Yet Another Sign It's Over
Remember 911TruthNews, the site that was started by the Truth Action folks to be an alternative to 9-11 Blogger; the site that was going to focus on the "real" 9-11 Truth Movement, and not get caught up in the Controlled Demolition nonsense?
Last updated in mid-October. This parrot has ceased to be. It has shuffled off the mortal coil. It is an ex-parrot.
posted by Pat @ 7:40 AM
140 comments
140 Comments:
Uh, sorry, but the individual running it has been involved with Occupy Auckland in New Zealand. He is in the process of adding more articles in the coming days. You're wrong as usual.
Jon, c'mon. You're a normal enough guy. Isn't it time to stop wasting your life on this nonsense? Leave the idiotic conspiracy crap to the truly hopeless and insane like Brian Good.
I realize you so desperately want advocates for 9/11 Justice to go away, but it's not going to happen. My book hasn't even come out yet. I'm not going anywhere.
Actually, I think more and more people are coming out of the fog of war and more books will be written that will open people's minds. I'm new to this myself. I didn't follow it much in the beginning. I just assumed that the government would produce an accurate report and that the simple story that they told us was true. I've recently come to the conclusion that that is a sadly naive view. I now know that we've been lied to and I know that the lies created never-ending war and the dismantling of rights here at home. I hope that the people who have been shouting this from the rooftops for so long don't give up, and I hope that more people take notice.
My book hasn't even come out yet.
What impact do you expect your book to have? What new information does it contain?
I realize you so desperately want advocates for 9/11 Justice to go away, but it's not going to happen. My book hasn't even come out yet. I'm not going anywhere.
Actually, I don't care what "advocates for 9/11 Justice" do. It's not my life that's being wasted on some stupid conspiracy.
I just wonder what you're going to think when you're 70 years old and you wasted decades on this nonsense. How about you go and hike the Appalachian Trail? It will get you away from the idiocy of the internet and maybe it will clear your mind enough so that you can see what a waste this stuff is.
Also, the reaction to your book will likely be the same as the reaction to your stunt where you chained yourself to the White House fence. Nobody will give a damn.
RGT, Jon's book doesn't need to contain anything new. Most people are amazingly ignorant about 9/11, including y'all here. Most people, like y'all here, make up simple explanations that make sense to them. I did too, until I started to investigated the facts.
"Oh it was turf wars in the intel agencies". "Oh NORAD just got fat and lazy." "Jet fuel is like rocket fuel and it melted the steel in the towers." "Nobody talked." "Bush isn't smart enough." "Truthers are feeble-minded Jew-haters."
One thing that got me started was Benjamin DeMott's essay in Harper's criticizing the 9/11 Commission Report. "Whitewash as Public Service" was a devastating critique.
Another was the realization that my own "that sounds logical" explanation that the four hijackings were simultaneous and the air war was over in 15 minutes was completely fact-free, and the truth was that there was no air defense for 100 minutes.
I started asking questions that still have not been answered.
Ian, it is amusing that you choose to devote such enormous energies to mocking something you feel is completely worthless. Talk about a waste! At least Jon has a high moral purpose and is part of something bigger than himself. All you're doing is having fun.
I hope in 2012 you will examine your motivations for this enterprise, tighten up your loose screws, and turn to some more activity more productive than lying about 9/11 and libeling me.
My book hasn't even come out yet.
As if it would make a difference. The only thing that remains true of twoofers is their ever-inflated sense of self-importance.
Looks like Ron Paul was caught nibbling on da twoof again.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/10/ron-paul-bush-admin-was-gleeful-because-of-9-11/
RGT, Jon's book doesn't need to contain anything new. Most people are amazingly ignorant about 9/11, including y'all here. Most people, like y'all here, make up simple explanations that make sense to them. I did too, until I started to investigated the facts.
Brian, you've never investigated any "facts" about 9/11. You babble about magic thermite elves and radio-controlled planes. You are a liar and lunatic who lives on disability with his parents.
Ian, it is amusing that you choose to devote such enormous energies to mocking something you feel is completely worthless. Talk about a waste! At least Jon has a high moral purpose and is part of something bigger than himself. All you're doing is having fun.
Squeal squeal squeal!
I don't think Jon is completely worthless, which is why I'm trying to talk some sense into him.
You, on the other hand, are completely worthless. You live on disability with your parents, dress in women's underwear, and spend hours and hours posting spam about Willie Rodriguez all over the internet.
Mocking you is hilarious and entertaining, especially in how much you squeal and cry about it.
I hope in 2012 you will examine your motivations for this enterprise, tighten up your loose screws, and turn to some more activity more productive than lying about 9/11 and libeling me.
But it's fun to mock a worthless liar and pervert and racist lunatic like you. I mean, just look at you!
http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood
I mean, just look at that haircut! I'm guessing you did it yourself while high on glue since mommy and daddy wouldn't drive you to the barber.
Ian, like I said, I'm fairly new to this and came to this site looking for various viewpoints. I get from you that you enjoy making fun of people for their haircuts. Is that all you have to offer? What a waste.
Like I said, I hope people keep asking questions and ignore petty nonsense such as you are peddling. I sincerely hope that Jon and others quit wasting any time on your stupidity and ridiculous personal attacks. This site is a time waster for sure and you should find a hobby.
lainnj, it's not just pettiness. He lies and lies and lies. He claims there are no 9/11 widows. He claims he has provided pictures of 220 acres of floor slabs. He claims that Dr. Sunder and Dr. Astaneh did not say what they said to NOVA and to PBS. He claims there was no molten steel at Ground Zero. He seems to get some kind of kinky thrill out of lying.
And everyone on this board except me tolerates that, even though it makes the board almost useless (except for my posts) as a source of true information.
Ian, like I said, I'm fairly new to this and came to this site looking for various viewpoints.
OK, where would you like to start? There are mundane explanations of the various points that truthers bring up, and we can go over them fairly quickly.
"Snug.bug" on the other hand, is not new to this. He's been spamming this blog for 3 years, and has nothing in the way of evidence to offer. I suppose we could just ignore him, but I do find it amusing to taunt him and see how he responds. Maybe it's not the most charitable trait of mine, but remember, "Snug.bug" believes thousands of people are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder without a shred of evidence.
lainnj, it's not just pettiness. He lies and lies and lies. He claims there are no 9/11 widows. He claims he has provided pictures of 220 acres of floor slabs. He claims that Dr. Sunder and Dr. Astaneh did not say what they said to NOVA and to PBS. He claims there was no molten steel at Ground Zero. He seems to get some kind of kinky thrill out of lying.
False.
And everyone on this board except me tolerates that, even though it makes the board almost useless (except for my posts) as a source of true information.
Brian, you're not a source of anything except as a window into the mind of a paranoid lunatic. You're definitely interesting as a case study in mental illness.
But you have nothing to offer on 9/11 except endless spam.
My book hasn't even come out yet. I'm not going anywhere.
Having trouble getting money from suckers, like yourself, to get it published? You're just another Jason Bermas asking for money.
Actually I predict that you're going to jail this year for something stupid, like handcuffing yourself to Governent Property.
RGT, Jon's book doesn't need to contain anything new.
I'm pretty sure it does. His existing message delivered in his existing way has clearly not taken hold. I don't see how adding his life story is going to make it more compelling.
"Jon Gold: The Life and Times of an Illiterate Asshole"
That has a nice ring to it.
Whyaskquestions: Before you call someone illiterate, you should clean up your blogs. They are full of spelling and grammatical errors. What a mess.
Ian, in your own defense, you claim that you enjoy taunting people. Pathetic. Get a life.
As for Jon Gold and snug.bug, why are you even here? Was this a serious blog at one time? Maybe I'll look through past posts but if ridiculous personal attacks is all they have, I can't believe you ever found this. It came up in google search for me. What a waste. Hopefully, google will figure out that this is garbage.
Ooh, do I get a review copy, Jon?
So I take it that you don't want to actually discuss anything about 9/11, huh lainnj?
And I enjoy taunting Brian Good because he's a stalker and liar who is obsessed with this blog. You'll notice I'm pretty easy on Jon Gold because I think he's probably a decent guy, just misguided.
Ian, you must realize that when you engage in juvenile personal attacks, you make yourself look ridiculous. You obviously don't care and are only here to taunt people. If that's fun for you, fine. But most people are going to consider you a waste of time and are certainly not going to engage you in a serious discussion about this topic. I am looking for real information about 9/11; I have no interest in your mean-spirited opinion about someone's haircut or their personal life.
When they named this thread "Yet Another Sign It's Over," they must have meant this blog. What a bunch of petty losers with too much time on their hands to devote to nonsense.
I hope the people with real questions will continue on and find a better forum than this. I'm still looking for good information and there is plenty out there, I know. This was just a wrong turn for me.
And yet you're still posting here....
I hope the people with real questions will continue on and find a better forum than this. I'm still looking for good information and there is plenty out there, I know. This was just a wrong turn for me.
Everyone knows this. Nobody comes here looking for answers. They do that at debunking websites, like JREF. This is a blog, not "Debunker HQ." You truthers keep using that strawman of "Screw Loose Change is a debunking site! We must defeat it!" like you'll change the world. It's just Pat and James and thier views on truther's and thier 9/11 conspiracies. Yet it just pisses the truthers off SO MUCH that they have it...
"Ian, you must realize that when you engage in juvenile personal attacks, you make yourself look ridiculous...."
...and yet you engage in them yourself.
"just assumed that the government would produce an accurate report and that the simple story that they told us was true. I've recently come to the conclusion that that is a sadly naive view. I now know that we've been lied to and I know that the lies created never-ending war and the dismantling of rights here at home. "
Congratulations, you've essentually cut-and-pasted every troofer's screed.
There are no big secrets. Everyone knows 9/11 was used as an excuse to invade Iraq, the argument should be weather it was justified, and the questions should be about the knee-jerk paranoid responses from the Bush Administration along with how the CIA arrived at its assessment of WMDs (which has happened).
Instead you are joining a sad little cult of folks who believe some uber-secret government/NWO/Illuminatti/insert your personal boogy man here managed to hide enough here-to-fore unknown explosives into 3 towers of the singe busiest buildings in NYC - without anyone seeing anything - and then set them off after flying two 767s (hijacked/remote control/your choice) into the twin towers.
You also have to believe nobody has talked in 10 years, not one leak, not one incriminating video, or photograph has surfaced as proof.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Insinuation, half-truths, and quotes out of contrext are not proof.
snug bug is a clown named Brian Good. Google Brian Good 9/11 truth before you decide to hang your hat next to his. He's been kicked out of every 9/11 Truth faction there is. He also sexually harrassed a peace activist, and has lied about a certified 9/11 hero ( a guy who was actually in the WTC on 9/11).
Truther also have a high body-count, and arrest record for sex-crimes.
So good luck with your troofer adventures, and yes we will make fun of you.
"Uh, sorry, but the individual running it has been involved with Occupy Auckland in New Zealand"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Figures. What with Auckland being the center of high-finance shenanigans.
"Whyaskquestions: Before you call someone illiterate, you should clean up your blogs. They are full of spelling and grammatical errors. What a mess.
"
Grammar-Nazis suck cock.
Did I spell that right?
"Another was the realization that my own "that sounds logical" explanation that the four hijackings were simultaneous and the air war was over in 15 minutes was completely fact-free, and the truth was that there was no air defense for 100 minutes.
I started asking questions that still have not been answered.
"
So you can see Brian's problem. The first jets left Otis AB as the first airliner smacked into the north tower. They were sent in the wrong direction initially so they didn't make cap until after the second plane hit.
So the "air war" began 30 seconds before the impact of the first plane.
Brian is wrong, he never served his country, and looks down on those who do. His brain stopped working in the mid-1980s when NORAD, SAC, and TAC were still around operating on a hair-pin trigger. The remnants of NORAD were a distant shadow of their Cold-War incarnation. Everyone knows this...except Brian.
""Oh it was turf wars in the intel agencies". "Oh NORAD just got fat and lazy." "Jet fuel is like rocket fuel and it melted the steel in the towers." "Nobody talked." "Bush isn't smart enough." "Truthers are feeble-minded Jew-haters."
All true if he'd actually looked at the facts.
Plus Brian hates African-Americans, and women.
Ian, you lie. There is no mundane explanation of the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile.
I never said thousands of people are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder. I said we have not had honest and thorough investigations.
You lie and liel and liel, and then you lie about the lies. You have claimed there are no 9/11 widows. You have claimed he has provided pictures of 220 acres of floor slabs. You have claimed that Dr. Sunder and Dr. Astaneh did not say what they said to NOVA and to PBS. You have claimed there was no molten steel at Ground Zero. You seem to get some kind of kinky thrill out of lying.
RGT, Jon's existing message has clearly taken hold. Have you seen the new edition of "102 Minutes?" The postscript says that the 9/11 Commission was often "hamstrung by delays and evasions at all levels of government" and says the 9/11 widows felt "it had left important questions unanswered".
lainnj, I am here because I have a character defect. I am unable to sit back and let people lie about 9/11.
I am not aware that it was ever a serious blog. At one time there were some fairly serious commenteers who had actually read Lawrence Wright (though they lacked the cojones to read Bamford or Lance) but they were driven away by the endless spamming from ButtGale and Ian, and less frequent and once-fairly-honest commenteers seem to have been corrupted by Ian's blatant lies so they now have little concern with facts or logic.
MGF, the claim that the official investigations were corrupt and incomplete is hardly extraordinary, and it's easily demonstrated. Pray tell, what is "out of context" about "I saw melting of girders"?
I didn't harass anybody, and I never lied about any heroes. You get your information from liars.
"Suck" and "cock" you know how to spell. Lots of other simple stuff you can't spell even when your errors are underlined in red. Willful ignorance is a terrible thing.
MGF, the air war began when the first line of defense, the FAA, noticed that a 767 en route to California had suddenly stopped responding to the radio and turned directly toward New York.
I'm serving my country this very minute--for free. No VA bennies.
If you admire soldiers so much, goarmy.com is waiting. Whassamatter, you'd rather pick artichokes?
Scrambling fighters to make intercepts was still a routine matter for NORAD on 9/11. You want to pretend they got fat and lazy like you, and that's how it should be.
Your belief that jet fuel melted the steel is just loony. You make stuff up that comforts you, because you don't have the guts to face reality. That kind of goes with college drop-out behavior. You don't have to face real life if you never finish college, right?
Brian is wrong, he never served his country, and looks down on those who do. His brain stopped working in the mid-1980s...
That's being generous. I'm guessing Brian's brain stopped working after he ingested a metric ton of LSD and other drugs while hanging out with various burnt-out Berkeley and Stanford dropouts in the 1970s.
Ian, you lie. There is no mundane explanation of the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile.
Yes there is. These are all the delusions of a failed janitor and liar who lives with his parents and calls people "girls" on the internet.
I never said thousands of people are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder. I said we have not had honest and thorough investigations.
Regardless, nobody cares what you think since you're a liar and lunatic and ignoramus.
You lie and liel and lie, and then you lie about the lies.
False.
lainnj, I am here because I have a character defect. I am unable to sit back and let people lie about 9/11.
Brian, all you do is lie about 9/11. You're a lunatic who is obsessed with this blog for reasons unknown, possibly because it's the only blog that hasn't banned you.
I am not aware that it was ever a serious blog.
And yet you've spent 3 years spamming it when you could always leave. Of course, you've been banned at every other 9/11 blog, so this is the only place where you can post dumbspam about invisible widows and Willie Rodriguez.
You harassed Carol Brouillet and lied about Willie Rodriguez.
I'm serving my country this very minute--for free.
Actually, it's the other way around. Your country is paying you disability benefits because you're mentally incapable of working, so you have the time to post gibberish about magic thermite elves on this blog.
Scrambling fighters to make intercepts was still a routine matter for NORAD on 9/11.
That's nice, Brian.
Your belief that jet fuel melted the steel is just loony.
Brian, you're the one constantly babbling about molten steel, even though there is/was no evidence for it.
You make stuff up that comforts you, because you don't have the guts to face reality.
Squeal squeal squeal!
You don't have to face real life if you never finish college, right?
Apparently not, given that you can afford internet service despite having no job and no mental capacity for rational thought. Disability payments for the mentally ill should be generous, IMHO. I just wish you'd be less self-destructive and seek the psychiatric care you desperately need.
"Your belief that jet fuel melted the steel is just loony."
I believe the fires in all three buildings WEAKENED the steel structure causing buckling which made them collapse.
You're the retards who thinks there was molten steel (even though there wasn't).
"You make stuff up that comforts you, because you don't have the guts to face reality."
You're mentally ill, so reality is relative for you.
"That kind of goes with college drop-out behavior. You don't have to face real life if you never finish college, right?"
What would you know about real life? Your parents are rich, you receive disability from the government due to your mental condition. So between the trust your parents set up and what the government gives - you've never had to deal with real life.
Your 9/11 crusade allows you to pretend you're doing something important, but like the rest of your life it's just another sad joke.
Why aren't you married? What's the story there?
"MGF, the air war began when the first line of defense, the FAA, noticed that a 767 en route to California had suddenly stopped responding to the radio and turned directly toward New York."
No, our air war began 30 seconds before impact. THE air war began when Al Qaeda hijackers boarded their planes.
"I never said thousands of people are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder. I said we have not had honest and thorough investigations. "
Yet you imply it with every post.
Jon Gold wrote, "...I realize you so desperately want advocates for 9/11 Justice to go away, but it's not going to happen. My book hasn't even come out yet. I'm not going anywhere."
So many anti-war movements to discredit, so little time.
%^)
lainnj = goat fucker sock puppet.
Whyaskquestions: Before you call someone illiterate, you should clean up your blogs. They are full of spelling and grammatical errors. What a mess.
Being a critic is nice, but slamming a persons blog just becasue you don't like it, well that just sends red flags up that you're an asshole.
Conspiracy Theories are like diapers. You have to change them all the time because they're shitty.
Ian, you lie. The speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile are not delusions. For you to show that they are delusions, you must show that they are false.
I don't call anybody "girl". Learn how to read.
You lie and liel and lie, and then you lie about the lies.
When did I lie about 9/11? Who are these invisible widows you keep babbling about? (Of course if I lied about the widows like you do, I'd probably start hallucinating like you do.)
I never harassed Carol Brouillet and I never lie about Willie Rodriguez.
Please provide evidence supporting your claim that I am paid disability benefits. I have never posted anything about magic thermite elves.
You continue to lie about the molten steel. Dr. Astaneh Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders."
What makes you think I have no job?
MGF, you claimed last night that the proposition that "Jet fuel is like rocket fuel and it melted the steel in the towers" was true.
Dr. Ghoniem (MIT) said the photo evidence for molten steel is strong. Dr. Glanz (NYT) said he saw a three foot stalagmite of formerly-molten steel "like a drip candle".
Setting false data points (such as the start of the air war) allows you to prove anything you want.
Goat fucker,
I still don't see any substantiation for your idiotic propaganda.
Why is that, goat fucker?
Repeating the same long ago debunked bullshit ad infinitum isn't "evidence," goat fucker.
You need a new routine, goat fucker, because as things stand now, you have nothing. ZIP. NADA. ZILCH. ZERO.
FAIL.
UtterFail, you haven't debunked anything. All you do is repeptitively spam the board with cut-and-post nonsense, frequently irrelevant, that you get from lying propaganda websites--and which you don't even understand.
Then you claim victory, and the feeble-minded say--wow, look at those big words and even chemical equations and stuff! That guy must be a deep thinker!
I never harassed Carol Brouillet and I never lie about Willie Rodriguez.
Her e-mails from you prove that you harassed her. I saw them with my own eyes and read them.
Sure you lie about Willie. You think that bombs were in the Towers and somehow Willie came out unhurt from those bombs from WTC1. Must be some kind of bomb that gives people like him a second chance. Your lies are as weak and limp as your dick. How I know, Carol told me.
Goat fucker,
Lies and spin about alleged "propaganda websites" (which you've never proven, by the way) will never add the force of credibility to your idiotic "argument." Nor does your incredulity constitute an argument. Hand waving and nay-saying, which are all you have, are a poor substitute for real evidence.
Notice that people don't buy into your propaganda.
Why is that, goat fucker?
You can spin and obfuscate like your hero Bill O'Reilly until you're blue in the face. The rest of us, however, are not fooled by your 100% fact-free "argument."
There's a very simple reason why you steadfastly refuse to substantiate your propaganda: YOUR ARGUMENT IS BASED ON THE CRAP YOU GET FROM "lying propaganda websites--and which you don't even understand."
Instead of providing real evidence, you chose to spam SLC with your worthless, lying, 100% fact-free opinion.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The 100% fact-free opinion of a sex predator, college dropout and glue sniffing homosexual who wears women's underwear is less than worthless.
You do the same thing every right or left wing conspiracy monger does--you put the burden of proof on your detractors when in fact it belongs on you and the other morons alleging a conspiracy. You're the one making the absurd allegations; thus, you prove their merit if indeed they have any.
You perpetrate these myths all the while demanding that sane, intelligent people prove them wrong if they can--which is not only illogical and dishonest, it's insane.
Now, either substantiate your argument, or do us a favor and stop spamming the blog with lies.
Is that simple enough for you, Putómatic?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
And you know what's truly pathetic, goat fucker?
Answer: Your sock puppet, "lainnj."
Since you are incapable of mounting a logical argument based on real evidence, you invent "support" for your lies and propaganda--which is truly pathetic.
FAIL.
ToothlessnAlwaysWacko, learn to read. You haven't shown anything that says I harassed anybody. When have you ever seen my emails? You make shit up.
I didn't say there were bombs in the towers. I don't know if there were. Willie said there were.
Nice job of flipping, ButtGale.
My argument is based on well-sourced information, such as the testimony about molten steel by five PhDs. Are you calling Father Edward Malloy, PhD, the president of Notre Dame, a liar?
In order to demonstrate the need for new investigations, all I have to do is point out the inadequacies of the official reports. Since NIST can't prove their theories, for you to demand that I prove theories is dishonest.
You're the guys who claim that you're right. You are the guys who have to prove that you're right. Instead of doing that you just blow stinky smoke.
I have many times substantiated my argument--the reports are dishonest, incomplete, and unbelievable. I haven't lied about anything. You clearly haven't the faintest idea how to distinguish truth from fiction.
Offtopic -- I don't think this has been posted here before: the script for that 9/11 Truth movie.
Daniel Sunjata would make a great Shyam Sunder.
Putómatic brays, "...Are you calling Father Edward Malloy, PhD, the president of Notre Dame, a liar?"
No, I'm calling you a liar, liar.
Is that simple enough for you, gay boi?
Putómatic brays, "...I have many times substantiated my argument."
Utterly false. A brazen lie.
Care to provide us with so much as ONE example that supports your baseless assertion, ass?
I won't hold my breath waiting for your "substantiation."
Putómatic brays, "...In order to demonstrate the need for new investigations, all I have to do is point out the inadequacies of the official reports."
Another argument from incredulity. You CONSTANTLY try to claim that a proposition is true because it has not yet--IN YOUR WORTHLESS OPINION--been proven false. This is a naked logical fallacy. Freshman in college critical thinking to be exact. This is why there's not a snowball's chance in Hell that you ever graduated from college, let alone high school.
FAIL.
You haven't shown anything that says I harassed anybody. When have you ever seen my emails? You make shit up.
Oh really? Do I make up shit about you wanting to off Kevin Barrett and Willie Rodriguez when you were talking over the phone with one of your Truther friends? All because you fell in love with Carol and were jealous of them. Isn't that right?
I didn't say there were bombs in the towers. I don't know if there were. Willie said there were.
Oh, now you're pinning it on Willie for your fuck ups?
Are you calling Father Edward Malloy, PhD, the president of Notre Dame, a liar?
So, you're calling a friar a liar? What does religion have to do with 9/11?
all I have to do is point out the inadequacies of the official reports.
But without evidence you've got nothing against it.
Instead of doing that you just blow stinky smoke.
And where does that stinky smoke come from? Our asses! And who smells it? You Do!
reports are dishonest, incomplete, and unbelievable
Of course your reports are.
You clearly haven't the faintest idea how to distinguish truth from fiction.
That's nice that you talk about yourself there Brian. Keeps us sane folks laughing at you.
I didn't say there were bombs in the towers. I don't know if there were. Willie said there were.
I never said there were bombs so stop lying. I always said I am not an expert on explosives and that whatever it has been written of me saying there were bombs is incorrect. So stop lying about me and stop lying about your emails, I will be happy to post all of them here and some you send to others as well. Your call.
Willie,
Post the emails. Personally, I'd love to read the emails. Go for it.
by the way, happy Holidays to all of you.
(excluding BG of course!)
This was just a wrong turn for me.
Iainnj, if you're looking for thoughtful arguments on 9/11, you won't find it in the comments section of this blog. It's turned into a giant flame war. This is because the posters on this blog has debunked the same points over and over again and have just gotten tired of the truthers who post those same debunked points over and over.
As a former believer in LIHOP, I would recommend that you go here first:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/
That site debunks most of the "evidence" that truthers believe. If you became a truther from watching Loose Change, I would go here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561
It addresses just about every point in Loose Change. Yeah, it's long, but easy to take in installments
Finally, this site tells the story of an ex-truther.
http://extruther.blogspot.com/
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't just dismiss these sites as shills for the government, or as gullible people who will believe whatever people tell them. These are well thought out arguments. Think about the points they are making. My hope is that you realize, like I did, that every shred of evidence truthers have can be easily explained without a conspiracy theory.
If you still believe that fundamentalist Muslims didn't do it, go here to see who else they've killed in the name of their religion:
http://thereligionofpeace.com/
Good luck!
I never said there were bombs so stop lying. I always said I am not an expert on explosives and that whatever it has been written of me saying there were bombs is incorrect. So stop lying about me and stop lying about your emails, I will be happy to post all of them here and some you send to others as well. Your call.
And Brian is going to back off from your statement reguarding those explosives. Like I told him, if there were explosives you and others with you would've been dead. Since you're alive that proves him wrong.
Willie, if I were you, I'd do it.
by the way, happy Holidays to all of you.
Thanks Willie.
ButtGale, you should check your facts before you call somebody a liar. People might think you dont know how to google. Here's what Father Malloy wrote: "The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down."
Your inability to distinguish "inadequacies of the official reports" from an "argument from incredulity" shows your irrationality. The official reports failed to follow national standards. They failed to address essential issues. That's not an argument from incredulity--they don't give us anything not to believe!
I rarely claim that a proposition is true. I've tried many times to explain this to you. Apparently the concept is too subtle for your faith-based mind.
ToothlessnAlwaysWacko, where would you get the idea that I would want to "off" Kevin Barrett and Willie Rodriguez? You make stuff up.
Willie said there were bombs. The federal court lawsuit he filed claimed on p. 9 that "there were large explosive charges in the sub-basements of both towers, and smaller charges used to bring the buildings down in an orderly fashion."
I've got plenty of evidence of the inadequacies of the official reports. I keep repeating the 7 things they never explained in the NIST report.
Mr. Rodriguez, I guess you are not the same William Rodriguez who filed a lawsuit October 22, 2004 that starts out "Plaintiff (blah blah blah) respectfully alleges," and then goes on to claim on p. 9 that there were explosives in the basement.
John, actually the blog is a flame war because the "debunkers" don't know what they're talking about and flaming is all they can do. ButtGale's got a regular bio-methane flamethrower. Ian lies and lies and lies about the widows and the witnesses.
Nobody has debunked my points. That's what gives me confidence in them. If "every shred of evidence truthers have can be easily explained," try taking on the 7 essential mysteries that NIST completely ignores.
So your logic would seem to be-- Muslims kill people, and therefore jet fuel can melt steel.
and you forget how many times I said I distanced myself from that lawsuit that Phil Berg put together. Of course is not the same man. You in the other shoe, are unable to see the truth even if it hits you in the face. I do not support your controlled demolition theory and neither John Gold. For the record.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Putómatic brays, "...you should check your facts before you call somebody a liar. People might think you dont [SIC] know how to google [SIC]. Here's what Father Malloy wrote: "The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down."
Tell us more about "facts," goat fucker.
After all, you just cited Father Malloy's speculation as "fact."
FAIL.
"...I rarely claim that a proposition is true. I've tried many times to explain this to you. Apparently the concept is too subtle for your faith-based mind."
Who gives a fuck what a sex predator, college dropout and glue sniffing homosexual who wears women's underwear tried to explain?
You're a proven liar. End of story.
FAIL.
Furthermore, everything you write to this blog is an argument from incredulity.
You're a one trick pony, at best.
Argument from incredulity is used as a rationalization because you have no evidence to substantiate your propaganda.
In fact, argument from incredulity is used to shift the burden of proof.
Since you have no evidence you MUST shift the burden of proof.
And that's why you're a waste of time, as are all Internet trolls.
FAIL.
Father Malloy's speculation is a fact. He said what he said. I said he said it, and he did say it, and I proved that he said it. I didn't say that the fact that he said it proved anything other than that he said what he said. You want to toss it out because it's not proof, but that's because you have the mind of a child.
No, not everything I write to this blog is an argument from incredulity. For the 7 essential mysteries, NIST gives us nothing to be incredulous about.
It doesn't take much evidence to show that NIST lacked the guts to go after the persistent mysteries of the collapses. I have plenty of evidence of shoddy investigations.
Putómatic brays, "Father Malloy's speculation is a fact."
No, speculation is speculation.
There's not one iota of "proof" to substantiate your "molten steel" lie. And your complete FAILURE to produce an assay by a competent chemist to that effect is proof you have nothing but speculation.
FAIL.
All you've managed to "prove" is your inability to pass a formal examination in elementary logic.
You're an idiot.
ButtGale, your confident overstatement of your case is worthy of a believer in alien reptiloids from outer space. Like I said, you have the mind of a child.
I have provided many iotas of evidence for molten steel, jncluding the testimony of 5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain. Your lying Iananity is becoming a bore, and I don't know why the mods allow it.
That's right, goat fucker, post more dumbspam.
Quote mining and speculation are not evidence.
So when do you plan to produce an assay by a competent chemist in order to confirm your "molten steel" speculation?
I know, you'll produce the assay when Hell freezes over, right you pink tutu wearing freak?
FAIL.
Stick to modeling women's underwear, goat fucker, because you're a complete failure at "debate."
FAIL.
Willie, I'm curious. Do you believe that Al Qaeda pulled off 9/11?
I didn't quote mine anybody.
If I did get a chemist to analyze the steel, you'd just move the goal posts and demand that I get the writeup published in Nature.
It's not my job to analyze the molten steel--it's NIST's. That's why we need new investigations. They didn't do it right the first time.
Putómatic brays, "...I didn't quote mine anybody."
False.
For example, you quote mined Dr. Astaneh-Asl.
"...All those who use my quote in this context of conspiracy theories are absolutely wrong and are doing a dis-service to the truth, the victims and their families and the humanity. No one should use that specific quote "molten metal" out of context, to indicate that I have seen molten metal and then use my good name and reputation as a researcher to conclude that there was a conspiracy." -- Dr. Astaneh-Asl.
What's this, goat fucker?
"...When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle. When the columns buckled, the top portion of the building, losing its supports, was pulled down by gravity and dropping on the floors below, pancaking the floors one after another and leading to progressive collapse in an almost perfect vertical direction of the pull of gravity force." -- Dr. Astaneh-Asl, from Design News.
Any more lies for us, goat fucker?
Putómatic brays, "...If I did get a chemist to analyze the steel, you'd just move the goal posts and demand that I get the writeup published in Nature."
That's right, goat fucker, always accuse your detractors of the crimes YOU commit.
And moving the goal post is YOUR specialty, not mine--you scurrilous liar.
Putómatic brays, "...It's not my job to analyze the molten steel--it's NIST's."
It's not possible to "analyze" something that never occurred at Ground Zero.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
What's this, goat fucker?
"...please stop using a phrase "molten steel" from eight years of my work and statements to further your absolutely misguided and baseless conspiracy theories and find another subject for your discussion. You are hurting the victims' families immensely and if you have any humanity you would stop doing so and will not use my name nor the out of context words from my work." -- Dr. Astaneh-Asl
Humanity????????????????
You don't have one shred of humanity in your entire body, goat fucker.
FAIL.
What's this, goat fucker?
You're describing "green" to a blind man. He cannot process the information. Give up.
ButtGale, I didn't quote mine anybody, and I didn't lie. Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center."
I didn't use his statement to further any conspiracy theory. I used it to counter a bunch of liars at ScrewLooseChange who claim there's no evidence of molten steel.
I didn't conclude that there's a conspiracy.
There is much evidence of molten steel at Ground Zero--testimony from 5 PhDs, for starters. You continue to lie about this. It seems you can't learn.
Putómatic brays, "...I didn't quote mine anybody, and I didn't lie. Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS 'I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center.'"
You're moving the goal post, goat fucker.
Didn't you write the following at time stamp 27 December, 2011 19:34?
"...There is no mundane explanation of the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile." -- The goat fucker.
And what about this little gem at time stamp 27 December, 2011 19:34?
"...You have claimed that Dr. Sunder and Dr. Astaneh did not say what they said to NOVA and to PBS. You have claimed there was no molten steel at Ground Zero. You seem to get some kind of kinky thrill out of lying." -- The goat fucker.
And what's this, goat fucker? From time stamp 28 December, 2011 19:12
"...I have provided many iotas of evidence for molten steel, jncluding [SIC] the testimony of 5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain." -- The goat fucker.
Would you like me to continue, Pinocchio?
So, why are you moving the goal post and changing the subject from "molten steel" to "melting of girders"? The girders "melted" as the result of a eutectic reaction, which took place at 1800 degrees F, not 2750 degrees F, and the alleged "melting" penetrated the steel by only 20 microns on average. (See Barnett, Biederman and Sisson).
Of course, you would NEVER move the goal post. Right, asshole?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Obviously, you are citing Dr Astaneh-Asl as "evidence," and you've done so in the past. So give it up, Pinocchio.
And it's clear you're misquoting Dr. Astaneh-Asl, as the following passage makes perfectly clear:
"...All those who use my quote in this context of conspiracy theories are absolutely wrong and are doing a dis-service to the truth, the victims and their families and the humanity. No one should use that specific quote "molten metal" out of context, to indicate that I have seen molten metal [ie., steel] and then use my good name and reputation as a researcher to conclude that there was a conspiracy." -- Dr. Astaneh-Asl.
Again, your "humanity" comes into question.
You're taking advantage of Dr. Astaneh-Asl and deliberately distorting his testimony. He doesn't speak English as a first language. It is obvious that he misspoke when he said "molten steel" to PBS. He meant to say "molten metal," as the aforementioned passage makes perfectly clear. Molten metal, as I've told you before, includes molten aluminum, which melts at a temperature between 800 degrees F and 1184 degrees F--depending on the composition of the alloy. Molten Aluminum was far more likely to be present at Ground Zero than "molten steel."
The goat fucker squeals, "...I didn't conclude that there's a conspiracy."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Stop it, goat fucker, you're killing me!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
FAIL.
The site looks good to me ... In fact the 9/11 truth movement seems in great shape over-all!
Well, it's almost 2012. I wonder if Brian will spend 2012 in the same way he spent the last 10 years: babbling about magic thermite elves and invisible widows, lying about NIST, Dr. Sunder, and Dr. Assanteh-Asl, and squealing and calling people "girls" when he gets mocked for his stupidity.
I guarantee he won't seek professional psychiatric care and won't a better way to spend his life than spamming the internet.
ButtGale, you're not only moving the goal post, you're picking it up and installing it in a whole different game. You're taking a hoop to a hocky game.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." That is an easily verifiable fact which most of you on this board seem reluctant to admit.
Yes, I wrote that there is no mundane explanation of the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile.
And you, unable to reply in any rational way to that challenge, can only respond by implying that saying so is somehow dishonest or unethical. It's not.
The same with telling Ian off about his lies about Dr. Sunder and Dr. Astaneh and the molten steel at Ground Zero. Nothing wrong there.
Same with my statement about the evidence for molten steel, including the testimony of 5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain. Nothing wrong there.
It seems to me that somewhere you got the idea that molten steel was a conspiracy theory. You should give this up. You're not equipped for it. Have you thought about taking up the accordion or growing kale and kohlrabi?
Last time I checked, girders were steel and "melting of girders" by definition means "molten steel". For you to pretend that the steel samples examined by Barnett, Biederman and Sisson is the entire universe of molten steel is ignorant.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl's statement is evidence. For you to deny that it's evidence is dishonest.
I didn't misquote or distory anybody. The quote is quite clear. "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." I didn't use it in the context of any conspiracy theory.
Ian, your claim that I spent the last ten years babbling about magic thermite elves and invisible widows, lying about NIST, Dr. Sunder, and Dr. Assanteh-Asl, and squealing and calling people "girls" is a lie from beginning to end.
Yes, I wrote that there is no mundane explanation of the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile.
Right, but to normal people, there is a mundane explanation. You're a delusional lunatic and liar, and these things listed above are figments of your imagination.
No serious scientists wonder about this stuff. Only a failed janitor who lives with his parents on disability does.
Ian, your claim that I spent the last ten years babbling about magic thermite elves and invisible widows, lying about NIST, Dr. Sunder, and Dr. Assanteh-Asl, and squealing and calling people "girls" is a lie from beginning to end.
See what I mean?
where would you get the idea that I would want to "off" Kevin Barrett and Willie Rodriguez? You make stuff up.
Carol told me your plan to do away with both of them because she said that you were madly in love with her. Also you told Carol that you wee planning something special with her husband.
Willie said there were bombs.
You can't explain how he survived those bombs?
Nobody has debunked my points.
Theories that aren't backed up by evidence isn't "points". Not by a long shot. You have no evidence therefore you have no points.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." That is an easily verifiable fact which most of you on this board seem reluctant to admit.
Then what's stopping you from confirming this with a peer-reviewed journal that proves what he said on PBS?
No peer-reviewed paper = no evidence that they were melted.
And of course, since the Towers wer mainly held up by trusses, how can there be "melting of girders" when the girders were inside the inner column?
Are you assuming that Dr. Astaneh-Asl had xray vision and could see through all 110 floors to see this "melting" process?
The goat fucker squeals, "...Dr. Astaneh-Asl's statement is evidence. For you to deny that it's evidence is dishonest."
No, it's not "evidence," and Dr. Astaneh-Asl told you why it's not "evidence." It's also clear that you have no intention of addressing anything I wrote. Instead you move the goal post and wave away everything I've presented up-thread.
Your use of the term "molten steel" is dishonest and unethical. Dr. Astaneh-Asl made it clear that he meant to say "molten metal," not "molten steel."
Additionally, your use of the term "melted girders," when taken out of context, is equally dishonest and unethical. Eutectic "melting" is not melting, it's erosion or if you prefer corrosion, as Drs. Barnett, Biederman and Sisson made clear. The reaction didn't take place at 2750 degrees F, it took place at ~1800 degrees F.
As a result, it's dishonest and unethical for you to claim the girders "melted" without giving the proper context of the word.
Finally, you have no evidence for the presence of "Molten steel" at Ground Zero. And until you can produce an assay to verify this claim you will continue to have no evidence. END OF STORY.
So yes, your argument is dishonest and unethical. And yes, your argument is based on quote mining. That a lunatic, liar, sex predator and college dropout who wears women's underwear refuses to admit the obvious is beside the point.
FAIL.
Ian, pray tell--how do "normal people" explain the speed of collapse, the symmetry of collapse, the totality of collapse, the pulverization of the concrete, the squibs, the destruction of the persistent lower cores, and the molten steel in the rubble pile?
Those are not figments of my imagination--they are documented in the public record.
Is the explanation like "Uhhh... gravity .... uh.... jet fuel ... uh... Muslim extremists"?
How can a serious scientist fail to wonder about molten steel at Ground Zero when jet fuel can not
melt steel?
ToothlessnALwaysWacko, the hearsay claims of anonymous internet posters (even when they happen to be Will Clark of Johnstown, PA) are worthless garbage.
99% of the people under the impacty zone survived the WTC attack. That Willie was no exception is hardly surprising.
I have repeatedly provided evidence of near-freefall speeds, pulverization of the concrete, the persistence of the lower core, squibs, and molten steel in the rubble. You're blind.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." That is an easily verifiable fact.
The towers were not held up by trusses. The floors were held up by trusses. The floors supported 50 psf. The towers were something like 250,000 tons apiece. The towers were held up by the columns.
ButtGale, Dr. Astaneh-Asl's statement is evidence. For you to deny that it's evidence is dishonest. He said "melting of girders". For you to suggest that this means anything other than molten steel is ridiculous.
Dr. Astaneh said nothing about eutectic melting. Your suggestion that Dr. Astaneh's melting girders were eutectic is evidence-free.
5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain testified to "molten steel" at Ground Zero. Are you calling the president of Notre Dame a liar?
After reading what I put below, its apparent that there was no melted steel @ Ground Zero. Brian, as always, is twisting shit around, quote-mining and telling huge lies.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=abolhassan_astaneh_asl_1
He notes that steel has bent at several connection points that had joined the floors of the WTC to the vertical columns. He describes the connections as being smoothly warped, saying, “If you remember the Salvador Dali paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted—it’s kind of like that.” He adds, “That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot—perhaps around 2,000 degrees.
He finds “severely scorched [steel] members from 40 or so floors below the points of impact [by the planes].” He believes this is the result of the planes having destroyed the elevator walls, thereby allowing burning jet fuel to pour down into the building, igniting fires hundreds of feet below the impact floors.
Other individuals will report seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Center in the weeks and months after 9/11 (see September 12, 2001-February 2002), and data collected by NASA reveals dozens of “hot spots” (some over 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit) at Ground Zero (see September 16-23, 2001). But Thomas Eagar—an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—later comments that the “temperature of the fire at the WTC [on 9/11] was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.”
Yet Astaneh-Asl will later put forward the “tentative” conclusion, “The collapse of the [Twin Towers] was most likely due to the intense fire initiated by the jet fuel of the planes and continued due to burning of the building contents.”
ToothlessnALwaysWacko, the hearsay claims of anonymous internet posters (even when they happen to be Will Clark of Johnstown, PA) are worthless garbage.
Are you that faggot that's stalking WhyAskQuestions on YouTube under the alias "Whyohwhyfools"? If that's you, you're in so much trouble with the Feds.
99% of the people under the impacty zone survived the WTC attack. That Willie was no exception is hardly surprising.
But still, if there were bombs on Level 2 Basement, Willie would be dead, right? But he's alive and well and living life, right?
I have repeatedly provided evidence of near-freefall speeds, pulverization of the concrete, the persistence of the lower core, squibs, and molten steel in the rubble. You're blind.
And yet no peer-reviewed jorunal to confirm this?
The towers were not held up by trusses. The floors were held up by trusses.
Right, and how can there be melting of girders if the floors had only trusses holding them up? Explain that one shithead.
The towers were held up by the columns.
Right, the outter coulmns were held up by the truss floor pans though and not by these girders you mention.
5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain testified to "molten steel" at Ground Zero. Are you calling the president of Notre Dame a liar?
How can a friar of religion get in the way of science? I thought the Vatican got away from science.
ToothlessnAlwaysWacko, there were girders in the core and some people believe there were girders outside of the core on selected floors.
If you want science, look at the other 4 PhDs: Dr. Ghoniem, a professor of mechanical engineering at MIT; Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at Berkeley; Dr. Glanz, with a PhD in astrophysics; and Dr.Alison Geyh, who earned her PhD in physical organic chemistry at Brandeis University and did postdoctoral work at Harvard.
So how's that argument from incredulity thing working out for you?
Dr. Astaneh-Asl's findings from 2006:
When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle. When the columns buckled, the top portion of the building, losing its supports, was pulled down by gravity and dropping on the floors below, pancaking the floors one after another and leading to progressive collapse in an almost perfect vertical direction of the pull of gravity force.
No mention of "molten steel".
Since Dr. Astaneh-Asl is talking about the temperatures, he's not looking for melting of he steel, he's looking for deformation of the steel from long exposure to the fires. Explosives can't cause steel to pool into molten steel nor can tey cause steel to bend like they did.
Brian has lost big time. Now the question is will he backpedal like Alex Jones? A: Yes, he will.
Yes, Brian, I know about the NOVA and PBS interviews, but without a peer-reviewed journal you've got nothing to prove. So do yourself a favor, STFU.
there were girders in the core and some people believe there were girders outside of the core on selected floors.
I've seen those blueprints and I've studied them through and through and found no girders outside the core. So obviously you're lying in order to make you look like you're intelligent. Well, you're not in this case.
So how's that argument from incredulity thing working out for you?
Taking a debunker statement and making it your own? Wow, I've never seen anyone like you hit rock bottom before.
Those are not figments of my imagination--they are documented in the public record.
They're all figments of your imagination, Brian, They're what we'd expect from a worthless liar and failed janitor who wears women's underwear, washes his hair with soap (no wonder your haircut is so terrible!), believes in invisible widows, and was expelled from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet.
How can a serious scientist fail to wonder about molten steel at Ground Zero when jet fuel can not melt steel?
A serious scientist would know that there was no molten steel at the site because he/she is not a worthless liar and failed janitor who wears women's underwear, washes his hair with soap (no wonder your haircut is so terrible!), believes in invisible widows, and was expelled from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet.
I have repeatedly provided evidence of near-freefall speeds, pulverization of the concrete, the persistence of the lower core, squibs, and molten steel in the rubble. You're blind.
No, you've repeatedly provided evidence that you're a delusional lunatic and liar.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." That is an easily verifiable fact.
See what I mean? This is not evidence. It's the delusions of a failed janitor and liar who believes in magic thermite elves.
5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain testified to "molten steel" at Ground Zero. Are you calling the president of Notre Dame a liar?
No, we're calling you a liar. We're also calling you a lunatic, a pervert, a failed janitor, and a believer in modified attack baboons.
If you want science, look at the other 4 PhDs: Dr. Ghoniem, a professor of mechanical engineering at MIT; Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at Berkeley; Dr. Glanz, with a PhD in astrophysics; and Dr.Alison Geyh, who earned her PhD in physical organic chemistry at Brandeis University and did postdoctoral work at Harvard.
None of them saw molten steel. You can squeal and squeal and squeal about it all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.
Also, it's a fact that you're a liar who sniffs glue and wears women's underwear and lives on disability with your parents.
And it's a fact that the widows will never have their questions answered. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
Ian,
I can act like Brian too.
Me as Brian: "I believe that King Kong destroyed the WTCs'."
Bystander: "It was a movie that you saw with Jeff Bridges in it. It's not real."
Me as Brian: "You're lying, there's video evidence of Bigfoot in the Patterson/Gimlin film. King Kong is real."
Bystander: "You're a loon, ya know that?"
Me as Brian: "You're a shill."
See, even I can act like a paranoid nutcase without even thinking about it.
I like what Thomas Eagar said:
Thomas Eagar—an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—later comments that the “temperature of the fire at the WTC [on 9/11] was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel."
So in Brians world Thomas Eagar is "lying".
The goat fucker lies, "...Dr. Astaneh said nothing about eutectic melting. Your suggestion that Dr. Astaneh's melting girders were eutectic is evidence-free."
False.
Once again, you deliberately twist my argument beyond recognition, attack the straw man you've created, and then declare my argument "ridiculous."
Is it any wonder you're a college dropout, Mr. "scientific reputation"?
You've also demonstrated your inability to "debate." In fact, you don't "debate" at all. You create straw man arguments and attack the caricature of your detractor's argument.
If you would actually address what I've written, you would know that my argument, as concerns the "melted girders," was confirmed by Drs. Barnett, Biederman and Sisson. Dr. Astaneh-Asl, moreover, never performed a detailed analysis of the "melted girders." So you've not only managed to distort his testimony, you cite irrelevant, unverified testimony as well.
As Drs. Barnett, Biederman and Sisson pointed out, the "melted girders" (there were only two "melted girders" collected at Ground Zero) underwent a eutectic reaction at ~1800 degrees F. As I've pointed out in the past, 1800 degrees F is nowhere near the melting point of structural steel (2750 degrees F). So for you to claim "molten steel" was present at Ground Zero based on the non-evidence you've presented is another prime example of the unethical, unscientific and dishonest bilge we've come to expect from you, goat fucker.
The goat fucker squeals, "...Dr. Astaneh-Asl's statement is evidence."
No, it's not evidence. It's a deliberate, willful distortion of Dr. Astaneh-Asl's testimony on your part, as was proven up-thread at time stamp 29 December, 2011 01:10.
FAIL.
Checkmate on Brian.
Come one Brian, confirm those NOVA and PBS interviews with a peer-reviewed journal.
You had 10 years to show this journal. Show it now.
Brian, I'm tired of pointlessly going over this stuff. Let's talk about something else.
What was your favorite record of 2011? I still would go with "Nine Types of Light" by TV on the Radio, but the new Black Keys record is fantastic as well.
I think Brian is trying to tell us that some people (or experts) don't agree that the scientific integerity of the NIST report is solid about saying that there was "molten steel" found in the debris pile.
However alot of the experts do agree on one thing: That the fires caused deformations in the exposed steel where the planes impacts blasted away the fire proofing and caused the buildings to collapse by fire brought on when the jet fuel ignited office furniture that burned for nearly an hour.
So, Brian, hows your butt doing today? Does it hurt??
NOTE:
"...A section of an A36 wide flange beam retrieved from the collapsed World Trade Center Building 7 was examined to determine changes in the steel microstructure as a result of the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001...Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1,000ºC, forming the eutectic liquid by a process similar to making a "blacksmith’s weld" in a hand forge." -- J.R. Barnett, R.R. Biederman, and R.D. Sisson, Jr.
So much for "melted girders."
I like how Brian thinks that Willie Rodriguez was on the 39th floor at the same time he was on Level 2 in the basement. And that there were explosives placed right where Willie was standing and somehow Willie made it out alive.
Brian sure does like to stretch the truth and make up all kinds of shit. But what's a paranoid idiot to do around the holidays?
GB, good post. Confirms there wasn't "melted steel".
NOTE:
Next, the goat fucker will squeal and try to tell us that gypsum (the source of the sulfur) is "inert," however, this assertion is false. Gypsum (CaSO4) can be made to release its SO2. The following reactions are good examples of the phenomenon:
[1] In the presence of carbon monoxide at a temperature of 1000 degrees C:
CaSO4 + CO -> CaO + CO2 + SO2
[2] And when the molten aluminum reacts with the gypsum:
3CaSO4 + 2Al -> Al2O3 + 3CaO + 3SO2
Thus, we can see that the conditions necessary to cause the gypsum to release it SO2, thereby initiating the sulfidation attack, were present in the conflagration.
So Drs. Barnett, Biederman and Sisson are correct.
So much for "melted girders."
You're absolutely right GB.
I find it hard to believe that Brian would throw out all logic and knowledge so he can rant and rave like a God damn lunatic all day long and he's only 50+ yrs. old.
I guess he didn't finish school long enough to know any better.
I might be 32 yrs. old, but I know I'm smarter than some hick that looks like a drugged out actor look-a-like (Christopher Llyod) wannabe resercher.
Brian told me that his butt hurts. I wonder why that is? LMAO!
ToothlessnAlwaysWacko, Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World TRade Center." That's a fact.
The floors of the WTC were an acre in size. Your belief that a bomb would kill everybody on a floor is absurd.
The blueprints you have seen are architectural drawings and not structural drawings. They do not provide an accurate rendition of floor framing.
I have repeatedly provided evidence of near-freefall speeds, pulverization of the concrete, the persistence of the lower core, squibs, and molten steel in the rubble. You're blind.
Dr. Astaneh-Asl told PBS "I saw melting of girders at World Trade Center." That is an easily verifiable fact.
5 PhDs and a FDNY Captain testified to "molten steel" at Ground Zero. Are you calling the president of Notre Dame a liar?
ToothlessnAlwaysWacko, what you're missing is that the fact that the fires were not capable of melting steel does not mean there was no melted steel.
ButtGale, Dr. Astaneh-Asl doesn't need an elemental analysis. A melted girder is by definition melted steel. You have not a shred of evidence that the sample tested by Dr. Sisson et al. was the one Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw.
Ian, "Nine Types of Light" seems to be highly produced and unintelligent--like bronzed turds.
ToothlessnAlwaysWrong, I never said that Willie Rodriguez was on the 39th floor at the same time he was on Level 2 in the basement. I never said there were explosives placed right where Willie was standing. I never said there were explosives anywhere. Willie did.
I like how you use the logic "Lenny used to live in Kentucky and therefore Lenny never lived in Japan, because you can't be two places at the same time."
ButtGale, gypsum is inert. That's why they use it for fireproofing. Jonathan Cole burned some steel with powdered gypsum and aluminum scrap for three days. The steel was not damaged in the least.
Where are you going to get temperatures of 1000 C? If there's CO that means there's bad combustion. As usual you don't know what you're talking about.
Ian, "Nine Types of Light" seems to be highly produced and unintelligent--like bronzed turds.
So you prefer the Black Keys record? Or do you have a different record in mind when you think of the best record of 2011?
Also, Brian, where is your favorite vacation spot in California? I'm a life-long east coast resident, but I've been to CA many times and I feel like I've seen a lot of it, but I'm still missing a few things.
Vacation? What's that?
Vacation? What's that?
It's something that normal people with jobs do when they get a chance. This might surprise you, Brian, but not everyone is as obsessed with posting the same junk on the internet over and over again, 365 days a year.
Anyway, I was in California twice this past summer. I was in San Diego for a friend's wedding (nice city, reminded me more of San Francisco than LA), and then I did a road trip vacation that started in Seattle but ended in 'Frisco. I went through Humboldt Redwoods country, did lunch in Napa, and some wine tasting in Livermore.
Ever been up to Redwoods country, Brian?
Ian, I have redwoods in my yard, and have been to all the redwood country there is--north, south, west, and east. I lived for months in the redwoods in Mendocino County. Yes, I've been to the redwood country.
I liked Humboldt Redwoods State Park better than the ones further north by Crescent City. They seemed taller and more impressive, and the fog didn't roll in as early at night, so you could sit out and watch the stars while camping.
See Brian, isn't this a lot better that talking about 9/11?
Certainly it's better than lying about 9/11, which is an absurd way for you to spend your energies.
Goat fucker,
I don't see any evidence to support your outlandish bullshit--you scurrilous liar.
All I see is another effort to place the burden of proof on your detractors.
FAIL.
I supported my argument with expert testimony. You, on the other hand, give us nothing but your opinion and arguments from incredulity--which is nothing more than another futile effort to shift the burden of proof to your detractors.
FAIL.
This time, try to support your "argument" with something other than your opinion and arguments from incredulity.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
ButtGale, I have supported my points with testimony from 6 PhDs.
You are simply making empty claims, as usual.
Bullshit.
Where's your evidence, goat fucker?
Nay-saying and hand waving are NOT evidence.
Let's start with this lie:
"...If there's CO that means there's bad combustion." -- The goat fucker.
Prove it, asshole.
And be careful, goat fucker, because I'm waiting to pounce on you--you scurrilous liar.
ButtGale, that you don't know that CO is only produced in oxygen-starved, and hence, low-temperature, fires only shows that you don't know what you're talking about.
Your wikipedia chemistry only fools the simple-minded, like WAQo and MGF.
That's not evidence, goat fucker, it's your opinion and an evasion.
Produce expert testimony to support your bullshit or you stand exposed, once again, as a liar.
FAIL.
"Your wikipedia chemistry only fools the simple-minded, like WAQo and MGF."
That's all you have left?
Medication is not a substitute for theropy, Brian, have you gone back to see your shrink? There are new surgical procedures which might help you to lead a normal life again.
Goat fucker,
All I hear are
*crickets*
*crickets*
*crickets*
What's this, goat fucker?
This is expert testimony, which proves, once again, that you're lying and misleading the reader.
"...The pyrolysis of wood in highly vitiated, high temperature environment can lead to the production of very high concentrations of CO in enclosure fires." -- NIST, Carbon Monoxide Formation in Fires by High Temperature Anaerobic Wood Pyrolysis.
Thus, fire produces CO in hydrocarbon-rich environments.
The World Trade Center towers, of course, were--by definition--hydrocarbon-rich environments (for example, the towers were crammed with thousands of wooden desks).
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"I didn't say there were bombs in the towers. I don't know if there were. Willie said there were."
Yes, you repeatedly say there were explosives AND incindiaries inside all three buildings.
Willie did not. Willie initially thought the jet fuel errupting through the elevator shart in the basement was cause by explosives.
He has recanted this statement multiple times. This speaks to his overall honesty.
You consistantly ignore this which speaks to your mental illness, dishonesty, and pointless bullying.
"For the 7 essential mysteries, NIST gives us nothing to be incredulous about.It doesn't take much evidence to show that NIST lacked the guts to go after the persistent mysteries of the collapses."
NIST didn't need to explain the obvious, science isn't a "lowest common denominator" end producer, so stupid people like you are out of luck.
" I have plenty of evidence of shoddy investigations."
No you don't.
Thanks for your nice description. I think it should be helpful for everyone. I like it.
ButtGale, anybody with any sense knows CO means oxygen-starvation. Your ignorance is not my fault. Maybe if you'd stop pretending to knowledge you don't have you wouldn't make such a fool of yourself.
Your pyrolysis straw only shows that you get your high temps only by assuming high temps.
MGF, thanks for recommending "theropy". That's rich.
Your claim that I repeatedly say there were explosives AND incindiaries inside all three buildings is a lie.
Willie's lawsuit said there were explosives in the basement, and smaller charges elsewhere. Any fool can check it. He can recant the statement until he's blue in the face--but that won't change the fact that he made it. This speaks to his overall honesty.
NIST did need to explain the obvious disconnect between their claims and the laws of physics. Your belief that I am intellectually deficient is without any basis in fact, but is merely your own defense mechanism.
Ian, I don't have a best album yet. I usually download the ones mentioned on the best of lists at the end of each year.
But best song of 2011 has got to be Midnight City by M83. Listen to it every day.
The goat fucker brays, "...anybody with any sense knows CO means oxygen-starvation."
Still trying to pass off the lying opinion of a college dropout, sex predator, and science illiterate who wears women's underwear as "expert testimony," goat fucker?
Maybe the little old ladies who you sexually assault in Golden Gate Park are impressed by such transparent nonsense, but I'm not impressed at all--you shiny pated pervert.
EPIC FAIL.
Try again, goat fucker, and this time I want expert testimony, not hand waving, nay-saying and opinion (read, bald-faced lies).
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Brian, have you ever been up to Washington and Oregon? I like California and all, but if I were ever to move to the west coast, I'd rather live in Seattle or Portland. I know, I know, the gloomy weather and all, but the summers in Seattle are wonderful (especially compared to the disgusting heat and humidity in New York). Plus, all the mountains and forests and lakes...what perfect weather for hiking around Mt. Rainier.
ButtGale, if you had any interest in truth you would find that it is much easier to type "carbon monoxide" and "oxygen deprived" into google and look up what every oil-change monkey in the world already knows than it is to type your stinkbreeze out.
Ian, it's all good. A little slow, maybe, some of those places--but slow can be good. Who's got time for good books otherwise?
I've hung around UW and UO both. They're nice, but they ain't Berkeley. Suit yourself.
"Your claim that I repeatedly say there were explosives AND incindiaries inside all three buildings is a lie."
Nope. We've got years of your posts where you argue there were until you're blue in the face.
"Willie's lawsuit said there were explosives in the basement, and smaller charges elsewhere. Any fool can check it. He can recant the statement until he's blue in the face--but that won't change the fact that he made it. This speaks to his overall honesty."
It changes everything. Willie states he was victimized by a lawyer who tacked on all kinds of 9/11 troofer bullshit to his case.
This is a fact.
"NIST did need to explain the obvious disconnect between their claims and the laws of physics."
Nope. Gravity seemed to work just fine (unfortunately) on 9/11.
"Your belief that I am intellectually deficient is without any basis in fact, but is merely your own defense mechanism."
No.
Your mental illness is on full display with every post you make. Your inability to reason, to read honestly, keep a focused arguement, and your constant contradiction of your own statements is rampent.
Worse, you claim to be educated yet you refuse to post your bonafides. This is suspect as you claim anyone with a PhD is automatically qualified to discuss engineering, and physics when after a year in an actual college it is clear PhDs aren't qualified to discus anthing other than their speciality.
Your standard refrain is "Learn to Google". No intellectual say this. Retards do.
http://911truth.org/ #investigate911
MGF, you seem to have some difficulty distinguishing between
"Michelle Bachmann is an idiot" and "Vote for Obama".
I have never argued that there were explosives or incendiaries used. I have argued against absurd claims that there is no evidence of explosives or incendiaries. There is evidence consistent with explosives and incendiaries that none of you can explain. You prefer to lie about it.
Willie's lawsuit said there were explosives in the basement, and smaller charges elsewhere. He put his name on the lawsuit. In many venues, the necessary verification process would have involved swearing that the allegations within the lawsuit were true.
Nobody says gravity didn't work just fine. The law of gravity is not the only law of physics. The building did not work just fine. Near-freefall collapse violates the first law of thermodynamics.
If you expect me to take your criticisms of my "arguement" seriously, perhaps you should learn to spell the word. I don't believe your claims that you've had three years of college.
When did I say I was educated? I never said anything so stupid as to claim that anybody with a PhD is automatically qualified to discuss engineering and physics. Some real dumb people are PhDs--Kevin Barrett, for instance.
"Learn to Google" is hardly my standard refrain. But it's good advice to people who display their ignorance so carelessly that it's obvious that they don't know how.
So Brian, who is your pick to win the Superbowl? With all due respect for the 49ers, I expect an epic NFC championship between New Orleans and Green Bay and the winner of that game to stomp on Baltimore.
Goat fucker,
I still don't see any evidence to support your "If there's CO that means there's bad combustion" lie.
Why is that, goat fucker?
Perhaps you should give up the 9/11 conspiracy crap and stick to waving your wand at little old ladies in Golden Gate Park?
Once again, you FAIL, Putómatic
Buttgale, it's axiomatic to anyone who ever heard of stiochiometry.
Goat fucker,
Stoichiometry is freshman-level chemistry--which means you flunked the course. So don't throw around words you don't understand.
You've provided not one word of substantiation in support of your bogus "If there's CO that means there's bad combustion" assertion.
Why is that, goat fucker?
The answer is simple: You don't have a credible source. After all, the troofer myths you parrot ad nauseum can't be substantiated.
FAIL.
In case you're wondering, goat fucker, "I said so" isn't "science." And your continued refusal to substantiate the "bad combustion" claim proves that you don't have a shred of evidence to support your argument.
FACT: The "melted girders" didn't melt at all. The "melted girders" eroded. The erosion was the result of a eutectic reaction of iron oxide and iron sulfide. The eutectic reaction occurred at 1,000 degrees C (1832 degrees F), which simply isn't hot enough to melt steel.
FACT: Gypsum (CaSO4) does release its SO2 when in the presence of carbon monoxide at a temperature of 1000 degrees C. The WTC fires produced very high concentrations of CO (carbon monoxide) as would any hydrocarbon-rich environment.
CaSO4 + CO -> CaO + CO2 + SO2
There is no question that the conditions necessary to cause the gypsum to release its SO2 were present in the conflagration.
Thus, the sulfidation attack on the A36 structural steel was inevitable.
So until you can learn to cite something other than your worthless opinion, long-ago debunked "truther" myths, and utterly pointless hand waving or nay-saying, YOU LOSE.
So do you have anything more than the insipid, 100% fact-free nonsense you've found at idiotic 9/11 conspiracy websites, Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation"?
Goat fucker--parrot for 9/11 troof.
Goat fucker want a cracker?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFool, you haven't proven your claim that the post-collapse fires produced lots of CO. I never heard of any of the rescue workers complaining about CO.
Carbon monoxide, as any fool knows, is produced by combustion with insufficient oxygen.
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/co/coh.htm
You are deliberately, erroneously, and dishonestly conflating the reports of melted steel with the "eroded" steel reported by the WPI Profs when it is not the same steel at all.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you make up your "facts".
The goat fucker brays, "...Carbon monoxide, as any fool knows, is produced by combustion with insufficient oxygen."
Citing the obvious does not cast doubt on NIST's conclusion--and I quote: "...The pyrolysis of wood in highly vitiated, high temperature environment can lead to the production of very high concentrations of CO in enclosure fires."
Sure, if you're burning nothing but pure oxygen the product will be carbon dioxide (CO2); however, air is another matter. When air is introduced, it's necessary to heat oxygen molecules and nitrogen molecules. So instead of reaching a temperature of 2,750 to 3,200 degrees C, as would be the case in the presence of pure oxygen, a hydrocarbon-rich environment produces a temperature of ~1,000 degrees C (1832 degrees F)--which is just the temperature we need for the iron oxide and iron sulfide eutectic reaction to proceed.
In fact, your source contradicts your argument.
"...Carbon monoxide is also formed as a pollutant when hydrocarbon fuels (natural gas, petrol, diesel) are burned." -- Dr. Mike Thompson, Carbon Monoxide.
Obviously, carbon monoxide is the product of hydrocarbon-rich fire.
Thus, your own source confirms my argument. And, once again, we see that you're not above misrepresenting your source. Should we expect anything less from a proven liar? Probably not.
Is it any wonder that you're so reluctant to produce evidence to substantiate your idiotic assertions when all you have are blatant dishonesty and pseudo-science?
Probably not.
The goat fucker brays, "...You are deliberately, erroneously, and dishonestly conflating the reports of melted steel with the "eroded" steel reported by the WPI Profs when it is not the same steel at all."
That's right, goat fucker, accuse your opponent of the crimes YOU commit, while failing to produce one iota of evidence to substantiate your assertions.
Where have we seen this before? Oh, that's right! That would be every comment you make to SLC. My bad.
Yep, you should stick to waving your wand at little old ladies in Golden Gate Park.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
You haven't shown that there's a vitiated environment. You are frantically scouring the internet for anomalies, Mr. Desperate Defense Attorney. Why do you do this? Why are you afraid of nrew investigations? What do you think they would find? What are you trying to hide?
Your cut-and-paste lectures about pure oxygen environments are just typical BubbleGear VaporShit.
Squeal, squeal, squeal.
I didn't cut-and-paste anything, goat fucker. Unlike you, I know what I'm talking about. You, on the other hand, argue not from the real World, but from an idealized environment (pure oxygen, as opposed to air).
For example, your own source contradicts your argument. Fire, in a hydrocarbon-rich environment like the WTC towers, will produce copious volumes of CO (carbon monoxide).
And, as usual, you're tossing out an avalanche of squealspam in order to bury the truth: You deliberately misrepresented your source, as I proved above.
Face it, goat fucker, you can't substantiate your argument because troofer myths and pseudo-science can't be substantiated.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
The goat fucker brays, "...You haven't shown that there's a vitiated environment."
Vitiate means mar, impair, spoil, deflower or damage.
So what were you babbling about, goat fucker?
Cretin.
So you wrote that irrelevant lecture about pure oxygen environments yourself? That really proves you're an idiot. reads up on the concept of the
"limiting reagent".
If there was CO, then the fire was oxygen-starved and thus of low temperatures, thus no 1000 degree CO. None of the NIST steel showed heating to 1000 degrees. None of it even showed exposure to 600 degrees for more than 15 minutes. Your theoretical perfect storm for decomposition of gypsum thus dis not exist, and you're talking through your hat. Your tottering tower of alphabet soup collapses.
"I have never argued that there were explosives or incendiaries used. I have argued against absurd claims that there is no evidence of explosives or incendiaries. There is evidence consistent with explosives and incendiaries that none of you can explain. "
...and there you go contradicting yourself.
You and your troofer butt-buddies imply there is evidence citing the RJ Lee report, yet the report itself draws no such conclusions because in truth the is no evidence of explosives no incindieries.
No explosions are heard, to the troofers went looking for thermite because thermite is quiet. No one saw thermite in use on 9/11, and nobody saw evidence of its use in the pile at Ground Zero.
Why?
Because the explosives needed to bring down each structure would have weighed over 2000lbs, requiring a minimum safe distance of 500 yards, and this puts all of the surving first responders within the kill-zone of the blast. The explosions would have been visibly larger than the impact-explosions of the two jets.
Thermite just isn't used. Period. It's not even in the Ranger Handbook for demolition charges.
"When did I say I was educated? I never said anything so stupid as to claim that anybody with a PhD is automatically qualified to discuss engineering and physics. Some real dumb people are PhDs--Kevin Barrett, for instance."
You wave your mythical education over Guitar Bill all the time. You throw PhDs in our face in every other post you make.
Carol likes Kevin, yet thinks you're a sad little man, and this fact burns you up.
""Learn to Google" is hardly my standard refrain. But it's good advice to people who display their ignorance so carelessly that it's obvious that they don't know how."
It's your mantra.
They did teach us to google in Marine Biology. They taught us to trust only suffixes with .edu when citing research, and to use academic journals where possible (which is always possible at a college/university library). Citing a troofer website wouldn't cut it in the real world (where the debunker cult HQ is located).
"Willie's lawsuit said there were explosives in the basement, and smaller charges elsewhere. He put his name on the lawsuit. In many venues, the necessary verification process would have involved swearing that the allegations within the lawsuit were true."
Yet they weren't were they. Willie is a regular guy, he was taken advantage of by a scumb bag lawyer. It's not the first time and not the last time that's happened. Willie hasn't hidden from the world, and will tell anyone who asks the explosives allegations were wrong.
In fact Willie hasn't hidden from anything in his life. When he makes a mistake he's the first one to say so. He's an honest man.
Unlike you
Contradicting yourself again and citing the NIST Report, cretin?
Only 200 pieces of structural steel were collected from Ground Zero and subjected to analysis. Citing a small sample of steel and then claiming "[n]one of it even showed exposure to 600 degrees for more than 15 minutes" is more pseudo-scientific bilge.
The maximum flame temperature of burning hydrocarbons in air is 1,000-1,100 degrees C, as was pointed out by NIST.
You have not proven that 600 degrees C was the highest temperature obtained by the structural steel. Nor have you proven any of the pseudo-scientific bilge you've scribbled to SLC.
The only thing you've managed to prove is that you're not above deliberately misrepresenting your source.
Yep, you should stick to waving your wand at little old ladies in Golden Gate Park.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
MGF, it seems that you don't understand that pointing out that there is evidence for something is not arguing that the something exists. Truth is not a football game. There are always more than two sides.
The RJ Lee report cites the presence of iron microspheres that have not been explained.
Dozens of witnesses reported explosions, including Chief Albert Turi. Your claim that no explosions were heard is ignorant and absurd. Why would you expect people to see thermite used in the elevator shafts, or inside hollow columns? People saw evidence of molten steel consistent with the use of thermite. You make stuff up.
DO you think 2000 pounds is a lot of stuff? That's just 21 sacks of cement.
Thermite was used to bring down two 600-foot towers in 1935.
I wave ButtGale's ignorance in his face every time. I don't believe his claims about his education any more than I believe yours.
UtterFail, nice try to blame your lack of evidence for 1000 C temps on me. Followed by your usual dataspam.
What makes you think I'm out to prove something? Why would I want to do that?
The goat fucker brays, "...nice try to blame your lack of evidence for 1000 C temps on me. Followed by your usual dataspam."
False. The NIST Report confirms the temperature reached 1,000 degrees C.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
"Thermite was used to bring down two 600-foot towers in 1935. "
It was used ONCE. Why? Because it isn't as effective as explosives.
Way to go, drop out.
"Dozens of witnesses reported explosions, including Chief Albert Turi. Your claim that no explosions were heard is ignorant and absurd. "
The Chief heard what he "thought" were explosions. Ask him today and he'll tell you it was the floors slamming into eachother.
Quote-mining doesn't make it real.
"The RJ Lee report cites the presence of iron microspheres that have not been explained."
They don't require explaination. How many other plane-crash-into-highrise investigations has RJ Lee done? They didn't care because because they understood the source.
Only the troofers think they've found something.
"
DO you think 2000 pounds is a lot of stuff? That's just 21 sacks of cement."
M118 is not cement. Dumbass.
That's 2000lbs in each building.
"MGF, it seems that you don't understand that pointing out that there is evidence for something is not arguing that the something exists."
Actually pointing out evidence is how you argue something exists. Google Rene' Descartes sometime, retard. You'd like him, he's a long winded ass too.
"Truth is not a football game. There are always more than two sides."
You should write fortune cookies for dipshits.
"wave ButtGale's ignorance in his face every time. I don't believe his claims about his education any more than I believe yours."
Obviously it shouldn't matter what you believe as you are an idiot.
The goat fucker brays, "...I wave ButtGale's ignorance in his face every time. I don't believe his claims about his education any more than I believe yours."
Yeah, you're killing me, goat fucker.
I guess that's why you misrepresented your source, and completely FAILED to substantiate your argument.
Yeah, you're killing me, goat fucker.
And given that you don't know the meaning of the word vitiate, you're hardly in a position to question anyone's academic credentials--you cretin.
Yep, you should stick to waving your wand at little old ladies in Golden Gate Park.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
This thread is a snooze fest of misquotes.
Metal melts = 2500
Max Carbon temp = 1000
NIST REPORT =
NIST says:
"The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes."
(p. 183/p. 233 of the .pdf)
and
"Jet fuel sprayed onto the surfaces of typical office workstations burned away within a few minutes."
(p. 184)
Dolp!
Yawn...
NIST reported maximum temperatures of about 1,000 degrees C (1,832 degrees F) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).
Doh!
"...Metal melts = 2500"
No, "metal" is not the proper term. And structural steel melts at 2750 degrees F, not "2500".
That's quite a "snooze fest of misquotes," genius.
To return to the OP--it's over all right. The debunkers are toast.
To return to the OP--it's over all right. The debunkers are toast.
So we should expect indictments against the Bush administration and its various collaborators any day now, right? I mean, after 10+ years, you should have a meticulously detailed and damning report on how the WTC towers were destroyed, and by whom.
I mean, comments like "the debunkers are toast" couldn't just be the squealing of an unemployed janitor who does nothing but spam the internet all day, could it?
Post a Comment
<< Home