Not Just Another in the Long Line
Remember Truth Burn, the fiasco where a giant sign was going to be demolished by thermite at Burning Man? Truthers raised $20,000 for that effort and what did they get? A video of some thermite being burned in a bucket.
Remember Box Boy Gage collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations, and paying himself a salary of $75,000?
Remember NYC-CAN, where the Truthers raised a bunch of money in order to get an initiative on the ballot in New York City only to have their efforts laughed out of court?
Well, this isn't like those, apparently. This is a scam, according to the Troof Action dolts.
As of this date, it looks like a total scam and it is most unfortunate that Ken has gotten sucked into this and can't seem to see the real problems.
Part vaporware, part bait and switch. All "trust us." A classic con.
"This" is a new attempt to get an independent 9-11 Commission initiative on the ballot. Somewhere:
Building on the New York experience, I approached the Office of California Legislative Counsel in October 2010 for assistance in drafting a prospective law that would create a new investigative commission––independent of federal and state governments––but with the necessary powers to get to the facts (i.e., subpoena and oath taking). The vision of the commission would be to pursue an investigation wherever the evidence leads. No person would be immune from criminal implication, regardless of political station in or out of government (domestic or foreign).
But not California as it turns out:
We have since concluded that the initiative process in California is overly expensive and otherwise not ideal for a number of reasons, and that we should prioritize our work in three states: Oregon, Massachusetts, and Alaska. You will learn more about these considerations at our website, 9-11cc.org.
The people behind the effort include:
Mike Gravel, the former Senator from Alaska. Gravel's run for President in 2008 included this ad, possibly the greatest in the history of politics:
Byron "Urantia" Belitsos, one of the founders of 9-11 Truth dot org.
Ken Jenkins, 9-11 Truth's #1 psychologist.
And somebody named George Ripley, believe it or not.
One of the more endearing aspects about 9-11 Truthers is the way they can put a smiley face on all their fiascos. But they usually do it after getting the pie in the face; in this case they've already prepared for it:
If we are able to raise the necessary funds for this undertaking, I believe there is no possibility of failure even if no initiative is enacted into law.
Their donations page claims that the contributions are tax-deductible; sounds to me like the money is being laundered through Gage and his gaggle. The home pages notes them as a "sponsor". So far the effort claims to have fleeced, err, raised almost $4900.
Update: One of the members of the advisory board is Fred Burks:
Bat-crap crazy.
Labels: Ballot Initiative, Mike Gravel
posted by Pat @ 10:10 AM
313 comments
313 Comments:
And somebody named George Ripley, believe it or not.
What about Ellen Ripley? I think David Ray Griffin should give up on the voice morphing stuff and look into whether Dick Cheney planted aliens to burst out of the chests of the pilots and then fly the planes into the WTC and Pentagon.
I think David Ray Griffin should give up on the voice morphing stuff and look into whether Dick Cheney planted aliens to burst out of the chests of the pilots and then fly the planes into the WTC and Pentagon.
Yeah, really. And those rivers of molten steel? Well, this is what molten steel looks like. Now look at this. That's all I'm going to say.
Don't forget the Building What? scams. Its current incarnation is here. Interesting that in the small print at the bottom they declare that Gage gets a 5% cut. The meter shows zero at the moment. Dare one hope people are wising up?
Erm, the video of Mike Gravel.
WTF?????
Oh man, I forgot about the Mike Gravel "Rock" ad. Truly a classic.
do these morons have any concept of jurisdiction?
GMS, any state that lost a citizen on 9/11 can launch a murder investigation.
HAHAHAHAHA!
GMS, any state that lost a citizen on 9/11 can launch a murder investigation.
Any relative of a victim or anybody who suffered an injury can file a civil suit. The issue isn't only jurisdiction or standing. The larger issue is that when expressed as factual assertions, 9/11 Truth is exposed as insanity (*cough* April Gallop *cough*).
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dismissing the entire 9/11 truth enterprise on the basis of a few lunatics is like dismissing the entire medical establishment on the basis of a few quacks.
Take away the lunatics and it's not clear what's left. The responsible branch appears intent on reciting platitudes like "there needs to be accountability" and "we need new investigations". That barely even merits the attention that a dismissal would require.
Re; the Gravel video. The man himself explains:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57GOsJNjRkY
a new investigative commission––independent of federal and state governments––but with the necessary powers to get to the facts (i.e., subpoena and oath taking). No person would be immune from criminal implication, regardless of political station in or out of government (domestic or foreign).
Not only is that no different from the New York initiative, those are exactly the reasons it failed! They asked for powers that the government cannot give them.
Now, a sane PAC would actually consider a statement like "the petition overreaches by attempting to confer a wide variety of law enforcement powers on the commission" and try to come up with a way to achieve what they want without doing so.
But conspiracy nuts have a great belief in magical language. If their argument fails, it's not because it was actually invalid, but because they failed to invoke the Univeral Commercial Code at exactly the right moment, or because the flag had a gold fringe and they were under maritime jurisdiction.
You see this all the time in the tax protesting world. They just keep going back to court with the same long-defeated arguments, they keep losing, they keep piling up frivolous penalties, and they never learn.
And so it will be with these ballot initiatives.
RGT, take away the lunatics and what remains is family members who have been lied to and who want honest investigations. For you to so blithely dismiss accountability is short-sighted. We live in an age of unaccountability where knaves in all fields of chicanery and criminality are able to walk without facing consequences. It's the major reason this country is going down the tubes.
Shut the fuck up, Brian.
Take always the loonies and the con men and you have nothing but people too stupid to know the facts of 9/11, and in a free country you don't start which hunts on the ignorance of a small few. Even if you find a few family members who honestly question the event, so what? You can feel sorry for them but their questions have no more weight than the informed majority who understand 9/11 was NOT an inside job.
In fact question mean absolutely NOTHING, If you think a crime has been committed you need real hard facts and evidence, nothing else matters at all.
It's the major reason this country is going down the tubes.
----
This country is not going down the tubes, in spite of the fact we have far to many useless citizens like you Brian. Janitors come a dime a dozen. You only other value is as a fine example of the loser nature of the 9/11 truthers. Even other truthers know you are a detriment to the cause.
That barely even merits the attention that a dismissal would require.
Ouch....that was an awesome burn.
DK, why do you think the issue is whether 9/11 was an inside job? What difference does it make if it was or wasn't when first we must address the problem of having a thorough and honest investigation?
Does it surprise you to know that both NIST and the 9/11 Commission had subpoena power? Do you know of any time when they ever used it? Would not the failure to use subpoena power suggest that the investigation were less than rigorous?
Questions mean something. When the official investigation has not answered the questions, it strongly suggests that they're hiding something.
The country is going down the tubes. Congress has an approval rating of 13%, the news media are not reporting the news, the electorate has no concern about whether their voting machines can be trusted or not, we spend more than the rest of the world combined on the military, and we start new wars before we've even finished the ten-year-old ones we've got.
Where do you get the idea that I'm a janitor? I once said I was the janitor of the truth movement, taking out trash like Barrett and Turdriguez, and Craig Ranke. Can you not recognize that you are indulging in the argumentum ad infinitum logical fallacy? Are you letting your prejudices against janitors interfere with your ability to recognize that I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator? In times like these I have much to offer.
Dismissing the entire 9/11 truth enterprise on the basis of a few lunatics is like dismissing the entire medical establishment on the basis of a few quacks.
So what Brian is really saying is that the Truth Movement is based on lunatics who take hearsay arguements from quacks, then magically turn those idiotic arguements into "facts" then claim that they're "evidence" of a "cover-up".
Damn Brian, you're easy to read!
take away the lunatics and what remains is family members who have been lied to and who want honest investigations.
And you don't have a relative that died on 9/11 do you Brian? No you don't! Now would you fucking get off the 9/11 Families backs you God damn monkey?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Questions mean something. When the official investigation has not answered the questions, it strongly suggests that they're hiding something.
And yet we can find those questions that have been answered in NIST's FAQ sheet, that's on the World Wide Web for ALL to view:
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
So how the fuck can they "hide" something when it's on the web? Answer that question goat fucker!
Don't like what NISt says on their FAQ sheet, then don't bother coming here and crying and bitching that they're "wrong". You want to prove them wrong Brian? I suggest you get off your fucking lazy ass and collect evidence then e-mail your evidence to them and see what they tell you. If they tell you the same thing they've told us, then admit you fucking lost the arguement.
I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator.
Get help.
I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator?
Naw, you're just a pimple on our asses which needs to has it's head popped.
Also......
Brian has breached his agreement about going off topic on every thread on SLC.
Ban him!
RGT, take away the lunatics and what remains is family members who have been lied to and who want honest investigations.
False.
We live in an age of unaccountability where knaves in all fields of chicanery and criminality are able to walk without facing consequences. It's the major reason this country is going down the tubes.
You're right. Richard Gage should really be prosecuted for fraud.
The country is going down the tubes. Congress has an approval rating of 13%, the news media are not reporting the news, the electorate has no concern about whether their voting machines can be trusted or not, we spend more than the rest of the world combined on the military, and we start new wars before we've even finished the ten-year-old ones we've got.
None of which has anything to do with whether 9/11 was an inside job or not, but it does go a long way towards explaining why Brian is so eager to jump on deranged conspiracy theories.
Where do you get the idea that I'm a janitor?
You told us you were a janitor. You also told us your're petgoat. I don't think you even read your own writings, much less Ryan Mackey's.
Are you letting your prejudices against janitors interfere with your ability to recognize that I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator? In times like these I have much to offer.
Speaking of delusions....
Where do you get the idea that I'm a janitor?
OK what exactly do you do? You are not smart enough to do much as far as I can see. So a janitor is just about your speed, and skill level.
Face it Brian you are a guy who is at a retard level in thinking ability, to compensate you imagine you are "a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator." The mentally challenged do this all the time. Part of Asperger's syndrome and your actions suggest that.
Its got to be tough for you living in a world where everyone is brighter than you.
DK, where did you get the idea that I'm a janitor? You don't even have a clue, do you?
You know that almost everything Ian says is a lie, don't you?
"Dismissing the entire 9/11 truth enterprise ..."
Enterprise? Hmmm...
Definition:
a project or undertaking that is especially difficult, complicated, or risky. Readiness to engage in daring or difficult action. A unit of economic organization or activity; especially a business organization.
It's not an enterprise, it's a cult.
"why do you think the issue is whether 9/11 was an inside job?"
He doesn't. YOU do.
"What difference does it make if it was or wasn't when first we must address the problem of having a thorough and honest investigation?"
If it wasn't an inside job then the investigations that have been done address the various causes that lead to the strike. Duh.
"Does it surprise you to know that both NIST and the 9/11 Commission had subpoena power? Do you know of any time when they ever used it?"
Why subpoena people who willingly cooperate?
"Would not the failure to use subpoena power suggest that the investigation were less than rigorous?"
No. I means that everyone contacted in the investigation cooperated fully.
Do you know subpoena and penis are two different things? Because I'm not sure that you do.
"Questions mean something."
No. Absolutely not. Not all questions are equal, and therefore do not require answers.
"When the official investigation has not answered the questions, it strongly suggests that they're hiding something."
So you admit that you are hiding something by not presenting evidence that you have not watched "Transormers 3"! I'm playing by your fucked up rules and I admit that it is fun. What are you hiding, Brian? Where is the evidence that you havenot watched the latest Transformers movie?
"the news media are not reporting the news, the electorate has no concern about whether their voting machines can be trusted or not, we spend more than the rest of the world combined on the military, and we start new wars before we've even finished the ten-year-old ones we've got."
Does your tinfoil hat have a point, or does it hug your head?
Brian, the NIST report never addressed my "punxsutawney phil" model, in which groundhogs with spray-on nanothermite on their teeth chewed through the columns of the WTC. Nor did they address my "death rake beam from space" model, in which high-speed nanorakes were fired at the towers until they fell.
Don't you think NIST should address these concerns?
MGF, the point you're missing is that the first thing to do in an investigation is establish the facts. Then you can speculate and work backward and forward from your hypotheses. Since we haven't yet established the facts, you can't claim We know it's not an inside job and therefore we don't need an investigation.
Subpoena power is necessary so that witnesses can say their pieces without fear of professional retaliation.
Nobody said all questions were equal. DK said "In fact question mean absolutely NOTHING." I'll suppose you agree with me that it was a stupid thing for him to say.
MGF, the point you're missing is that the first thing to do in an investigation is establish the facts.
Right, and since the facts have been established, we can conclude that an inside job did not happen.
Since we haven't yet established the facts, you can't claim We know it's not an inside job and therefore we don't need an investigation.
The facts have been established, Brian. You'd know this if you knew how to Google.
Subpoena power is necessary so that witnesses can say their pieces without fear of professional retaliation.
False.
body said all questions were equal.
Right, which is why nobody cares about your "widows".
Yo goat fucker--you retard.
Tell us more about how "elemental barium" exists in nature. Tell us about all the "elemental barium" the USGS found at Ground Zero--you lying wanker.
You're an idiot and a liar.
So goat fucker, tell us, why did you lie about Barium when you wrote--and I quote:
"...The USGS paper you cite is an elemental analysis. It finds 800 ppm of barium in the dust and does not distinguish between elemental barium, barium oxide, or barium nitrate." -- The goat fucker, lying through his terracotta teeth.
Wikipedia writes, "...Because barium quickly oxidizes in air, it is difficult to obtain the free metal and it is never found free in nature. The metal is primarily found in, and extracted from, barite."
Thus, "elemental barium," as I pointed out over-and-over again, DOES NOT EXIST IN NATURE, because "[b]arium is a soft, silvery white alkali earth metal, which quickly oxidizes in air."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium
SO HOW COULD THE USGS REPORT CONCERN ITSELF ONLY WITH AN ELEMENT--BARIUM--WHICH DOES NOT EXIST IN NATURE?
Hence, we can see, once again, that you're a fucking liar.
Once again, you FAIL.
Are you letting your prejudices against janitors interfere with your ability to recognize that I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator.
I think the interference from arriving at that conclusion has more to do with your lack of skillful research, uninsightful analysis, and failure to communicate effectively.
UtterFail, I never said that elemental barium existed in nature. I said that USGS ran an elemental analysis and thus failed to distinguish between all the various incarnations of barium.
I'm sorry this confuses you, but if you had taken freshman inorganic chemistry you would know this.
Arcterus, you are allowing the inhabitants of this forum to drag you down to their level. Watch out--DK, Ian, MGF, and GutterBall are blatant liars who make up their facts and bluff about stuff they know nothing about.
You said "elemental baruim"--you liar.
The report also states--and I quote:
"...As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites."
Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/
So, for the 100th time, where's your evidence for elevated levels of barium oxide/nitrate or aluminum oxide in the dust?
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
"...Watch out--DK, Ian, MGF, and GutterBall are blatant liars who make up their facts and bluff about stuff they know nothing about."
What's the matter, goat fucker? Apparently, accusing your opponent's of the crimes you commit is all that you have left--you evil, lying neo-Nazi shit stain?
Watch out--DK, Ian, MGF, and GutterBall are blatant liars who make up their facts and bluff about stuff they know nothing about.
Hey, I'm feeling a little left out here. Snif.
UtterFail, your argument is on the level of "heh heh, he said 'extend'". I said the USGS elemental analysis did not distinguish between the various flavors of barium, which is true. I mentioned elemental barium because I believe that is what the elemental test detects. I did not say that elemental barium exists in nature, though, like elemental aluminum I might expect that it could if encapsulated in an oxide shell.
Your constant babbling about aluminum oxide and barium nitrate is just silly. The USGS reports were elemental analyses. I'm sorry that confuses you, but if you'd take the first chemistry course at Mission College you'd understand.
That's not an answer, felcher, that's an evasion.
So, for the 101th time, where's your evidence for elevated levels of barium oxide/nitrate or aluminum oxide in the dust?
Arcterus, you are allowing the inhabitants of this forum to drag you down to their level. Watch out--DK, Ian, MGF, and GutterBall are blatant liars who make up their facts and bluff about stuff they know nothing about.
My, such squealing!
RGT, take away the lunatics and what remains is family members who have been lied to and who want honest investigations.
If that's true, why are there relatively few family members in the movement? (Cosmos doesn't count.)
For you to so blithely dismiss accountability is short-sighted.
I don't dismiss accountability. I dismiss meaningless cliches like "there needs to be accountability" as grounds for new investigations. You might as well add "proper nutrition is very important" and "the children are our future".
We live in an age of unaccountability where knaves in all fields of chicanery and criminality are able to walk without facing consequences. It's the major reason this country is going down the tubes.
Uh, maybe. Whatever. As concerns 9/11, the government has identified a set of people as responsible for the whole thing; maybe you'd like to share why you're so eager to shift the blame from that group to some other group.
That's right, goat fucker, cite the laws of physics when it suits you, and ignore them when they prove you're lying.
Wikipedia wrote, "...Thermate-TH3 is a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives which have been found to be superior to standard thermite for incendiary purposes. Its composition by weight is generally 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate, 2.0% sulfur and 0.3% binder (such as PBAN).
The law of conservation of mass tells us that mass will remain constant over time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass
So where did the barium nitrate go? It didn't disappear into the ether--you God damned liar.
So where's your evidence for the presence of barium nitrate/oxide at Ground Zero?
Once again you FAIL.
Barium? I hardly even knew him.
[that never gets old]
This comment has been removed by the author.
RGT, I could only speculate as to why there are few family members. One reason is that the "Fight the NWO!" heroes are probably repulsive to them. Another is that they probably get a lot of pressure from family, friends, employers, and psychiatric authorities to move on, think happy thoughts, avoid conspiracy theories, etc.
The fact that "proper nutrition is very important" and "the children are our future" are cliches do not justify feeding the kids pure corn syrup and failing to educate them.
Some elements of the government have identified a group they claim are responsible for 9/11, but their case is full of holes and very dishonest. The confession of a guy who's been waterboarded 183 times proves nothing. What about the redacted 29 pages in the House/Senate investigation? Where does that one point? Most people say the Saudis. How come the Saudis get a pass in all this? How come NORAD gets to lie? How come NIST gets to lie?
UtterFail, the wikipedia article on barium nitrate answers your question. Barium nitrate decomposes under high temps to Barium oxide, nitrous oxide, and oxygen. The barium oxide is in the 800 ppm barium that USGS found in the dust. The nitrous and oxygen entered the atmosphere. Your blather about conservation of mass is just bluff. You don't know enough about the subject to have any idea how ridiculous you sound.
"...The barium oxide is in the 800 ppm barium that USGS found in the dust."
FALSE!
The USGS wrote, "...As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites."
Wikipedia wrote, "...Thermate-TH3 is a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives which have been found to be superior to standard thermite for incendiary purposes. Its composition by weight is generally 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate, 2.0% sulfur and 0.3% binder (such as PBAN)."
The law of conservation of mass tells us that mass will remain constant over time.
So where did the barium nitrate go? It didn't disappear into the ether--you God damned liar.
So where's your evidence for the presence of barium nitrate/oxide at Ground Zero?
Once again you FAIL.
The goat fucker lies, "...The nitrous and oxygen entered the atmosphere."
FALSE!
I've already proven that elemental barium does not exist in the presence of oxygen--God damn it!
Wikipedia writes, "...Because barium quickly oxidizes in air, it is difficult to obtain the free metal and it is never found free in nature. The metal is primarily found in, and extracted from, barite."
Thus, "elemental barium," as I pointed out over-and-over again, DOES NOT EXIST IN NATURE, because "[b]arium is a soft, silvery white alkali earth metal, which quickly oxidizes in air."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium
Now you're talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Since barium can't be found in the presence of oxygen without immediately oxidizing to BaO, WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE OF ELEVATED BaO CONCENTRATION IN THE DUST SAMPLES COLLECTED BY THE USGS?
ANSWER THE GOD DAMNED QUESTION!
AGAIN, ANSWER THE GOD DAMNED QUESTION!
STOP LYING, AND ANSWER THE GOD DAMNED QUESTION!
Once again, you FAIL.
I never said they found elemental barium. You are making no sense. Why would you expect to find barium nitrate and why would you expect there to be any difference inside or outside?
Any BaO is in the 800 ppm barium measured by the USGS. Where else could it be?
NOTICE, THE GOAT FUCKER COMPLETELY AVOIDS MY POINT ABOUT CONSERVATION OF MASS.
"...Why would you expect to find barium nitrate"
I didn't say barium nitrate--you liar. I said barium oxide. You would expect to find barium oxide because it's a byproduct of the reaction--you lying cretin.
"...Barium nitrate decomposes under high temps to Barium oxide, nitrous oxide, and oxygen."
So where's your evidence for elevated-levels of barium oxide in the dust samples?
The USGS States clearly--and I quote: "...As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites."
So where's your evidence for elevated-levels of barium oxide?
Once again, you FAIL.
Get it through your thick skull, goat fucker: You can't detonate "thermate" without producing a huge amount of barium oxide--which, of course, will exceed normal background levels.
Conversely, you can't detonate thermite, and not expect to produce a huge amount of aluminum oxide--which, of course, will exceed normal background levels.
Again, where's your evidence for the presence of thermite, thermate, or "nanothermite"? You can't have it both ways, goat fucker.
You said barium nitrate in your post half an hour ago, you liar.
The barium is in the 800 ppm. Why do you keep asking me where it is?
UtterFail, you should stick to cutting and pasting from debunker sites. You don't have the intellectual horsepower for original research.
"...You said barium nitrate in your post half an hour ago, you liar."
No, I didn't--you liar.
I wrote "barium nitrate/oxide."
So, where's your evidence for the presence of thermite, thermate, or "nanothermite", which is indicated by the presence of barium oxide? You can't have it both ways, goat fucker.
"...UtterFail, you should stick to cutting and pasting from debunker sites. You don't have the intellectual horsepower for original research."
No, goat fucker, you should stick to answering my questions, which you aviod like plague.
ADDITION: So, where's your evidence for the presence of thermite, thermate, or "nanothermite", which is indicated by the presence of barium oxide or aluminum oxide?
"...The barium is in the 800 ppm. Why do you keep asking me where it is?"
Again asshole, 800 ppm is NORMAL.
If thermate was used to demolish the towers, the level of barium, assuming a thermate reaction, would RISE DRAMATICALLY. If thermite was used to demolish the towers, the level of aluminum oxide would RISE DRAMATICALLY.
So where's your evidence for your alleged "demolition theory"?
Once again, you FAIL.
RGT, I could only speculate as to why there are few family members.
No speculation needed. 9/11 truth is a bunch of nonsense that only a gullible idiot or lunatic could believe in.
The fact that "proper nutrition is very important" and "the children are our future" are cliches do not justify feeding the kids pure corn syrup and failing to educate them.
Brian, what do you know about raising children? You've never had a sexual relationship in your life. You're reduced to stalking Carol Brouillet.
Some elements of the government have identified a group they claim are responsible for 9/11, but their case is full of holes and very dishonest.
Who says the case is full of holes and very dishonest? I mean, you do, but you're a failed janitor who was expelled from the truth movement for attempting molest members of the group. Does anyone who is sane think the case is full of holes and very dishonest?
Arcterus, you are allowing the inhabitants of this forum to drag you down to their level.
Bullshit. I'm not being "dragged down", this is just my personality, and always has been. You didn't seem to have a problem at Truth Action when I made similar comments towards debunkers and CIT and the like. But now that I use it against you, it's because I've been tainted? You're a fucking hypocrite.
Wow being called a liar by a guy with the IQ of vegetable is quite an honor.
So Brian when creationist ask the question "If man evolved from apes, why are they still apes?" is that NOT a stupid question. Yes, So question do mean nothing in the world of logic. Only retards think it does.
I know you are ashamed you can't how a job where thinking is a requirement, and you have as a consequence have to sponge off mom and dad, but that is the lot in life of the low cognitive janitor type.
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFool, you said at 1:22 "Where did the barium nitrate go?" Your claim to the contrary is a blatant lie.
The presence of molten steel and the sulfidation attack on the FEMA samples are evidence of the use of thermite or thermate. Since there are many flavors of thermite that do not use barium, your question is meaningless.
Your claim that there is no barium oxide and no aluminum oxide is meaningless because the test you cite is an elemental analysis and can not distinguish among the various forms of the element. Elemental barium may not exist in nature but it may well exist in the context of a test that involves extended heating at high temperatures. If you'd had inorganic first quarter freshman chemistry you would know this.
Your claim that there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors is simply not true. The indoor samples averaged (mean) 500 ppm barium, and the outdoor ones averaged (mean) 800 ppm. (see figure 4)
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/
One sample showed 4000 ppm of barium--10X the background level in the earth's crust. Maybe if you actually read the papers you quote instead of doing your research at really STOOOOPID debunker sites you wouldn't embarrass yourself so much, and then maybe your wife and children would like you better.
Arcterus, I thought the truthaction guys treated Ranke in a very shabby manner, and I told him so when I met him in 2009. Of course after I came to know him for a blustering, bluffing, bullshitting liar I came to understand that the shabby treatment was well earned.
Well even if you have pre-existing character defects such that these guys are not corrupting you, hanging out with them is still bad for you because it reinforces your character defects. Also, I'm sure you've noticed that they lie and they're not very bright.
DK, the answer to the creationists' question is obvious. Evolutionary progress occurs only to the extent that it's necessary to aid successful reproduction. We are still apes because we don't need to be anything more. You might as well ask why we only have two hands when four would be so much handier.
"...Since there are many flavors of thermite that do not use barium...[blah][blah][blah]."
More lies and proof that you're an idiot, goat fucker.
Show me where I ever claimed that "thermite" is composed of barium nitrate.
"...Your claim that there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors is simply not true."
More lies and proof that you're an idiot.
It's not my claim--you fucktard--it's a direct quote from the USGS document you quote mined.
You can't even get the basics right, goat fucker, so why should anyone believe one word you've written?
Once again, you FAIL.
"...As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites." -- USGS
So there you have it, folks.
The goat fucker quote mines the relevant material. Then he quotes from two separate documents, while he pretends they're the same document. And to add insult to injury, he conflates "thermite" with thermate.
I stand by my statement, goat fucker: You couldn't find your ass with a hunting dog and a compass.
Once again, you FAIL.
Why did you bother to quote it if you're not claiming it?
The figure 4 data contradict your claim. If you were competent to read the chart you could see that.
One of the samples shows almost 10X the background level of barium, and UtterFail keeps braying "Where's the barium, idiot?"
You should try reading the papers you quote instead of spreading misinformation from STOOPID secondary sources.
"...The indoor samples averaged (mean) 500 ppm barium, and the outdoor ones averaged (mean) 800 ppm."
This is a bald-faced lie. Here's what the USGS really says--sans the goat fucker's never ending lies--and I quote:
"...The dust and girder coating samples are substantially more variable in their trace element compositions than in their major element compositions. In most dust samples, zinc is the predominant trace metal, with concentrations as high as 3000 parts per million. With the exception of one sample that is high in barium (WTC01-16), the trace metals barium, lead, copper, and chromium are present in concentrations of hundreds of parts per million. Concentrations of other trace metals and metalloids such as molybdenum, antimony, and titanium, are tens of parts per million or less. As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites." -- USGS
Thus, you can't even get the basics right without lying and misrepresenting the relevant data.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...One of the samples shows almost 10X the background level of barium, and UtterFail keeps braying "Where's the barium, idiot?"
One sample doesn't cut it, goat fucker.
A controlled demolition using thermate would have spewed barium oxide from one end of Ground Zero to the other.
So why did you lie about thermite's alleged "barium nitrate" component?
Why did you lie and claim that a direct quote from the USGS was "my claim"?
And why are you misrepresenting the USGS data and the conclusions found therein?
I rest my case--you're a compulsive liar and a charlatan who can't be trusted.
UtterFail, I didn't misrepresent anything. I didn't lie about anything. Your frantic denial that you are claiming the things that you say makes you look like a nut.
Figure 4 shows that the outside dust contains barium concentrations 60% higher than the inside dust, and 100% higher than that of the earth's crust.
One sample one block from Ground Zero shows a barium concentration of almost 10X that of the earth's crust. So are you going to stop babbling "Where's the barium?"
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/
Goat fucker, I asked you three (3) questions, and I want an answer to each question:
[1] So why did you lie about thermite's alleged "barium nitrate" component?
[2] Why did you lie and claim that a direct quote from the USGS was "my claim"?
[3] And why are you misrepresenting the USGS data and the conclusions found therein?
Isn't it interesting that the goat fucker DEMANDS answers to his idiotic questions, but when he asked to answer questions, the silence is deafening.
This is proof positive that the goat fucker is a liar. When his back is against the wall, he sows confusion and tells even more lies. This is proof positive that we're dealing with a psychopath, folks.
BAN.
The goat fucker lies, "...UtterFail, I didn't misrepresent anything. I didn't lie about anything...[blah][blah][blah]."
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
"...Since there are many flavors of thermite that do not use barium, your question is meaningless." -- The goat fucker, lying through his terracotta teeth.
So, there's the proof that you deliberately tried to conflate thermite with thermate.
So answer the question: [1] So why did you lie about thermite's alleged "barium nitrate" component?
Let's move on to lie Number Two.
"...Your claim that there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors is simply not true."
As I proved above, it's not "my claim." The quote is a direct quote from the USGS, as I've proven above.
So answer the question: [2] Why did you lie and claim that a direct quote from the USGS was "my claim"?
Now, let's move on to lie Number Three.
"...The indoor samples averaged (mean) 500 ppm barium, and the outdoor ones averaged (mean) 800 ppm." -- The goat fucker, lying through his terracotta teeth.
My post at 10:48 proves that you misrepresented the USGS data. A controlled demolition using thermate would have spewed barium oxide from one end of Ground Zero to the other.
So answer the question: [3] And why are you misrepresenting the USGS data and the conclusions found therein?
You're a liar. And when you're caught lying, you try to sow confusion. You lie, obfuscate and pervert the data to cover your tracks.
You're a psychopath.
Arcterus, I thought the truthaction guys treated Ranke in a very shabby manner, and I told him so when I met him in 2009. Of course after I came to know him for a blustering, bluffing, bullshitting liar I came to understand that the shabby treatment was well earned.
Oh, so it's okay to be sarcastic and flippant with people who don't meet your standards? What kind of self-righteous bullshit are you filled with?
Well even if you have pre-existing character defects
Defects? Fuck you. I don't have to give my respect to people who don't earn it. Not being a dainty flower with everyone I talk to is not a "defect", shithead.
Also, I'm sure you've noticed that they lie and they're not very bright.
I have noticed those characteristics, but not with the party you're suggesting.
Goddamn, Brian, the annoying thing is that you're such a pretentious dipshit and you seriously have no clue about that. You seem to fancy yourself some kind of omniscient messiah, even though everything you say is bullshit and every claim you make is refuted, only for that refutation to be repeatedly ignored. If that's the mindset of a truther, then I am SO glad I got out of it.
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
http://domains.googlesyndication.com/apps/domainpark/domainpark.cgi?client=ca-dp-bodis01us_3ph_js&ref=&output=html&s=worldtradecentertruth.com
Thus, we can see that your hero, Steven Jones, disagrees with you, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL.
Look, folks! I found a portrait of the goat fucker:
http://insidepulse.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/pinocchio1.gif
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
The goat fucker lies, "...UtterFail, nice job of misquoting Dr. Jones. What he actually said is 'Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (thermite plus sulfur, sometimes with barium nitrate and other ingredients added). For example, thermate TH-3 is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur.'"
This is another bald-faced lie.
A Google search for the alleged Steven E. JOnes quote the goat fucker cites as evidence returns the following:
No results found
Thus, we can see that when the goat fucker is caught lying, he simply digs his heels in a lies with abandon.
Here's what Steven E. Jones really wrote--sans the goat fucker's constant lies and obfuscation:
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)."
Source: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_24b.htm
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
UtterFail, I didn't lie or misrepresent anything, so your wifebeater questions are meaningless.
Thermate is a flavor of thermite. Your ignorant semantic quibbles are just an attempt to distract.
If you were not claiming what the USGS quote said, then why did you quote the USGS?
Your belief that thermate necessarily includes barium is entirely your own irrational invention.
I didn't misrepresent anything, as anyone who bothers to look at Figure 4 can see. Of course I doubt that anyone here knows how to read it, but that's not my problem.
Arcterus, it seems to be you that believes it's OK to be sarcastic and flippant and self-righteous. You said you were that way before you were subject to the influence of the sarcastic and flippant and self-righteous turkeys here.
If you would bother to investigate the claims made here, you would see that mine check out and most of those made by the turkeys are pure ass-breath.
UtterFail, nice job of misquoting Dr. Jones. What he actually said is "Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (thermite plus sulfur, sometimes with barium nitrate and other ingredients added). For example, thermate TH-3 is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur developed by the military. Thermate TH-3 combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added).
"The thermate reaction proceeds rapidly and is much faster than thermite in degrading steel leading to structural failure due largely to the presence of sulfur. Thus, both the unusually high temperatures and the extraordinary observation of steel-sulfidation (Barnett, 2001) can be accounted for -- if the use of thermate is allowed in the discussion. Note that other metal oxides (like CuO and MoO3) and oxidizers (like KMnO4 and zinc nitrate) are sometimes used in thermite analogs."
Note he says "sometimes". Barium is not a necessary ingredient to thermate, there are plenty of other ingredients that might be used, and you're not just a liar but an incompetent one at that.
That's right, goat fucker, when you're caught lying, repeat yourself, dig your heels in and lie with abandon, while you try to bury your latest humiliating defeat in an avalanche gay squeal spam..
No results found
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Source: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_24b.htm
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The goat fucker lies, "...UtterFail, nice job of misquoting Dr. Jones. What he actually said is 'Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (thermite plus sulfur, sometimes with barium nitrate and other ingredients added). For example, thermate TH-3 is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur.'"
This is another bald-faced lie.
A Google search for the alleged Steven E. Jones quote the goat fucker cites as evidence returns the following:
No results found
Thus, we can see that when the goat fucker is caught lying, he simply digs his heels in a lies with abandon.
Here's what Steven E. Jones really wrote--sans the goat fucker's constant lies and obfuscation:
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)."
Source: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_24b.htm
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The paper's right here:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade-Center.doc
It's not my fault you don't know how to google.
Now you can see why the goat fucker NEVER provides a hyperlink to his sources. He's a liar. And all you need to do to prove that he's a liar is consult Google.
No results found
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The goat fucker continues to lie and obfuscate, "...The paper's right here...[blah][blah][blah]."
This is another bald-faced lie! The paper you cite as evidence doesn't mention the word thermate.
Proof?
If the reader will take the time to download the MS Word document the goat fucker cites as "evidence" and click on "File" and then "Search," you'll get the following result:
Not Found
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
NOTE: Make sure to "Search" for the keyword "thermate." The result is
Not Found.
The link works just fine, GutterBall. It's not my fault that you can't google and you can't cut and paste a perfectly good link.
You're just trying to make a fight about links to try to cover over the fact that you lied about what Jones said, and he supported my position (that thermate need not contain barium) rather than your evidence-free and irrational position (no barium, no thermite).
Don't you ever get tired of getting your ass stomped? I sure get tired of stomping it.
Another bald-faced lie.
Show me where I claim "no barium, no thermite"? And I want a direct link to your "evidence."
You can't provide the link, Pinocchio?
Then STFU--you scurrilous liar.
The lying goat fucker squeals, "...You're just trying to make a fight about links to try to cover over the fact that you lied about what Jones said, and he supported my position (that thermate need not contain barium) rather than your evidence-free and irrational position (no barium, no thermite)."
Here's more proof that you're a liar.
See the thread titled, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!," at the following timestamp:
30 June, 2011 09:33
Here's what I wrote, "...Here we have more proof that you can't read, goat fucker. I never said "lack of barium rules out thermite," I said lack of barium rules out thermate--you cretin. With respect to thermite, thermite is ruled out by lack of aluminum oxide."
Thus, we can see, once again, that you're a liar.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Why have you been braying "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" er... "Where's the barium?" unless your point was that without barium there is no thermite?
You go on and on and on about nothing and then deny that you said it. When you scatter your off-topic nonsense on five different threads I'm not going to go track down the quote.
You lied about what Dr. Jones said and you have not a shred of truthful evidence that barium is a necessary component to thermite or thermate. And your own USGS paper shows concentrations of barium in the dust of almost 10X background concentrations.
So, who said "no barium, no thermite"?
Answer: The goat fucker.
See the following post:
The goat fucker claims "no barium, no thermite".
Here's what the goat fucker wrote--and I quote: "...Thermate does not require barium, only an idiot would put on your "no barium, no thermite" argument..."
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is resorting to a straw man argument. He stuffs words down my throat and then attacks the caricature of my argument.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...Why have you been braying "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" er... "Where's the barium?" unless your point was that without barium there is no thermite?"
That's not an answer, goat fucker, it's an evasion. In fact, I NEVER said what you claim, and your utter failure to provide a DIRECT LINK proves that you're lying.
I asked for A DIRECT LINK to substantiate your claim that I said "no barium, no thermite."
And, as per your SOP, you can't produce the evidence to substantiate your lie.
So where's the DIRECT LINK to support your claim, goat fucker?
Once again, you FAIL--you scurrilous liar.
So, who said "What's the frequency, Kenneth?"?
Answer: The goat fucker.
See the thread titled, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!," at the following timestamp:
06 July, 2011 11:02
Here's what the goat fucker wrote, "...What's the frequency, Kenneth?"
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is resorting to a straw man argument. He stuffs words down my throat and then attacks the caricature of my argument.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
This comment has been removed by the author.
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Thus, we can see that even Steven E. Jones disagrees with your propaganda, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL--you scurrilous liar.
Wow, you just make it worse and worse. You were wrong about there being no barium, you were wrong about barium being necessary to thermate, you were wrong about Dr. Jones's quote, and you're even wrong about your own argument.
6/29 16:37 in the "White Paper" thread you put forth the "no barium, no thermite" argument.
You said: "NIST didn't test the thermite hypothesis because the USGS data showed no evidence for the presence of aluminum oxide or barium nitrate."
You not only go around spewing nonsense, you lie about what you said when you're called on it.
You've been going on and on about this for a week and you've come up with nothing, zilch, nada. You're a waste of time.
Look at yourself, citing a UFO-reptile site as your source for your lies. (And once again trying to distract from your total pwnage by making a fight about links.)
Why don't you cite an authorized source?
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade-Center.doc
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...6/29 16:37 in the 'White Paper' thread you put forth the 'no barium, no thermite' argument. "
Another bald-faced lie!
Here's a direct link to my post at 16:37:
More proof that the goat fucker is a liar.
Show me where I ever said "no barium, no thermite."
Continued...
This comment has been removed by the author.
"...Look at yourself, citing a UFO-reptile site as your source for your lies. (And once again trying to distract from your total pwnage by making a fight about links.)"
Another bald-faced lie.
The paper I cite as evidence was written by Steven E. Jones. The paper is titled "Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse" by Steven E. Jones.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
6/29 16:37 in the "White Paper" thread you put forth the "no barium, no thermite" argument.
You said: "NIST didn't test the thermite hypothesis because the USGS data showed no evidence for the presence of aluminum oxide or barium nitrate."
If that's not your argument, what have you been braying (ignorantly) about for a week?
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...You said: 'NIST didn't test the thermite hypothesis because the USGS data showed no evidence for the presence of aluminum oxide or barium nitrate.'"
You're quote mining again, goat fucker.
From the same comment we find the following: "...The absence of aluminum oxide or barium nitrate thoroughly disproves Cole's thermate theory."
Thus, we can see that you're a liar who resorts to a straw man argument to sow confusion.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Here's my argument IN CONTEXT:
"...No, Cole is working backwards from a predetermined conclusion. He has no evidence for the presence of any alleged thermitic material--thermite, thermate or 'nanothermite.'"
Thus, we can see that I was not only talking about thermite. I was also talking about thermate and "nanothermite."
Thus, you stand exposed, once again, as a lying quote miner.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Thus, we can see that the paper you cite as evidence from journalof911studies.com supports my claim.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Check and mate
You will say anything, won't you, to sow confusion and give the appearance (to your feeble-minded and lazy colleagues) that you have an argument.
Nice job of quote-mining, chump. Given two versions of the paper, you choose the sloppier one that gives the appearance of lending support to your bogus claims--and you ignore the more specific and restrictive one that shows that your claims are bogus.
Lying again, goat fucker?
I cited two separate sources: Your source and my source. Both are IDENTICAL.
Source One (My source):
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Source Two (Your source):
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Thus, we can see that both sources support my claim. We can also see that you're a liar.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
This comment has been removed by the author.
You are absolutely unbelievable, goat fucker.
"[S]ometimes with barium nitrate" is not "specific and restrictive." Sometimes is a weasel word, just like essentially, your weasel word of choice.
Furthermore the only difference between the word document you reference and the pdf file from journalof911studies.com is the file extension (.doc verses .pdf). The files are identical in every respect.
Thus, you're lying again, as the hyperlinks I provide in my post at timestamp 15:02 prove conclusively.
Thus, you FAIL again, goat fucker.
Have you no shame? I gave you the source and you buried it in spam.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade-Center.doc
Given two versions of the paper, you choose the sloppier one that gives the appearance of lending support to your bogus claims--and you ignore the more specific and restrictive one that shows that your claims are bogus. That is the very definition of quote-mining.
I didn't say "sometimes" was specific and restrictive. I said the quote was specific and restrictive.
The two versions of the paper are not identical, liar. In the pdf the discussion of military thermate is on p. 19. In the doc the specific and restrictive discussion of "thermate TH-3" is on p. 18.
You're incompetent as well as dishonest.
Here's the proof that you're a liar, goat fucker.
I downloaded all three files (html, .doc and .pdf), and converted them into text documents named jones1.txt, jones2.txt and jones3.txt. If the two files are different, the diff command gives the filename and byte of the first difference.
Then I ran the Unix "diff" command as follows:
diff jones1.txt jones2.txt
diff jones1.txt jones3.txt
diff jones2.txt jones3.txt
In each instance the diff command returned NOTHING, which proves that all three files are IDENTICAL.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...The two versions of the paper are not identical, liar. In the pdf the discussion of military thermate is on p. 19. In the doc the specific and restrictive discussion of "thermate TH-3" is on p. 18. "
Wrong again, goat fucker. You're lying and misleading the reader.
You can't compare a .doc, html and .pdf file and refer to page numbers. The formatting is NOT IDENTICAL. That's why you must convert the files into flat text files before you can run a valid comparison.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
UtterFail, anybody who bothers to look can see that the doc contains this text on p. 18:
"Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (thermite plus sulfur, sometimes with barium nitrate and other ingredients added). For example, thermate TH-3 is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur developed by the military"
while the pdf says on p. 19:
"Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well
above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (or a similar variation of thermite).
Thermate is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur developed by the military"
You will lie and lie and lie and lie to give the appearance of having an argument.
The doc contains the specific and restrictive term "TH-3" twice while the pdf does not.
Are you letting your prejudices against janitors interfere with your ability to recognize that I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator? In times like these I have much to offer.
Then by all means, stop posting here and go out and bring your message to the world. Become a journalist for Time or Newsweek, a combined professor of political science, chemistry and structural engineering at a major university , or go on the lecture circuit. Apply for an interview on CNN or MSNBC. Become a guest panelist on Bill Maher's show. Go out, and with your effective communication, unite all the truthers under one umbrella and get that new investigation you want. Or, at the very minimum, pay the reserve fee and start your own blog.
Because obviously, no one on this blog recognizes your genius for what it is. You know more about science than the science majors here, you know more about the military than the veterans here, and you know more about the state of politics than anyone here. You're only reaching maybe 20 people by posting on Screwloosechange. And no of them are going to help you.
Just an opinion from a lurker.
FWIW, that Mike Gravel ad is the best avant-garde cinema I've seen since the last Jean-Luc Godard flick.
"...UtterFail, anybody who bothers to look can see that the doc contains this text on p. 18...while the pdf says on p. 19..."
False.
And what does the goat fucker offer as proof? His opinion. And the opinion of a proven compulsive liar isn't worth the ASCII characters you waste to post it.
I challenge anyone to run the diff command on all three versions of the document (.pdf, .doc and .html). They'll see that I'm telling the truth.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
John, I know more about chemistry and physics than the "science majors" here because I took the classes and they clearly did not. MGF and UtterFail are liars, and obviously not terribly bright. I'm not out for admiration here, I'm out to slap down some 9/11 liars.
UtterFail, the doc contains the specific and restrictive term "TH-3" and the pdf does not.
Lying again, goat fucker?
I'll hold my undergraduate degree and two masters degrees up to your pseudo-education any day of the week.
After all, you're a failed, unemployed janitor who wears women's underwear.
You can't read; you can't think, and you never tell the truth, as anyone who's familiar with your long, sordid history will attest.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Here's the proof that you understand nothing about chemistry.
You claim that "aluminum oxide is a gas a reaction temperature." That claim, however, is a bald-faced lie.
Fe2O3(s) + 2 Al(s) -> Al2O3(s) + 2 Fe(l)
Source: http://reviewessays.com/print/Thermite-Lab-Writeup/46840.html
Hence, Al2O3(s) is a solid, as the (s) proves beyond a doubt.
Thus, aluminum oxide is NOT a "gas" at reaction temperature, as you falsely claim.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Wikipedia wrote, "...Further, the low density of the aluminium oxide formed as a result of the reaction tends to cause it to float on the iron, reducing contamination of the weld."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Types
So what were you saying about "aluminum oxide is a gas a reaction temperature"?
You're a liar, and you know nothing about chemistry.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
I know more about chemistry and physics than the "science majors" here because I took the classes and they clearly did not.
High school or college classes? What classes were they? Just curious.
I'm not out for admiration here, I'm out to slap down some 9/11 liars.
Personally, I don't think you're here for either. I think you're here to make yourself feel important. When you say you're "a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator" and that you "have much to offer" your time can be used much more efficiently than by posting to a blog where no one believes you and you get insulted all the time.
Again, just an opinion.
Arcterus, it seems to be you that believes it's OK to be sarcastic and flippant
Yes, I do. You know why? Because there's no such thing as objective morality, and it's perfectly okay if I want to have style in my arguments. YOUR STANDARDS are not universal, you self-righteous fuckhead.
and self-righteous.
How retarded are you? Nothing I said was self-righteous. YOU are the self-righteous one, dipshit.
If you'd bother to investigate your own claims, you'd see how much of a retard you really are.
John, I know more about chemistry and physics than the "science majors" here because I took the classes and they clearly did not.
And yet you're a failed janitor. Strange...
MGF and UtterFail are liars, and obviously not terribly bright. I'm not out for admiration here, I'm out to slap down some 9/11 liars.
And yet you never do go after liars like Richard Gage and David Ray Griffin. Strange....
UtterFail, that you don't seem to understand that the claims of an anonymous internet poster about his degrees are meaningless shows you to be poorly educated and unintelligent.
So who's that you're quoting as an authority on thermite? Reviewessays.com? A term paper mill? Say, they didn't write your Master's thesis by any chance did they?
So why don't you tell me, smart guy, what's the reaction temperature of this TH-3 thermate you keep babbling about? How does that compare to the boiling point of aluminum oxide?
John, I had college chemistry.
Arcterus, oh wow, we've got a boy-Nietzsche on our hands.
Ian, where do you get the idea that I'm a failed janitor?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oh, and UtterFail, the .doc contains the specific and restrictive term "TH-3" which shows that Dr. Jones does not share your belief that lack of barium would rule out thermate. It also names several other co-factors that could be substituted for barium. But the point is moot because the USGS report you cite as evidence of a lack of barium in fact shows levels of nearly 10X background in a sample from one block away from Ground Zero.
The pdf file does not contain the term "TH-3". Your claim that the documents are identical is a stupid, easily-checked lie.
But I don't expect people to check, as they didn't check Ian's claims that Dr. Sunder did not cite collapse times of 9 seconds and 11 seconds.
But Dr. Sunder did cite those times:
"The measurements have indicated that Tower One collapsed in about 11 seconds, and Tower Two collapsed in about 9 seconds."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/debunking-9-11-bomb-theories.html
The goat molester squeals, "...So why don't you tell me, smart guy, what's the reaction temperature of this TH-3 thermate..."
I wasn't talking about thermate--you dunce. See? You're so brain-dead that you can't follow a simple demonstration, a demonstration which I designed specifically to prove, once again, that you're an idiot.
See how you are, goat fucker?
And as I've said repeatedly--you tiny-brained wiper of other people's buttocks--a prudent scientist wouldn't look for aluminum oxide as evidence of a thermate reaction, he would look for evidence of barium nitrate, which has a telltale signature, barium oxide. (Al2O3(s) is evidence of a thermite reaction, not thermate.)
Thus, you're an idiot, goat fucker. But that's a given, isn't it?
Once again, you FAIL.
The goat molester squeals, "...Oh, and UtterFail, the .doc contains the specific and restrictive term "TH-3" which shows that Dr. Jones does not share your belief that lack of barium would rule out thermate."
I don't care what Dr. Jones thinks--you cretin. After all, like you, he's a fraud and a liar. It doesn't matter because I've already quoted Dr. Jones above, and his statement directly contradicts your idiotic assertions.
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
http://domains.googlesyndication.com/apps/domainpark/domainpark.cgi?client=ca-dp-bodis01us_3ph_js&ref=&output=html&s=worldtradecentertruth.com
Thus, we can see that you're a liar and an incompetent who can't read. But that's a given, isn't it?
The goat molester prevaricates, "...But the point is moot because the USGS report you cite as evidence of a lack of barium in fact shows levels of nearly 10X background in a sample from one block away from Ground Zero."
Another lie. But that's to be expected. After all, I'm talking to the goat fucker.
The USGS wrote, "...The dust and girder coating samples are substantially more variable in their trace element compositions than in their major element compositions. In most dust samples, zinc is the predominant trace metal, with concentrations as high as 3000 parts per million. With the exception of one sample that is high in barium (WTC01-16), the trace metals barium, lead, copper, and chromium are present in concentrations of hundreds of parts per million. Concentrations of other trace metals and metalloids such as molybdenum, antimony, and titanium, are tens of parts per million or less. As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites." -- USGS
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/
As anyone can see, you're lying again and deliberately misrepresenting the USGS's conclusion, Pinocchio.
Assuming an alleged thermate reaction, barium oxide would have been present at elevated levels throughout the complex, and completely cover ground zero. One tiny location on the complex near the north tower doesn't cut it--you arrogant fraud.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
John, I had college chemistry.
One course?
Hey Arcterus, what's your story? Are you this guy?
http://extruther.blogspot.com/
"I am a skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator"
This from the idiot who could not work his way through the US Constitution, grade school US history, and news events within his own lifetime to realize that impeachment is not removal from office.
You want to know why I get "pedantic" when you make those mistakes, Snug? Because when you claim to be able to investigate or analyse anything, people reading your boasts need to know just how hollow and laughable they are.
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFail, your belief that aluminum oxide would not be a reaction product of thermate, and your belief that barium is the "telltale signature" the absence of which shows no thermate presence only demomstrate that you don't know whereof you speak.
You cared what Jones believes when you thought he disagreed with me. Now that I've shown you lied about his paper, suddenly you don't care about his opinion.
What he says right here http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade-Center.doc
supports my view and shows you to be a liar.
You seem to be unable to recognize that the USGS writeup contradicts their own data in Figure 4, which show clearly that the interior barium concentration was 500 ppm while the exterior concentration averaged 800 ppm and was, 1 block from Ground Zero, at 3800 ppm--almost 10X the normal background level.
John, first-quarter freshman inorganic chem is all I need to show that MGF and GutterBall never had it. MGF doesn't understand the energy of fusion and GutterBall doesn't know what an elemental analysis is.
JR, you are a fringe ideologue. When you join the reality-based community, let me know.
"JR, you are a fringe ideologue. When you join the reality-based community, let me know."
Now that is hysterical. You do irony well.
I'm content to let any readers who are interested search back in this blog and look at our discussions. They can decide for themselves whcih of us is an idealogue and which has even a nodding acquaintance with reality.
You are an incompentent investigator and analyst. Your own past postings prove it. That is not an ideological position, it is a simple statement of repeatedly proven fact.
The goat fucker squeals, "...UtterFail, your belief that aluminum oxide would not be a reaction product of thermate, and your belief that barium is the "telltale signature" the absence of which shows no thermate presence only demomstrate [SIC] that you don't know whereof you speak."
Goat fucker, you still can't read, let alone spell. [1] I never said aluminum oxide isn't a byproduct of a thermate reaction. Learn to read--you cretin. [2] Barium oxide, not barium, is most certainly a byproduct of a thermate reaction. Your statement, if true (and it's not true by any means), constitutes a violation of the law of conservation of mass. When a thernate reaction occurs, the barium nitrate doesn't simply vanish, it's reduced to BaO (barium oxide).
Thus, we can see, once again, that you know nothing about chemistry, and that you'll lie and blatantly violate a universal physical law (the law of conservation of mass, in this instance) in order to "win" at all costs, while never admitting you're wrong--which is proof positive that you're a psychopath.
The goat fucker squeals, "...You cared what Jones believes when you thought he disagreed with me."
Another blatant misrepresentation of my argument. Pointing out that Jones acknowledges barium nitrate as a component of thermate doesn't imply that I care about his idiotic pseudo-science. It simply proves that you'll lie and toss one of your own under the bus in order to "win."
The goat fucker squeals, "...Now that I've shown you lied about his paper, suddenly you don't care about his opinion."
You haven't proven anything--with the exception of your infinite capacity to lie. Again, goat fucker, Jones statement is clear and unambiguous:
"...Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added)." -- Steven E. Jones
Thus, you're a liar, as Jones statement makes perfectly clear.
Continued...
The goat fucker squeals, "...You seem to be unable to recognize that the USGS writeup contradicts their own data in Figure 4, which show clearly that the interior barium concentration was 500 ppm while the exterior concentration averaged 800 ppm and was, 1 block from Ground Zero, at 3800 ppm--almost 10X the normal background level."
There's no "contradiction." There's just your never-ending stream of lies.
"...As with the major elements, there are no discernible differences in trace metal content between the dust samples collected outdoors and those collected indoors. There are also no apparent spatial variations in trace-element composition between sample sites." -- USGS
The samples show concentrations of trace elements that are perfectly in line with what a prudent scientist would expect to find in the dust given the presence of "metals that might be used in building construction; and particles of other components, such as computers, etc." For example, cathode ray tubes (CRT), found in older computer monitors and televisions which were prevalent at the time, contain lead, barium, mercury, cadmium, and phosphorous. Given the numbers of CRTs that were destroyed as a result of the Tower's collapse, a slight rise in barium concentration is to be expected. A thermate reaction, on the other hand, would have resulted in much higher levels of barium oxide, which, as USGS's Graph 1 shows conclusively, simply didn't occur at Ground Zero. A thermate reaction, moreover, would have resulted in high barium concentrations--much higher than 10X normal background level--throughout the complex, and completely cover ground zero, not one tiny location on the complex near the north tower.
Once again, you FAIL.
JR, anyone who reads your postings here can see that you get your kooky opinions from wacko websites and you don't know what you're talking about.
UtterFail, this very day at 00:24 you said: "Al2O3(s) is evidence of a thermite reaction, not thermate."
You say stupid things and then deny that you said them.
Your babbling about the conservation of mass is a meaningless straw man. I never said mass was not conserved. We've already discussed this and you won't learn.
You said 7/6, 11:44: "your hero, Steven Jones, disagrees with you, goat fucker." You cared enough about what he believes to lie about what he said. And you continue to lie.
Here's what Dr. Jones said: "Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (thermite plus sulfur, sometimes with barium nitrate and other ingredients added). For example, thermate TH-3 is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur.'"
You continue to demonstrate your incompetence in chemistry when you claim that the USGS data does not show barium oxide. The USGS analysis does not distinguish between barium oxide and any other form of barium. The sample a block from Ground zero showed almost 10X the normal concentration of barium.
The issue is of no actual consequence, of course, because there's no evidence that barium thermate (as opposed to any number of other thermate recipes) was employed at the WTC. It only serves to show that you lie and you're an incompetent analyst.
The goat fucker squeals, "UtterFail, this very day at 00:24 you said: 'Al2O3(s) is evidence of a thermite reaction, not thermate.'"
And that statement is absolutely true.
Fe2O3(s) + 2 Al(s) -> Al2O3(s) + 2 Fe(l)
What part of that simple thermite reaction don't you understand, fucktard?
FAIL.
The goat fucker squeals, "...You say stupid things and then deny that you said them."
Projecting your foibles again, goat fucker?
FAIL.
Continued...
The goat fucker whines, "...Your babbling about the conservation of mass is a meaningless straw man. I never said mass was not conserved."
Then why did you write the following, Pinocchio?
"...your belief that barium is the "telltale signature" the absence of which shows no thermate presence only demomstrate [SIC] that you don't know whereof you speak." -- The goat cuer lying his ass off.
So where did the barium nitrate go, fucktard? Simply repeating the same 100% fact-free dumbspam without substantiating your argument is as worthless as a failed janitor who wears women's underwear (that's you, numbnuts)
The goat fucker lies, "...You continue to demonstrate your incompetence in chemistry when you claim that the USGS data does not show barium oxide. The USGS analysis does not distinguish between barium oxide and any other form of barium."
That's right, goat fucker, continue to deny the obvious. The two byproducts of a thermate reaction are aluminum oxide (41%) and barium oxide (29%). Both are unique to thermate and would have no reason to be found in the WTC dust. The USGS found naturally occurring barium (e.g., barium sulfate, BaSO4, and barium carbonate, BaCO3), not barium oxide (Ba0 or Ba02), in addition to barium from CRTs, which were present in the thousands throughout the towers.
FAIL.
Continued...
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...The sample a block from Ground zero showed almost 10X the normal concentration of barium."
Which is proves absolutely nothing. Again--you illiterate liar--a thermate reaction would have resulted in high barium concentrations--much higher than 10X normal background level--throughout the complex, and completely cover ground zero, not one tiny location on the complex near the north tower.
FAIL.
The goat fucker squeals, "...The issue is of no actual consequence, of course, because there's no evidence that barium thermate (as opposed to any number of other thermate recipes) was employed at the WTC."
Excuse me, asshole, but I'm not the one promoting a conspiracy theory that claims thermite, thermate or "nanothermite" was used to demolish the towers. That distinction goes to the 9/11 "truth" movement. The same "truth" movement that had the good sense to ban you for lying, stalking and wearing women's underwear.
FAIL.
The goat fucker squeals, "...It only serves to show that you lie and you're an incompetent analyst."
Projecting your foibles again, felcher?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"JR, anyone who reads your postings here can see that you get your kooky opinions from wacko websites and you don't know what you're talking about."
Would that be my opinion that impeachment is not removal from office? I got that opinion from the US Constitution and knowing enough history to have heard of Andrew Jackson and Bill Clinton.
Or do you mean my opinion that a treaty can not abrogate portions of the US Constitution? That one I also got from reading the document itself.
Perhaps you just don't approve of the Constitution?
Actually, I don't think that of you, I just think you are too stupid to actually check the stories you pick up from other loony truther sources or too stupid to spot the errors in what you hear from those sources.
Continued...
Next, before Jones can claim to have found thermate in the samples, a reasonable scientist would establish that all the elements of thermate are present in the samples--and this is where Jones' claims fall apart.
The two byproducts of a thermate reaction are aluminum oxide (41%) and barium oxide (29%). Both are unique to thermate and would have no reason to be found in the WTC dust. Neither the USGS or Jones himself, however, report finding any traces of either of these elements. Jones points to aluminum, but there's a world of difference between aluminum and aluminum oxide. Aluminum, moreover, was common throughout the WTC complex owing to its use in the WTC facade, 767s, and vehicles in the parking garage--to say nothing of common office items.
The presence of these elements doesn't in any way support the use of thermate, and the lack of aluminum oxide and barium oxide thoroughly disproves Jones' claims.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Barium Toxicity Sources:
[1] Mining and refining, coal and oil burning emissions, processing plants (e.g. paint, brick, tile, glass, and rubber).
[2] Arc-welding, metal fabrication work, fireworks, pigments, and cathode ray tubes.
http://www.toxicwatersolution.com/Human-Heavy-Metal-Toxicity-Symptoms-&-Testing/Barium-Toxicity/
And we all know that there are no coal burning power plants in New York State, and arc welders (common in construction and ongoing modification to the WTC and surround structures) and CRTs were nowhere to be found at the World Trade Center Complex.
You're an idiot, goat fucker.
UtterFool, you don't know what you're talking about. I've tried to school you and you won't learn. I'm not going to repeat the same lesson again and again and again to a liar.
You provide no source for your claim that barium oxide was not found. The paper you quoted did not distinguish among sulfate, carbonate and oxide.
Your belief that thermate inevitably yields barium is persistently loony. It's like saying that all cakes must be chocolate--no chocolate, no cake. You're daft. Which is why your job went to a Pakistani teenager.
JR, the NYT and WaPo use "impeachment" to describe the process of removal from office. Your attempt to play "gotcha" is ignorant and silly.
The Industrial Minerals Association of North America wrote, "...Barite [BaSO4] is also used in a wide variety of other applications including plastics, clutch pads, rubber mudflaps, mold release compounds, radiation shielding, television and computer monitors, sound-deadening material in automobiles, traffic cones, brake linings, paint and golf balls."
http://www.ima-na.org/barite
Thus, naturally occurring barium is ubiquitous, and found in just the concentration the USGS found at Ground Zero.
Again, you're an idiot, goat fucker.
The goat fucuker lies, "...You provide no source for your claim that barium oxide was not found."
Now you're contradicting yourself. One minute you claim barium oxide was found at Ground Zero, and then you turn around and claim that it wasn't found at Ground Zero when it suits your propaganda and bald-faced lies.
On the contrary--you logical fallacy spewing jackass--it's not incumbent upon me to prove the truthers idiotic thermite/thermate/"nanothermite" theory. That burden falls on your shoulder's and your shoulder's alone.
So I'll ask you again for the 100th time: Where is your evidence for the presence of barium oxide or aluminum oxide at Ground Zero?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Wikipedia wrote, "...Barium oxide is made by heating barium carbonate with coke, carbon black or tar. It may also be prepared by thermal decomposition of barium nitrate."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium_oxide#Preparation
So there's the proof that barium oxide is the signature for the presence of thermate--which is composed of 29% barium nitrate before thermate ignition.
So where's you evidence for the presence of barium oxide at Ground Zero, goat fucker?
"JR, the NYT and WaPo use "impeachment" to describe the process of removal from office. Your attempt to play "gotcha" is ignorant and silly."
The fact that the NYT and WaPo incorrectly use a word is neither surprising, relevant, nor excusing the error when you make it.
The US Constitution and history both prove you, the NYT and the WaPo to be completely wrong.
When I pointed that out to you the first time, quoting, and linking to the relevant passage of the US Constitution, you actually said you weren't going to read it. After all, what "skilled researcher" would bother going to the actual defining document, right?
It wasn't your mistake that makes you such an obvious fool, I even pointed out it was a common one when I first brought it up. It was your absurd inability to admit the error and use the word properly after that.
You have no interest in truth, you have no ability at actual research, and you sure as hell are incapable of rational analysis.
It is absolutly one of the funniest things I've seen on this blog that you think correcting your blatent errors is the act of an ideologue.
And here's the proof that the USGS found barite (BaSO4) at ground zero, not barium nitrate or barium oxide.
Section: Gypsum/anhydrite
The USGS wrote, "...Gypsum (CaSO4_2H2O) and anhydrite (CaSO4), along with a variety of other hydrated Ca sulfates are the primary components of wall board (drywall). Other minor and trace components of drywall such as quartz (SiO2), barite (BaSO4), and calcite (CaCO3) are included with mineral material below."
Section: Mineral material
The USGS continues, "...Mineral material includes all particles that generally occur as rock-forming minerals. The primary components in this group include quartz (SiO2), feldspars ((Ca,Na,K)1(Si,Al)4O8), micas (including vermiculite), talc (Mg3Si4O10(OH)2), calcite (CaCO3), dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2), sulfide minerals, barite (BaSO4), and others"
Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html
NOTE: Notice that the USGS never mentions having found traces of barium nitrate or barium oxide at Ground Zero.
Notice that my claim for the presence of barite at Ground Zero, which I'll reproduce below, is supported by the evidence presented in the USGS document titled, "Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust," by Lowers and Meeker.
"...Thus, naturally occurring barium [barite] is ubiquitous, and found in just the concentration the USGS found at Ground Zero." -- GuitarBill
You'll also notice that Barite (BaSO4) is used extensively as a lead substitute in cathode ray tubes (CRT), of which there were tens of thousands present at Ground Zero.
Check and mate
So where's your evidence for the presence of barium oxide at Ground Zero, goat fucker?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The goat fucuker lies, "...You provide no source for your claim that barium oxide was not found."
Fine.
Here's a link to Table 1, Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust.
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Table 1 provides a detailed breakdown of categorized collected spectra found at Ground Zero. Notice that the section titled "Mineral Material" shows one entry for barite. This is the only barite-based compound found in the Atlas. Hence, only barite was found at Ground Zero, as I have pointed out repeatedly.
Check and mate
Thus, once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Here's a shot of the spectral analysis of the barite found at Ground Zero.
You got some 'splaining to do, goat fucker.
Now, where's your public apology for lying about the alleged presence of barium oxide/nitrate at Ground Zero, Pinocchio?
Correction:
My post at 20:22 should read, "...This is the only barium-based compound found in the Atlas."
Sorry for the typo, my bad.
UtterFail, I never said barium oxide was found at Ground Zero. You're a liar.
It is incumbent upon you to prove your claims that barium oxide was not found. I don't care about the issue myself, because it's meaningless. Barium is not a necessary component of thermite or thermate, and your fixation on the stuff is just loony. Since barium sulfate is present in gypsum, why wouldn't USGS find some? So what? You expend enormous energies proving exactly nothing.
JR, you are only making yourself look silly. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "impeach" as:
transitive verb
1
a : to bring an accusation against b : to charge with a crime or misdemeanor; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office
c : to remove from office especially for misconduct
My usage of the term was correct.
The goat fucker prevaricates, "...UtterFail, I never said barium oxide was found at Ground Zero. You're a liar."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Really? No kidding? Are you willing to bet your non-existent "credibility" on that assertion, Pinocchio?
What's this, goat fucker?
"...The presence of molten steel and the sulfidation attack on the FEMA samples are evidence of the use of thermite or thermate...One sample showed 4000 ppm of barium--10X the background level in the earth's crust. Maybe if you actually read the papers you quote." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 06 July, 2011 10:05.
No, you would never argue that "barium oxide was found at Ground Zero." Perhaps you can explain why, in the light of the aforementioned quote, you wrote--and I quote: "...The presence of molten steel and the sulfidation attack on the FEMA samples are evidence of the use of thermite or thermate...One sample showed 4000 ppm of barium--10X the background level in the earth's crust"
If you aren't arguing for the presence of "barium" that proves "evidence of the use of thermite or thermate," what are you babbling about--you cretin?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"...UtterFail, I never said barium oxide was found at Ground Zero. You're a liar...http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/ This document records lots of barium and aluminum, and does not break out aluminum oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 30 June, 2011 15:33.
Really? No kidding?
Then why did you write--and I quote: "...The presence of molten steel and the sulfidation attack on the FEMA samples are evidence of the use of thermite or thermate...One sample showed 4000 ppm of barium--10X the background level in the earth's crust."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Nope. No argument for the "evidence of the use of thermite or thermate" at Ground Zero...move along, folks.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Gosh goat fucker, I'm no match for your stellar debating skills.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
You're not a great "communicator," you're a great prevaricator.
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
..."Barium nitrate would decompose in the thermate reaction, UtterFail...The USGS document does not distinguish between elemental aluminum and aluminum oxide, nor between barium nitrate and batrium [SIC] oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 30 June, 2011 18:32.
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
The USGS document is clear, goat fucker. Barium nitrate and barium oxide (to say nothing of aluminum oxide, which was also not found at Ground Zero) were NOT found at Ground Zero, only barite was found at ground zero.
Thus, you have no evidence for the presence of thermite, thermate or "nanothermite."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Nope. The USGS report "does not distinguish between elemental aluminum and aluminum oxide, nor between barium nitrate and batrium [SIC] oxide." I guess that's why the USGS report DOES distinguish between elemental aluminum and aluminum oxide, and between barium nitrate and barium oxide. After all, the report only mentions barite specifically, but fails to mention aluminum oxide, barium nitrate and barium oxide. It must be a conspiracy.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"...I said the USGS elemental analysis did not distinguish between the various flavors of barium, which is true. I mentioned elemental barium because I believe that is what the elemental test detects." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 05 July, 2011 20:41.
Really? No kidding?
The USGS Report doesn't distinguish between "the various flavors of barium"?
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
You wouldn't lie to us, would you, goat fucker?
Of course you would lie to us. That's a given.
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"...Any BaO is in the 800 ppm barium measured by the USGS. Where else could it be?" -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 06 July, 2011 01:29.
Really? No kidding?
Then why does this document prove that BaO (barium oxide) was NOT found at Ground Zero?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
No, you would NEVER lie to us, would you, liar?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...The barium oxide is in the 800 ppm barium that USGS found in the dust." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 06 July, 2011 01:09.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Stop it, goat fucker, you're killing me. I'm going to die laughing!
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...UtterFail, there is no reason for me to provide evidence of the presence of aluminum oxide or barium nitrate/oxide at Ground Zero. It's a non-issue. It's loony of you to expect barium nitrate in the dust, and it's your bogus claim that they weren't present, for which you provide no evidence at all...Evidence for thermite is the otherwise inexplicable sulfidation attack on the FEMA Appendix C steel samples, and the "evaporated" steel reported by the NYT. Also the 2 dozen witness accounts of molten steel, which can not have been produced by jet fuel fires, and which has been reported even by Father Edward Malloy, CSC." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 00:11.
No, you would never argue for the "evidence of thermite," even though you just argued that the "sulfidation attack" is "otherwise inexplicable" without thermite.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"...There are witness accounts of ,olten [SIC] steel from 2 dozen witnesses. Dr. Astaneh saw "melting of girders". That's steel. Your hysterical blindness is silly...Dr. Malloy's observations were substantiated by testimony from Dr. Astaneh, by the FEMA Apendix C samples, and by the 40-pound ingot of formerly molten steel. Your hysterical blindness is silly...Yes, someone was arguing that thermite can not cut steel. National Geographic argued that, the mythbusters guys implicitly argued it, and New Mexico Tech implicitly argued it. Jonathan Cole showed that they were being dishonest." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 08:57.
No, you would never argue for the presence of thermite, thermate or "nanothermite," would you, Pinocchio?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, Pinocchio?
You're a liar, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Continued...
"...You haven't explained why the presence of aluminum oxide and barium nitrate is significant because you're wrong about them being significant...Barium oxide and aluminum oxide are both gases at the reaction temperature of barium thermate...Besides, the USGS study I cited showed the presence of both aluminum and barium in the dust." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 08:57. 01 July, 2011 13:57
Really? No kidding?
Barium oxide is a gas at reaction temperatures?
Fe2O3(s) + 2 Al(s) -> Al2O3(s) + 2 Fe(l)
What part of that simple thermite reaction don't you understand, fucktard? Aluminum oxide is a solid at reaction temperature, not a gas.
Furthermore, no aluminum oxide or barium oxide/nitrate was found in the dust, as the following document proves beyond a doubt:
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
FAIL.
"...UtterFail, lack of barium does not rule out thermate, and you have not demonstrated a lack of barium. Please provide your source for the claim." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 08:57. 02 July, 2011 10:37.
Here's your source, Pinocchio:
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"...The USGS paper you cite is an elemental analysis. It finds 800 ppm of barium in the dust and does not distinguish between elemental barium, barium oxide, or barium nitrate." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 08:57. 03 July, 2011 12:13.
The USGS Report doesn't distinguish between "the various flavors of barium"?
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Once again, you FAIL.
"...The USGS report did not distinguish between aluminum and aluminum oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 01 July, 2011 08:57. 05 July, 2011 21:50.
Yes, it did make the distinction between aluminum and aluminum oxide.. What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Once again, you FAIL.
"...USGS found a whole lot of barium in the dust. 800 ppm IIRC. It's very tiresome that you spam all the threads with the same crap. You don't know what you're talking about." -- The goat fucker, "Hell No I Ain't Reading No White Paper!", 05 July, 2011 23:19.
False.
The report found normal background levels for ONE form of barium--barite. No barium oxide/nitrate was found in the dust as the following table proves beyond a doubt:
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
FAIL.
"...Figure 4 shows that the outside dust contains barium concentrations 60% higher than the inside dust, and 100% higher than that of the earth's crust." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 06 July, 2011 11:09.
Never mind that the USGS only found one type of barium in the dust--barite.
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
So where's your evidence for the presence of aluminum oxide or barium oxide in the dust, goat fucker?
Yeah, you would never argue that barium nitrate/oxide was in the dust..except when you argue for the presence of barium nitrate/oxide in the dust.
You're a double-talking liar.
FAIL.
"...But the point is moot because the USGS report you cite as evidence of a lack of barium in fact shows levels of nearly 10X background in a sample from one block away from Ground Zero." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 06 July, 2011 22:22.
Yeah, you would never argue that barium nitrate/oxide was in the dust..except when you argue for the presence of barium nitrate/oxide in the dust.
Too bad the USGS report says you're full of shit.
FAIL.
"...You seem to be unable to recognize that the USGS writeup contradicts their own data in Figure 4, which show clearly that the interior barium concentration was 500 ppm while the exterior concentration averaged 800 ppm and was, 1 block from Ground Zero, at 3800 ppm--almost 10X the normal background level." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 07 July, 2011 11:40.
Too bad the barium they found was barite, not barium oxide.
And, of course, we must remember that you would never argue for the presence of barium oxide in the dust...excpt when you argue for the presence of barium oxide in the dust.
You wouldn't talk out of both sides of your mouth, would you, Pinocchio?
Of course you would.
FAIL
"...You continue to demonstrate your incompetence in chemistry when you claim that the USGS data does not show barium oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 07 July, 2011 13:45.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Show it to me, Pinocchio. Here's your chance:
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Of course, we must remember that the illustrious goat fucker would never argue for the presence of barium oxide in the dust...except when he argues for the presence of barium oxide in the dust.
You wouldn't talk out of both sides of your mouth, would you, Pinocchio?
Of course you would.
FAIL.
"...You provide no source for your claim that barium oxide was not found." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 07 July, 2011 14:45.
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
So goat fucker, how does it feel to know that your alleged "credibility" can be measured in negative engineering units--you lying, double-talking troll?
You'd lie to your mother if you thought for one nanosecond that you could gain an advantage from the lie.
You're a psychopath.
Now go play in the middle of US highway 101, goat molester.
"...UtterFail, I never said barium oxide was found at Ground Zero. You're a liar." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line," 07 July, 2011 23:23.
Really? No kidding?
You never claimed that "barium oxide was found at Ground Zero"?
What's this, goat molester?
"...You continue to demonstrate your incompetence in chemistry when you claim that the USGS data does not show barium oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 07 July, 2011 13:45.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Stop it, goat fucker. You're killing me! I'm going to die laughing!
Beyond parody.
This comment has been removed by the author.
John, first-quarter freshman inorganic chem is all I need to show that MGF and GutterBall never had it. MGF doesn't understand the energy of fusion and GutterBall doesn't know what an elemental analysis is.
One chemistry course years ago and you know more than MGF and Bill?
John, understand that GutterBall and MGF clearly don't understand the chemistry they're babbling about, and both are liars. MGF implied that he had almost finished a four year degree in Marine Geology from a college that doesn't offer a BS in Marine Geology.
I said first quarter freshman chemistry is all that is needed to show that these clowns are making it up. Clearly neither of them ever had it. MGF didn't know about the energy of fusion and GutterBall doesn't know about elemental analysis.
UtterFail, your dishonest quote-mining is the kind of behavior I've come to expect from you. You are investing enormous energies in proving exactly nothing except your own ignorance and dishonesty.
Originally we were discussing a USGS paper that reported on an elemental analysis in which barium was barium--whether it was oxide, nitrate, sulfate, the test could not tell because the samples were burned first. That's what an elemental analysis does. Interestingly, the USGS writeup contradicts its own data in Figure 4, but apparently UtterFail can't recognize that even when it's repeatedly pointed out to him.
More recently UtterFail introduced another USGS paper into the discussion which did a more sensitive analysis and reported the presence of barium sulfate. This is not surprising, as it's found in drywall. Utterfail dishonestly applies discussions we had about the elemental analysis as if we were discussing the second paper.
He lies about what I said, he lies about what he said, and even after he's been corrected he continues to spam multiple threads with his erroneous and dishonest interpretations of things he doesn't understand. He doesn’t even read the papers.
He leaps to the irrational conclusion that if barium sulfate was found in the particle atlas, that proves that there's no barium oxide. If he would bother to read the paper he's quote-mining, he would notice that the second paragraph notes that the list is not exhaustive, and "it is likely phases and compounds will be identified in the future that are not listed in this atlas."
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html
And the whole argument is pointless because barium is not a necessary component of thermate or thermite, and so its absence would be meaningless even if UtterFail could demonstrate it, which he can't.
It is unreasonable to think that all the barium in the 3800 ppm sample is barium sulfate from drywall. Drywall barium should be dispersed equally in all directions. The concentration almost 8X above the concentration in the indoor samples is not consistent with drywall dust.
John, first quarter chem is all that's needed to show that neither GutterBall nor MGF know what they're talking about.
The simple fact that you believe the definitions in a dictionary or a newspaper are the governing definitions in a discussion of a legal matter, whether impeachment does or does not strip an ex-president of his pension, instead of using the definitions spelled out in the governing legal document, the US Constitution, says all that needs to be said about your vaunted research skills.
Do you also believe that clinical definitions of insanity govern the use of the word in courts of law?
As I said before, I'm more than content to let rational readers judge for themselves.
UtterFail, I get real tired of you continuing to spam your ignorance on multiple threads even after you've been corrected.
JR, I do not believe the dictionary definitions are the governing definitions. I used the word impeachment in a perfectly acceptable way in a general discussion, and you only jumped on it pedantically to try to play "gotcha". It is as irrelevant as GutterBall's babblings about barium.
Thye goat fucker lies, "...UtterFail, I get real tired of you continuing to spam your ignorance on multiple threads even after you've been corrected."
You didn't correct me, goat fucker. I caught you red-handed lying again, and now you continue to lie and pretend that no evidence was produced to prove that you're a liar.
The goat fucker lies, "...You provide no source for your claim that barium oxide was not found."
Really? No kidding?
What's this, goat fucker?
Proof that barium oxide was not found at Ground Zero.
Once again, you're caught lying through your terracotta teeth.
FAIL
Here's a link to Table 1 of the USGS's Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust.
Table 1. Categorized Collected Spectra.
Table 1 provides a detailed breakdown of categorized collected spectra found at Ground Zero. Notice that the section titled "Mineral Material" shows one entry for barite. This is the only barium-based compound found in the Atlas. Hence, only barite was found at Ground Zero, as I have pointed out repeatedly.
You'll also notice that aluminum oxide is absent from the table. Thus, there's not a scintilla of evidence for the use of thermite, thermate or "nanothermite" at Ground Zero.
Check and mate
Thus, once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
You're a psychopath.
Spin spin spin.
The point remains, you were wrong, you were proven wrong, you refused to even look at the proof (such good research skills), and you are unable to admit the simplest of errors.
None of this would be showing you up if you had responded way back then with "Oh right, that is a common mistake, I'll be more careful in my phrasing." Everyone makes them you know, snug. Most of us simply correct the minor error and go on with our statements. It's what honest adults interested in decent discussion do.
Why can't you do the same?
JR wrote, "...Why can't you do the same?"
Because he's a psychopath.
JR, it's not a mistake. "Impeachment" is a perfectly acceptable term for the process of removing someone from office. Quibbling about it is as pointless as pointing out that "Prosecuting criminals and putting them behind bars" leaves out the conviction process, and that "sex makes babies" leaves out fertilization, gestation, and birth.
So goat fucker, I'm still waiting for the formal apology you owe us for repeatedly lying.
"...UtterFail, I never said barium oxide was found at Ground Zero. You're a liar." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line," 07 July, 2011 23:23.
"...You continue to demonstrate your incompetence in chemistry when you claim that the USGS data does not show barium oxide." -- The goat fucker, "Not Just Another in the Long Line", 07 July, 2011 13:45.
Beyond parody.
John, first quarter chem is all that's needed to show that neither GutterBall nor MGF know what they're talking about.
Actually, it seems to me they know exactly what they're talking about.
Well, I bow to the "skilled researcher, insightful analyst, and effective communicator" who refused to read the proof I gave him, and insists that Meriam-Webster, the NYT, and the WaPo are the deciding factors on what the word "impeachment" regarding a US President means.
As I said, I'm happy to leave it to the interested reader to see for themselves just how closely coupled to reality your world is.
John, "seems" is the operative word. By cutting and pasting from scientific materials, a child can "seem" to be an educated researcher--unless you look for closely at the source material and the conclusions she draws from it.
Says the proven compulsive liar and psychopath who wears women's underwear.
So goat fucker, where's your evidence for the presence of thermite, thermate and "nanothermite" at Ground Zero?
No barium nitrate. No thermate.
FAIL.
No barium oxide. No thermate.
FAIL.
No aluminum oxide. No thermite or "nanothermite."
FAIL.
Well, I would still trust their words over yours. Every post you write gives the appearance of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about but believes that he does. Or is just making it up as he goes along and tries to cover it up by claiming it's obvious that everyone else is wrong.
Again, if you are the skilled researcher and great communicator you say you are, you're wasting your time posting here.
This comment has been removed by the author.
John, my work speaks for itself. It checks out. I don't lie, and when I point out a logical fallacy on these guy's part I'm right.
For instance, GutterBall's dogged insistence that barium is a necessary component of thermate and thermite is simply not true. Dr. Jones's paper (the doc version, not the pdf version) clearly distinguishes between barium thermate (TH-3) and other flavors of thermate. GB denies this.
GB believes that the presence of barium sulfate somehow proves that barium oxide is not present. That is loopy!
If he'd bother to read his own source he'd see that it says that the list is not exhaustive, and "it is likely phases and compounds will be identified in the future that are not listed in this atlas."
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html
It's also interesting that in the other paper, the USGS's writeup contradicts their own data in Figure 4. GB quotes the writeup and fails to notice the discrepancy. I know what I'm talking about, he doesn't. MGF, who claimed to be a marine geologist, rashly declared that California has more oil reserves than all the 'stans. He's FOS.
Post a Comment
<< Home