hot enough

That is patently false and you know it. Yet you still deny reality, you deny science, you are the ultimate anti-truther. "exponder" isn't even a word. You have lied about being a pilot too. ======================= The Best Evidence The evidence below shows that changes to the transponder data broadcast by the four aircraft on 9/11 were not necessarily caused by hijackers: The 9/11 Commission Report provides no evidence to show that hijackers manually deactivated three transponders to cause the loss of ATC data. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) 9/11 flight studies make no reference dealing with why the transponder signals for these flights were lost. Transponder activity is not listed among the Flight Data Recorder mandatory parameters and therefore cannot be established through FDR recordings. [9] A 2001 Christian Science Monitor story reporting how Flight 11’s transponder was turned off was speculative: “Flight 11’s transponder had stopped working. It was no longer sending a radar pulse … . Still, the controllers hoped that the plane simply had an electrical problem … .The controller speculates that the hijacker may have deliberately deactivated the plane’s transponder … .” [10] In the 2014 disappearance of Malaysian Flight MH 370, news stories overlooked what should have been obvious evidence if proof of manual deactivation were available. For example: “Kit Darby, a longtime pilot, said Tuesday it was not clear whether the transponder was turned off intentionally.” [11] Conclusion No good evidence has been provided to support the official claims that hijackers manually deactivated or altered the operation of the transponders aboard the 9/11 flights. Instead, there is a spectrum of evidence to question the reality of the hijackers as having been on the planes at all. [12] Accordingly, the transponder claims should not serve as supporting evidence for the alleged takeovers of the 9/11 flights by the accused or even as evidence of their presence aboard the flight decks of these aircraft. http://www.consensus911.org/point-flt-3/ ===================== Provide your source.

Betsy is a christian, being christian.

Many!!!! Have you any evidence that proves the hijackers crashed the planes into the towers? All the following prove that the USGOCT is impossible. 1. Molten steel, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, iron microspheres. 2. Nanothermite 3. Free fall for WTC 7. 4. Accelerating collapses for the twin towers. 5. ...

Have you a source that proves the hijackers crashed the planes into the towers? Fabulous usual Omni sourcing on that one! When are you going to address the wrong engine for the WTC2 plane landing on Murray Street? When are you going to describe evidence that shows the planes that the USGOCT describes are the planes that hit the towers?

No time and date stamps, Omni. ============================= The Official Account The 9/11 Commission Report holds that four airplanes (American Airlines flights 11 and 77, and United Airlines flights 93 and 175) were hijacked on 9/11. [1] The Best Evidence Pilots are trained to “squawk” the universal hijack code (7500) [2] on a transponder if they receive evidence of an attempted hijacking, thereby notifying FAA controllers on the ground. But leading newspapers and the 9/11 Commission pointed out that FAA controllers were not notified. [3] A CNN story said that pilots are trained to send the hijack code “if possible.” [4] But entering the code takes only two or three seconds, whereas it took hijackers, according to the official story, more than 30 seconds to break into the pilots’ cabin of Flight 93. [5] The fact that not one of the eight pilots performed this required action casts serious doubt on the hijacker story. [6]

Any sentient human with half a functioning brain knows that such a source can't exist, Omni. When are you going to address the wrong engine for the WTC2 plane landing on Murray Street? When are you going to describe evidence that shows the planes that the USGOCT describes are the planes that hit the towers?

1) That was tongue in cheek. What goalposts have been moved [not changed]? 2) Talk about moving the goalposts. It is not my claim, it is the science of 9 top of their field scientists. I told you already, there has been no peer review of the Harrit et al scientific paper by any scientists for the USGOCT. That means it is the established science. How does US government/military proprietary nanothermite come to be at WTC, melting structural steel in the twin towers and WTC7? 3) You have made many crazy claims. You deny all manner of scientific impossibilities to offer your support to a crazy conspiracy theory that has no evidence to support it. How did the "hijackers" melt steel, molybdenum 4700F, vaporize lead 3,180F, deliver the nanothermate to the twin towers AND WTC7?!! Have you found any videos/pictures of the hijackers? How about DNA? Did you know that the phone calls to Ted Olson from his wife never occurred? That's where the hijackers with box cutters myth came from. All the phone calls were fakes. Can you explain to us how a "hijacker" passport made it out of the "jet" that hit WTC1 unsinged and floated to the sidewalk? Can you explain how this passport story changed when it wasn't convincing enough? Can you explain how the engine that flew out of WTC2 and landed on Murray Street was not the kind of engine used in the 767-200? Yet that is the plane that the USGOCT says flew into WTC2.

Don't worry, Omni, they are coming. But you, the guy who will never pony up to support any of your fabrications really should not be pointing fingers. Would you agree that western media is one huge propaganda mill? How could you guys not know about these things? A phucking 1/4 century and none of you know. If that was Russia, China, Iran, ... you would never hear the end of it.

Angus blows it big time and then disappears for a number of pages until he figures things have blown over. In post ID#339, you made the fatuous statement that the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were not illegal invasions, offering as your "proof" the nonsense below. Then you fled, Angus Themopyle, piling onto your little scooter and fleeing. I made a very simple request and you not only refuse to answer it, you ran away. Why is that?

You know exactly why, and yet you pretend you don't. You folks make a mockery of honesty. Now there are three people who have never heard of the US's terrorism conviction or the UNGA condemnation.

Rue: 6-that no documented evidence exists to conclude that molten steel was found and in fact the eye witness reports from workers proved to be false as to what they thought they found hot enough: There is a great deal of documented eyewitnesses to huge volumes of molten steel, flowing like rivers, until February 2002. Why was all the millions of gallons of water needed to cool the high temperatures recorded by the USGS? Why didn't the Pyrocool help lower the temperatures below the rubble. Rue: 7-that no WTC conspiracy theorist ever saw first hand or obtained first hand any molten steel from the WTC You, the US conspiracy theory supporter lie, Rue. There is the FEMA steel, the picture of John Gross touching a molten/vaporized steel beam/column. The fused concrete and steel, the molten handguns, the Rue: and in fact Steve Jones was caught fabricating evidence and was so stupid as to pass off as molten steel debris that had writing on it and later was proven to be paper Provide your source. You never provide any sources. Sources are not good for consummate liars, are they, Rue?

You are the one that has been caught red handed, Rue, proclaiming you haven't seen the article when you have quoted it yourself. And no one possesses the slightest measure of honesty which would lead them to say, "Rue, you asked for the article and it's in the link you quoted".

You quoted the article on this very page, Rue. What are you, a bald faced liar? a totally incompetent poster? a disbarred lawyer? That is the specialty of the USGOCT science deniers/anti-truthers, the Rues, the Omnis, the OftenWrongs, the eyeballs, the Michael Hardners, the ..., folks who will deny realities and cling to falsehoods.

Omni and capricorn haven't heard of either. Two out of two. I see that capricorn still refuses to think.

From Mr Nonsense himself.

You delight in the carnage. You cream your jeans over the US murdering children. You know I condemn it so you are being your usual dishonest self. How many illegal invasions have you participated in? Did you get to napalm some villagers, shake and bake some innocents, cut off ears, noses, behead, steal gold teeth, ... . Come on, tell us of your war time exploits.

Sure. But first let's just see how many know of this. I think it will be highly illustrative of just how effective US propaganda is. Everyone thinks we have such a free, open and honest news media. 2) The US is the only country condemned by the UNGA for 25 years for its terrorism against a single country. Has everyone heard about that one?

I'm not trying to intimidate you. I'm trying to do the impossible - get you to think.

Yes, Canada's actions of supporting the worst war criminals to ever plague the planet. How much have you participated in these war crimes, terrorist actions? Why do you so delight in the slaughter of innocents?

Your life seems to be running around believing any nonsense you hear. Even after having had a complete impossibility explained to you, you said, "Duuuuh, I think I'll go with the USGOCT".

You don't know squat, capricorn. That leaps out in your every post.

Not at all correct. Terrible misdirection on your part. Par for the course. You know I was talking about you. Now it seems you don't want to discuss how "No one trusts a person who loves terrorists and war criminals" when it is you that often expresses deep love and admiration for these vicious, evil people. Look at your moniker!

You are consistently too chicken to address any of these things, capricorn. You are also consistently too incompetent to get involved in any of these topics. The US is the only country ever to be convicted of international terrorism. Would you like to discuss that?

You know of the experiment because you/or Omni have provided the USGOCT supporter reply. I have posted both the video and the article at least twice and I know that you have seen it. So you are either incredibly incompetent, Rue, or you are lying as you normally do.

The conclusion is that NIST lied, which we all know, and it was not aluminum. There was white smoke, witnessed and described by NIST, which is indicative of a thermitic reaction. There is no other metal source of the volume necessary to provide that flow seen pouring out of WTC2. You are clinging to a straw, because you know that you are up a stump - it is not aluminum. That is why NIST wouldn't do the experiments to prove their silly notion that organics were mixed with aluminum to create the color. It is molten steel. The same molten steel seen and described by myriad eyewitnesses, up to February 2002.