Intergranular melting is not just "melting", you cretin, it's "vaporization" as reported by the New York Times.

 
At 26 July, 2011 07:27, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

1. Something melted the steel at Ground Zero.
2. That something was not jet fuel.
3. Some guys in New Mexico set off some thermite and it just boiled away and did nothing.


1. It wasn't sparkler grade thermite nor nanothermite.

2. Yeah, its called a furniture equipted office building.

3. See, even Mexicans can't melt steel since it boiled away into nothing.

You have no point Cpt. Obvious.

Now what makes you think there's a contradiction between 1 and 3? What makes you think there's a connection?

Because you agreed that thermite can't do what you said it could do.

 
At 26 July, 2011 07:35, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Intergranular melting is not just "melting", you cretin, it's "vaporization" as reported by the New York Times.

LOL he's going for a loop-de-loop with trying to prove his silly theories.

First he complains that there was "molten steel". After being told and shown there was no "molten steel" he shifts his tactic to "evaporation".

Now in order for steel to evaporate Cpt. Obvious must prove the first step of evaporation: The melting of steel. Then he has to prove that the molten steel reached its boiling point. Lastly he has to prove that the molten steel reached its evaporating point.

So Cpt. Obvious managed to skip a couple of stages. He just went from "molten" to "evaporation" in an instant. However that's not howthe world works, you can't simply evaporate steel in a nano-second, it would be physically impossible with todays technology.

 
At 26 July, 2011 09:23, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, office fires can not melt steel. Did you ever hear of the Cardington tests?

I did not agree that thermite can not melt steel. I said that the explosives experts at EMRTC could not make it melt steel. Jonathan Cole can make it not just melt steel, but he can make make cuts on vertical surfaces.

There was molten steel. At least 2 dozen people have testified to it. A 40-pound sample was even taken.

The NYT says the steel evaporated.
Jonathan Barnett did not disagree.

Jonathan Cole has shown that blasting a steel beam with thermite can evaporate it in a few seconds.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:05, Blogger J Rebori said...

Jonathan Cole proved conclusively that thermite can only cut steel using bolt-on holders to contain and aim the burn that will survive use or they fail and don’t work,and extensive cutting into walls to allow bolting on the holders.

So you can cut a column or beam with thermite, but you cannot prepare it surreptitiously nor hide that it was done afterwards.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:24, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, office fires can not melt steel.

If that's the case then drop the whole "there was molten steel present" bullshit, alright.

I did not agree that thermite can not melt steel.

Bullshit, you provided me with facts reguarding EMRTC andthe Mythbusters in the thread "9/11 was a Soap Opera Job".

There was molten steel.

Talk about a short term memory Brian has. He just said: office fires can not melt steel.

The NYT says the steel evaporated.

So you're saying that it skipped a couple stages? Did you forget that steel needs to melt then reach above it's boiling point to evaporate, or did that slip your mind?

Jonathan Cole has shown that blasting a steel beam with thermite can evaporate it in a few seconds.

2 flaws in that sentence:

1: Thermite, alone, isn't an explosive.

2: Thermite can't evaporate steel.

Give it up Cpt. Obvious, you've been fucked by the NWO Brigade.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:51, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:51, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Jon Cole has been disgussed previously:

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=27396589&postID=8019946688608735398

Why is it that Brian likes to dig up the past of his own stupidity? That's a question I'd like Brian to answer.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:52, Blogger snug.bug said...

JR, Jonathan Cole has not yet tested the possible use of copper or aluminum or ceramic cartridges for the thermite, or the possibility that cutting or weakening action was achieved with layers of thermite coated with sprayed-on ceramic material. Empirical testing can refine self-destructing charges.

Charges can be wired in rather than bolted--so "walls" are drilled rather than cut.

There was a 9-month elevator renovations project providing 24/7 access to the core columns and lots of cover for preparation. In 1978 there was a structural retrofit done secretly on a skyscraper in lower Manhattan all summer long in complete secrecy.

WAQo, office fires can not melt steel. At least two dozen witnesses have testified to molten steel. What exactly is the contradiction you see there? Obviously something other than the office fires melted the steel.

The NYT says the steel evaporated.

You seem to think that because office fires can not melt steel, therefore the steel did not evaporate. I think your drive belt is missing a couple of pulleys.

Thermite doesn't need to be explosive to blast the steel. I can blast steel with water or sand, and neither are explosive.

Thermates based on lead oxide, copper oxide, and tungsten oxide can evaporate steel.

 
At 26 July, 2011 10:53, Blogger snug.bug said...

And a cyntillading disgushun it wuz, too.

 
At 26 July, 2011 11:05, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

There was a 9-month elevator renovations project providing 24/7 access to the core columns and lots of cover for preparation.

And in those 9 months not a single worker came forward saying: "They're planting charges in the buildings." Hmmm I wonder why that is Cpt. Obvious?

In 1978 there was a structural retrofit done secretly on a skyscraper in lower Manhattan all summer long in complete secrecy.

And that has nothing to do with the events leading up to 9/11. You don't know the business district in lower manhatten. You're grasping at nothing but straws.

 
At 26 July, 2011 11:08, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, office fires can not melt steel.

Yeah, so it can't melt steel and your point is?:

At least two dozen witnesses have testified to molten steel.

LMAO, no witnesses never saidthey saw molten steel. If there was you'd be able to provide us with the names of these imaginary witnesses.

What exactly is the contradiction you see there?

You said that fire can't melt steel then say it can. What a fucking loser!

Obviously something other than the office fires melted the steel.

Yeah, your mothers crotch when it was on fire and she had hot flashes.

 
At 26 July, 2011 11:16, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

You seem to think that because office fires can not melt steel, therefore the steel did not evaporate. I think your drive belt is missing a couple of pulleys.

You seem to forget, you need 3 things to happen for steel to evaporate:

1: Melting point
2: Boiling point
3: Evaporating point

But you have yet to prove all 3 happened on 9/11.

 
At 26 July, 2011 11:18, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Thermates based on lead oxide, copper oxide, and tungsten oxide can evaporate steel.

Yeah, if you're an expert welder with a welding tool.

 
At 26 July, 2011 13:18, Blogger J Rebori said...

"JR, Jonathan Cole has not yet tested the possible use of copper or aluminum or ceramic cartridges for the thermite, or the possibility that cutting or weakening action was achieved with layers of thermite coated with sprayed-on ceramic material. Empirical testing can refine self-destructing charges.

Charges can be wired in rather than bolted--so "walls" are drilled rather than cut.

There was a 9-month elevator renovations project providing 24/7 access to the core columns and lots of cover for preparation. In 1978 there was a structural retrofit done secretly on a skyscraper in lower Manhattan all summer long in complete secrecy."


Hey moron, thats what we call handwaving. It's making up explanations out of whole cloth to prop up an already disproven theory.

Cole's own video shows that simply clamping the charges doesn't work, it needed a strong mechanical connection. So it can't just be "wired", holes had to be drilled. that means actual cutting of access into walls.

There is no such animal as spray-on thermite. Until you can demonstrate such a thing exists it is unscientific and illogical to assume it was used. Until that happens, all your claims of its abilities are mere fantasy. Try to stay a little connected to reality, cocksucker.

Where are the girders with the holes drilled in them? There had to be dozens if not hundreds. No one in the clean up noticed them? Until some show up, it doesn't matter how much access anyone had to the elevator shafts, there is no evidence anything was done to the columns.

There was no thermite. Except in the fantasies of the 9/11 ghouls trying to improve their miserable existence with make-believe.

 
At 26 July, 2011 13:27, Blogger J Rebori said...

"And a cyntillading disgushun it wuz, too."

Considering that any mention of thermite easily proves your connection to reality to be tenuous at best, I'm not surprised you want to try laughing off past discussions.

 
At 26 July, 2011 14:13, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

And Cpt. Obvious vanishes like a fart in the wind.

 
At 26 July, 2011 14:21, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian's hit Christmas song:

Lacy things, the wife is missin'
Didn't ask, her permission
I'm wearin' her clothes
Her silk pantyhose
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear

In the store, there's a teddy
Little straps, like spaghetti
It holds me so tight
Like handcuffs at night
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear

In the office there's a guy named Melvin,
He pretends that I am Murphy Brown
He'll say, "Are you ready?" I'll say, "Whoa Man!"
"Let's wait until our wives are out of town!"

Later on, if you wanna
We can dress, like Madonna
Put on some eyeshade
And join the parade
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear

Lacy things- missin'
Didn't ask- permission
Wearin' her clothes
Silk pantyhose
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear
Walkin' 'round in women's underwear

 
At 26 July, 2011 15:05, Blogger snug.bug said...

Wacko, I know Lower Manhattan better than you do, and probably better than JR. He seems like the kind that doesn't get out much.

Captain Philip Ruvolo, Leslie Robertson, William Langewiesche, and Dr. Astaneh-Asl all said they personally say molten or previously molten steel. Dr. Ahmed Ghoniem said the photographic evidence of molten steel was very good. Others have stated that they saw molten steel. And many many more have said it was there.

I said office fires can't melt steel. Fire can melt steel if it's a thermitic fire or an oxy-acetylene torch or in a blast furnace.

The NYT said the steel evaporated. They attributed the observation to Dr. Barnett. Take it up with him.

JR, no you're handwaving to defend a ridiculous collapse theory.

You don't have to "cut a wall" to wire a thermite charge to a beam. Drilling is sufficient. There were surely opportunities for wedging charges in place by placing them near pipes or elevator rails or electrical conduit.

Iron oxide paint with aluminum powder in it is spray-on thermite. Copper oxide or lead oxide would make even better thermite.

JR, the clean-up was a "scoop and dump" operation. Here's how much they didn't notice. The complete body of a man in a business suit turned up in the rubble at Fresh Kills.

Several structural members showing the sulfidation attacks were recovered. It says so in Appendix C.

If the investigation had been honest, there would be no need for this discussion. Your compulsion to defend inept and fraudulent investigations is noted.

 
At 26 July, 2011 16:50, Blogger J Rebori said...

"Wacko, I know Lower Manhattan better than you do, and probably better than JR. He seems like the kind that doesn't get out much."

As was pointed out to you before, I was in lower Manhattan on the day in question. That was because I worked there for a couple of decades. But as always, don't let reality disturb your illusions, shit for brains.

"JR, no you're handwaving to defend a ridiculous collapse theory.

You don't have to "cut a wall" to wire a thermite charge to a beam. Drilling is sufficient. There were surely opportunities for wedging charges in place by placing them near pipes or elevator rails or electrical conduit."


Bullshit. Did you see the size of the charges he had to build to do the job? That can't be bolted on through a drill hole. And notice that when he simply clamped it in place, it failed, just as your
“wedged in” or "wired" charges would. Maybe you should re-watch your own fucking evidence.

"Iron oxide paint with aluminum powder in it is spray-on thermite. Copper oxide or lead oxide would make even better thermite."

So prove it could work well enough, Cole seems to have access to the space and material, why hasn't he tried it? Maybe you should ask him. Until someone tries it and succeeds, those variants are as futile as iron thermite. That they might work better, isn't the same as they will work well enough. Prove it or shut up.

Iron oxide paint with aluminum powder in it is not spray on thermite. It's glittery paint. If you believe it is otherwise, get some, both are easily available, and mix up a batch. Let us see the effect you get. Mixing explosives isn't just a matter of putting the right ingredients in a bowl and stirring. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for you to actually prove it.

"JR, the clean-up was a "scoop and dump" operation. Here's how much they didn't notice. The complete body of a man in a business suit turned up in the rubble at Fresh Kills.

Then it was the slowest fucking "scoop and dump" in history. It took over 8 fucking months. I watched several times every day as I went past and the pile slowly dropped. But at least you have admitted the debris was all taken to Fresh Kills and has been being searched through even after that.

So a "Scoop and Dump" that took 8 months and put all the debris in a storage space for examination, not much scooping or dumping in that, moron.

 
At 26 July, 2011 16:52, Blogger J Rebori said...

"If the investigation had been honest, there would be no need for this discussion. Your compulsion to defend inept and fraudulent investigations is noted.

Your desperate attempt to intimidate people by pretending to be keeping records of your enemies is noted, and laughed at uproariously.

 
At 26 July, 2011 17:27, Blogger Ian said...

Brian, did the widows have their questions answered today?

If not, that's yet another success for me and another abject failure for you.

 
At 26 July, 2011 17:41, Blogger snug.bug said...

JR, the claims of anonymous internet posters as to their experiences are meaningless.

JR, there are ways to wedge things in place. When I used to build concrete forms we used wedges all the time. You don't know what you're talking about.

You're the one who claims that thermite can't be sprayed. Prove it. Prove that iron oxide with aluminum flakes is not thermitic.

I don't have facilities for testing thermites. Hell, you can arrested just for smoking a cigarette around here.

It takes a long time to "scoop and dump" 500,000 tons of rubble. It was still a scoop and dump.

No, not all the debris was taken to Fresh Kills. Some of it wound up at salvage yards run by people who may have owed big favors to Giuliani. The debris was not searched through. NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to damage it. Dr. Astaneh complained to the House Science Committee that the steel was being destroyed before experts could examine it. You don't know what you're talking about.

 
At 26 July, 2011 17:50, Blogger Ian said...

JR, there are ways to wedge things in place. When I used to build concrete forms we used wedges all the time. You don't know what you're talking about.

Now all we need is some evidence of this wedging....

You're the one who claims that thermite can't be sprayed. Prove it. Prove that iron oxide with aluminum flakes is not thermitic.

Brian, you're the one who claims nuclear weapons weren't used to destroy the WTC towers. Prove it.

I don't have facilities for testing thermites.

That's good. You'd probably burn down 20 city blocks if you tried.

No, not all the debris was taken to Fresh Kills. Some of it wound up at salvage yards run by people who may have owed big favors to Giuliani.

I love 4th-hand conjecture used as evidence.

So Brian, have the widows had their questions answered yet?

 
At 26 July, 2011 18:12, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"No, not all the debris was taken to Fresh Kills. Some of it wound up at salvage yards run by people who may have owed big favors to Giuliani."

Context, Spalding, context.

In the first days after 9/11 it was a RESCUE mission. The steel was just being hauled away, and nobody had given thought about where to take it.

The New York News Media found out about the oversite and threw a fit. That's when they got organized and Fresh Kills became the designated destination.

The key here is that he MEDIA FOUND OUT AND SAID SOMETHING. No secrets here, no mysteries.

No conspiracy.

 
At 26 July, 2011 18:31, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I don't claim that nuclear weapons were not used. I don't know enough about them to know.

MGF, how can you be so confident there's no mysteries? How do you know what happened between the time the steel was delivered and the time it was discovered by the media.

Maybe when you get an education you will start to get a sense of what you don't know.

 
At 26 July, 2011 18:49, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, I don't claim that nuclear weapons were not used. I don't know enough about them to know.

Maybe you should learn more. Dr. Bill Deagle has argued that nuclear weapons were used to destroy the towers. You should read his material on this.

MGF, how can you be so confident there's no mysteries? How do you know what happened between the time the steel was delivered and the time it was discovered by the media.

Russell's Teapot rears its head again.

Maybe when you get an education you will start to get a sense of what you don't know.

My, such squealing!

 
At 26 July, 2011 19:58, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"MGF, how can you be so confident there's no mysteries? How do you know what happened between the time the steel was delivered and the time it was discovered by the media."

I know for a couple of reasons. First, if you'd actually been to NYC as you claim you have then you know that New Yorkers talk. Second, 9/11 was what the locals call "a big fucking deal" so all the scrap yards that received the steel/wreckage most likely treated it differently. I would bet good money that scrap yard worker posed for pictures with the stuff and took suveniers. Calling their friends wouldn't be out of the question either. Third, everything happened out in the open in full view of everyone on the pile, everyone at the barricades watching the cleanup, and just about anyone who cared to look.

"Maybe when you get an education you will start to get a sense of what you don't know."

That kind of thinking is for philosophy majors. Whatever education you had hasn't helped you to be a better person, nor has it prevented your mental illness.

"Ian, I don't claim that nuclear weapons were not used. I don't know enough about them to know"

See, this is why you're an idiot. I know there were no nuclear weapons used at the WTC for a couple of reasons. Large chunks of each tower didn't vanish in a bright (blinding) flash of light. There was not mushroom cloud of superheated gas that climbed into the stratosphere. No residual radiation. No melted glass. No deaths from radiation poisoning.

Come on, why cop out on a non-issue?

You're such a sad-sack.

 
At 27 July, 2011 00:05, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, MGF is the one making the claims, not me.

I'm simply pointing out the fact that there was an opportunity to dispose of dozens of tons of steel evidence.

Oh New Yorkers talk, huh? Then where's Jimmy Hoffa?

The pile was 16 acres and the work went on 24/7. It certainly was not an open book. Cameras were confiscated.

When I was young I had the same attitude as you about philosophy majors. When I became a man I put away childish things.

Unlike you, I do not pretend to know more than I do about nuclear bombs. You don't even know about the heat of fusion. Nuff said. Like I said, you don't know what you don't know.

 
At 27 July, 2011 10:56, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Wacko, I know Lower Manhattan better than you do, and probably better than JR. He seems like the kind that doesn't get out much.

LOL you don't know lower Manahatten, that's why you stay away from the park at night cause you're not a man.

I said office fires can't melt steel. Fire can melt steel if it's a thermitic fire or an oxy-acetylene torch or in a blast furnace.

He's putting his foot in his mouth again, the same lame contradiction.

Iron oxide paint with aluminum powder in it is spray-on thermite.

Can you say "sparkler"?

 
At 27 July, 2011 10:59, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Prove that iron oxide with aluminum flakes is not thermitic.

The Hindenberg was sprayed with a type of paint matching what you're saying. Problem is the thin metal skeleton didn't melt as a result of that massive hydrogen fireball.

Case closed! You lose!

 
At 27 July, 2011 11:40, Blogger J Rebori said...

"JR, the claims of anonymous internet posters as to their experiences are meaningless. "

Then why did you bring it up, moron?

"
JR, there are ways to wedge things in place. When I used to build concrete forms we used wedges all the time. You don't know what you're talking about."


You can't wedge up to a vertical surface without something to wedge against, asshole. Now you are going to assume there will be sufficient opposing points for wedging enough of those "cutting boxes" into enough of the critical locations. Got proof of any of those? And by the way, now you have to create openings big enough for those boxes, and the wedges and the tools to install the wedges. Can't do that through a small spray hole.

And, cocksucker, if it isn't relevant that I claim to have spent decades in Lower Manhattan, it is equally irrelevant that you claim experience pouring concrete.

"You're the one who claims that thermite can't be sprayed. Prove it. Prove that iron oxide with aluminum flakes is not thermitic."

Bullshit, it's your claim it can be done, therefore it is incumbent on you to prove it can, until you do prove it can be done it is illogical to just assume it can. All you need to do is find one instance of it ever having happened. Got a single one?

"You're the one who claims that thermite can't be sprayed. Prove it. Prove that iron oxide with aluminum flakes is not thermitic.

I don't have facilities for testing thermites. Hell, you can arrested just for smoking a cigarette around here."


So? Maybe you should move if that bothers you. Mr. Cole seems to have the facilities, why not contact him with your idea and offer to supply the few materials needed? You only have to prove it will act as thermite, not that it will successfully cut as a first test. Of course, since it will fail miserably and destroy your illusion, you would never take the chance he'll accept the offer. I know you can't grasp the concept, but it is one of the very first rules of logical debate, you have to prove your claims, I don't have to disprove them. When you can provide a paint on thermitic reaction, we can start arguing over if it would even work to cut steel. Till then you are in a fucking fairy tale.

"It takes a long time to "scoop and dump" 500,000 tons of rubble. It was still a scoop and dump.

No, not all the debris was taken to Fresh Kills. Some of it wound up at salvage yards run by people who may have owed big favors to Giuliani. The debris was not searched through. NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating sufficient to damage it. Dr. Astaneh complained to the House Science Committee that the steel was being destroyed before experts could examine it. You don't know what you're talking about."


Even granting you that some of the initial debris was sent to incorrect locations, and not recovered, which I doubt, the importatn debris would have been in the middle of the pile, the demolition you claim did not happen at the top. Maybe on your planet removal of a pile of debris starts in the middle, but here on Earth we start at the top.

If the debris was not searched through, where did that body you mentioned come from? Of course it was fucking searched, your own claim proves it.

 
At 27 July, 2011 11:44, Blogger J Rebori said...

"Oh New Yorkers talk, huh? Then where's Jimmy Hoffa? "

I guess you really are this fucking stupid.

Hoffa wasn't a New Yorker, never lived in New York, didn't disappear in New York and, to my knowledge, was never rumored to have been buried in New York.

You can't even do enough reliable research to find a put down that makes sense.

 
At 27 July, 2011 13:31, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, the Hindenburg's skin would not be an efficient way to transfer heat to the steel frame, and it is doubtful that the Hindenburg's paint was formulated in such a way as to optimize its thermitic potential.

JR, if you would bother to look at the WTC blueprints you will see that there are places like elevator shafts and HVAC ductways and plumbing and electrical raceways that would have many opportunities for wedging. And of course welding is another possible means of quickly affixing charge-holders to structural members.

In much of structure of the WTC the core columns were H-beams instead of box columns. There are ample opportunities for wedging there. Do you know the technique of "staking" by hitting the steel with a diamond chisel to raise a securing lump? You are arguing impossibility only from your own ignorance of construction, the WTC, and mechanical work.

Iron oxide can be sprayed. Aluminum flakes can be sprayed. Iron oxide plus aluminum flakes makes thermite and can be sprayed. Your claim that it can't is absurd.

The steel needn't necessarily be cut but only weakened.

The body was found at Fresh Kills, not at Ground Zero. The point is they were scooping and dumping the debris at Ground Zero without examining it.

What teams played at Meadowlands? Oh right, it was the East Rutherford Giants and the East Rutherford Jets. My mistake. You really don't get out much, do you? You're living proof that creative anachronism rots the mind.

 
At 27 July, 2011 14:27, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"What teams played at Meadowlands? Oh right, it was the East Rutherford Giants and the East Rutherford Jets. My mistake. You really don't get out much, do you?"

Guess who isn't burried in the endzone after all? They tore it down:

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/gallery?section=news/sports&id=7257859&photo=1

Rudy Giuliani may have been owed favors but he also had/has many enemies too. They would have burned him if anything underhanded had taken place.

"The pile was 16 acres and the work went on 24/7. It certainly was not an open book. Cameras were confiscated. "

Cameras were taken away from assholes who'd snuck into Ground Zero. You're the dumbfuck who says it was a crime scene, using your style of logic it's possible that these phony photographers brought in the nanothermite after the fact.

If we're making shit up then go for the gusto.

"I'm simply pointing out the fact that there was an opportunity to dispose of dozens of tons of steel evidence. "

Ooooooh, that sounds like a lot. No it doesn't, it sounds like a a couple of truck-loads.

"When I was young I had the same attitude as you about philosophy majors. When I became a man I put away childish things."

1. You never became a man.
2. I brought up philospohy and you threw it out because it undermined your bullshit position.
3. Occam's Razor: one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.

Occam, Francis Bacon, and Plato would all disagree with you and point out your foolishness.


Finally the odds are that Hoffa is burried on a golf course somewhere, which means you'll never find him.

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:40, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, MGF is the one making the claims, not me.

False.

Oh New Yorkers talk, huh? Then where's Jimmy Hoffa?

Jimmy Hoffa was from Michigan. You don't know what you're talking about.

Unlike you, I do not pretend to know more than I do about nuclear bombs. You don't even know about the heat of fusion. Nuff said. Like I said, you don't know what you don't know.

My, such squealing!

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:42, Blogger Ian said...

What teams played at Meadowlands? Oh right, it was the East Rutherford Giants and the East Rutherford Jets. My mistake. You really don't get out much, do you? You're living proof that creative anachronism rots the mind.

I dunno if this warrants a "see what I mean?" or a "squeal squeal squeal!". I guess it deserves both.

Also, Brian, you're a deranged glue-sniffing liar who was expelled from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet. You also wear women's underwear and believe in magic thermite elves. It amuses us that you think we care about your opinions.

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:46, Blogger Ian said...

Also, Brian, the teams are called the New York Giants and New York Jets. You make up your facts.

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:51, Blogger J Rebori said...

"JR, if you would bother to look at the WTC blueprints you will see that there are places like elevator shafts and HVAC ductways and plumbing and electrical raceways that would have many opportunities for wedging. And of course welding is another possible means of quickly affixing charge-holders to structural members.

In much of structure of the WTC the core columns were H-beams instead of box columns. There are ample opportunities for wedging there. Do you know the technique of "staking" by hitting the steel with a diamond chisel to raise a securing lump? You are arguing impossibility only from your own ignorance of construction, the WTC, and mechanical work."


So now you are welding and chipping and rigging wedges within elevator shafts, all with out causing a single siruption to service after it is in place?

Yet no evidence of any of this survived?

You are idiotic at best

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:55, Blogger J Rebori said...

"Iron oxide can be sprayed. Aluminum flakes can be sprayed. Iron oxide plus aluminum flakes makes thermite and can be sprayed. Your claim that it can't is absurd.

The steel needn't necessarily be cut but only weakened. "


Until someone actually does it, it isn't fact, only theory. And can't be used as proof of anything else.

After all, Oxygen is vital to explosives, hydrogen is highly volatile. A compound of hydrogen and oxygen, by your logic, should be explosive. And we all know you can't smoke near water.

 
At 27 July, 2011 15:59, Blogger J Rebori said...

"The body was found at Fresh Kills, not at Ground Zero. The point is they were scooping and dumping the debris at Ground Zero without examining it."

And that fact the body was found proves the debris was being examined, you simply don't want to admit that reality.

 
At 27 July, 2011 16:05, Blogger J Rebori said...

"What teams played at Meadowlands? Oh right, it was the East Rutherford Giants and the East Rutherford Jets. My mistake. You really don't get out much, do you? You're living proof that creative anachronism rots the mind."

And the name of the sports teams playing there changes the FUCKING STATE a location is in?

You are aware the East Rutherford is in fucking NEW JERSEY, aren't you?

The only Football team in NY is in Buffalo. But why let reality disrupt a good fantasy, right, snug?

Whose mind is rotting? It becomes clearer and clearer every day why you can believe these idiotic fantasies have any basis in fact

 
At 27 July, 2011 18:28, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, a wise man knows not to apply simplistic principles to anything as devious as human behavior, particularly human criminal. As I said, if the police were permitted to invoke Occam every time we'd think there was no crime at all, just stupid people who lose stuff and unlucky people who die from bizarre accidents.

 
At 27 July, 2011 19:39, Blogger Ian said...

MGF, a wise man knows not to apply simplistic principles to anything as devious as human behavior, particularly human criminal. As I said, if the police were permitted to invoke Occam every time we'd think there was no crime at all, just stupid people who lose stuff and unlucky people who die from bizarre accidents.

I'm guessing when you're as dumb as Brian is, ordinary criminals would seem like super geniuses. I guess pretty much everyone would seem like super geniuses when you're so dumb that you can't mop floors competently.

 
At 28 July, 2011 07:38, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, the Hindenburg's skin would not be an efficient way to transfer heat to the steel frame...

So what you're essentually saying is that since painted on nanothermite can't transfer heat to a thin metal skeleton of a blimp, then you also admit that it won't transfer heat to the supporting columns and beams inside the WTC?


Here's the thing Cpt. Obvious:

Your theories surrounding 9/11 are a pattern of inflammatory theories. You make use of murky methods to insinuate your claims, you bring up conspiracy theories of the past, you manipulate evidence to hide the holes in your theories. You rely on dubious academic sources that support no facts nor evidence. Therefore you're making it all up and essentually lying about everything.

 
At 28 July, 2011 09:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, if you knew anything about fire you would know that burning the skin of a balloon is a lousy way to transfer heat to a metal frame.

Imagine trying to barbecue a steak by putting it in a paper bag and lighting the bag on fire.

 
At 28 July, 2011 11:22, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, if you knew anything about fire you would know that burning the skin of a balloon is a lousy way to transfer heat to a metal frame.

Actually I do know about fire, what it can and can't do at certain temperatures because I'm a Volunteer Firefighter. But of course you're going to think: "But you claimed you're with the FDNY." I have a FRIEND that's in the FDNY. For fuck sakes would you read?

 
At 28 July, 2011 11:28, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Imagine trying to barbecue a steak by putting it in a paper bag and lighting the bag on fire.

Is that the way you cook your steak? LMAO I got only 1 question for ya: Got Worms?

 
At 28 July, 2011 12:03, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"MGF, a wise man knows not to apply simplistic principles to anything as devious as human behavior, particularly human criminal."

How would you know what a wise man does? You think thermite was used to bring down the towers, you think there was molten steel - from the girders - found at ground zero even though you can only name 12 out of the 3000 people who worked the pile (and you misquote all of them),yo repeatedly cite links that undermine every claim you make, and when challenged you change the subject instead of defending your position with facts.

You imply you're smarter than everyone because you might have had a philosophy class once, yet when confronted by philosophers like Occam, Bacon, and Plato you whine about how philosphy can't be used in real world situations (even though philosophy is all about using logic to solve problems).

 
At 28 July, 2011 12:40, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't misquote anybody. The only way you can defend your illusions is to make excuses to ignore the evidence and to try to kill the messenger.

I didn't say philosophy can't be used in real situations. I said that in the hands of an inept or dishonest thinker Occam's razor becomes a blunt instrument that mashes reality into an unrecognizable pulp.

 
At 30 July, 2011 08:59, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

MGF,

Captain Oblivious (Brian) is nothing more than a Truthbot sent here on a mission to drown out our facts and evidence becasue that's what it's programmed to do. Even though that bot is 100% wrongon everything, we should just ignore him for a while and see if there is any sign that it's a human being.

 
At 30 July, 2011 10:47, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't misquote anybody, and if I was wrong about anything you sure do a lousy job of showing it.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home