bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) "Checking for science" is just another version of the same Truther shuck and jive...even Chomsky questions their logic, methods, and motives: Edited April 5, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hey there little buddy, ever done the real science on how much explosive it would have taken to get those buildings to come down...and when you get doe looking that up, try to figure out how in the hell you could plant all that without anybody noticing. Oh excuse me sir, sorry to interrupt I just need to plant this small sack of explosive by your office window. But it seems truthers are willing to buy the idea. How quaint. That's one of the best "Oh look, a squirrel " memes I've ever come across, OGFT. Are you trying to leave me with the impression that you don't possess the necessary honesty to fulfill my request? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 "Checking for science" is just another version ... No need to check this one either, Tim, OGFT. You could at least try offering another of your fictions, George. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 That's one of the best "Oh look, a squirrel " memes I've ever come across, OGFT. Are you trying to leave me with the impression that you don't possess the necessary honesty to fulfill my request? Maybe I will after you fulfill mine. Or do you think the secretaries were all on board with this conspiracy and and left their individual packets of explosives by their desks and then scurried away to an early lunch. Must be tough to have to keep on coming up with deflections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 I am more interested in the continuing Truther circle jerk that loves science, especially very bad science. So is this guy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) OGFT: Maybe I will after you fulfill mine. Je suis Omar: Might I remind you that our discussion was the molten metal coming out of WTC2. You offered your opinion and your source. I countered that with my opinion and two sources. And all you have done since then, shamelessly, is fly off on obvious squirrel tangents. OGFT: Must be tough to have to keep on coming up with deflections. As I said, shamelessly. You really are beginning to make me feel that you don't possess the honesty necessary for, say, well pretty much anything. Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) I am more interested in the George, your first offering that remotely approached the science was a flat out fiction that you knew to be a fiction. It's been nothing but downhill ever since for you. That includes your admission that you love war criminals and terrorists. Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Have any of the meme chuckers put in a call for reinforcements yet? Where's Kimmy, Michael, Argus, ... ? Warm up your meme generators, recruits, and get the hell over here!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) George, your first offering that remotely approached the science was a flat out fiction that you knew to be a fiction. It's been nothing but downhill ever since for you. That includes your admission that you love war criminals and terrorists. No Jesus....you have failed to prove anything as "fiction", instead adding your own to the pile of Truther dung. The funny part is that you have to rely totally on the "elephant's" resources to do it. Edited April 5, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 No Jesus....g. No science yet from Bush_Cheney, OGFT, Tim. And the poor guy/girl was issued a truly defective meme generator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 No science yet from Bush_Cheney, OGFT, Tim. And the poor guy/girl was issued a truly defective meme generator. No science from Jesus either....just regurgitated bunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 As I said, shamelessly. You really are beginning to make me feel that you don't possess the honesty necessary for, say, well pretty much anything. Thats because you dont seem to get that the science is already in, long ago, and most people have moved on, except those who love to grovel around conjuring up nonsense. Perhaps you should take up a hobby to make life more interesting and positive instead of trolling around with the truthers that have long ago been dismissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) "NIST must rely on its claim of molten aluminum in order to validate its official fire-based explanation, because office fires cannot generate the extreme temperature required to melt steel or iron." http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/affiliate-marketing-program/899-what-was-the-molten-metal-seen-pouring-out-of-the-south-tower-minutes-before-its-collapse-steel-and-iron-or-aluminum-andor-lead.html Why wouldn't NIST do some simple experiments to verify their contention? It's not like this is a difficult experiment to perform. It's certainly within the capability of even a grad student. Puzzling indeed! Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 ...Why wouldn't NIST do some simple experiments to verify their contention? It's not like this is a difficult experiment to perform. It's certainly within the capability of even a grad student. Because it is a government conspiracy perpetrated by thousands of people, including NIST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Thats because you dont seem to get that the science is already in, long ago, and most people have moved on, except those who love to grovel around conjuring up nonsense. Perhaps you should take up a hobby to make life more interesting and positive instead of trolling around with the truthers that have long ago been dismissed. Nope, still no honesty, OGFT. Sad and shameless. You say the science is already in. That's completely unscientific. If it was already in, why did you argue your outdated "science"? If it's already in why did you stop cold stone dead when you found yourself up a stump. And still you press shamelessly on, apparently with not even the smarts required to realize just how hypocritical and completely unscientific you are being. Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Because it is a government conspiracy perpetrated by thousands of people, including NIST. Your meme generator is still on the fritz, George. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Nope, still no honesty, OGFT. Sad and shameless. You say the science is already in. That's completely unscientific. If it was already in, why did you argue your outdated "science"? If it's already in why did you stop cold stone dead when you found yourself up a stump. And still you press shamelessly on, apparently with not even the smarts required to realize just how hypocritical and completely unscientific you are being. Up a stump, thats quite cute. Oh I actually realized you were just up to the same thing all the previous truthers were up to long before you came along which is basically regurgitating more nonsense when the previous nonsense falls just like the molten aluminum from the planes in the WTC. (you do know enough to know that planes are made from aluminum, yes) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Your meme generator is still on the fritz, George. No...it's true...just ask your fellow Truthers pursuing "the science". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 the Still no honesty, OGFT. ------------------------- Point TT-6: The Claim that There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTC Point TT-6: Buildings << Previous Point, Next Point >> Introduction According to the official account, the Twin Towers were brought down by airplane impacts and fire, and in the case of WTC 7, by fire alone. One implication of this account is that the destruction would have produced no molten steel or iron, which is produced when steel is melted by certain substances, such as thermite): Structural steel does not begin to melt until it reaches about 1,482°C (2,700°F), and iron does not melt until it reaches 1,538°C (2,800°F).[1] The fires ignited by the plane crashes, even with the help of jet fuel, could not have been hotter than 1,000°C (1,832°F), meaning that they would have been at least 1000 degrees F. cooler than what would be necessary to melt steel/iron. The presence of molten steel or iron, therefore, would have implied that the building steel had been melted by something other than the airplane impacts and the resulting fires. http://www.consensus911.org/point-tt-6/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Still no honesty, OGFT. ------------------------- Point TT-6: The Claim that There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTC Point TT-6: Buildings << Previous Point, Next Point >> Introduction According to the official account, the Twin Towers were brought down by airplane impacts and fire, and in the case of WTC 7, by fire alone. One implication of this account is that the destruction would have produced no molten steel or iron, which is produced when steel is melted by certain substances, such as thermite): Structural steel does not begin to melt until it reaches about 1,482°C (2,700°F), and iron does not melt until it reaches 1,538°C (2,800°F).[1] The fires ignited by the plane crashes, even with the help of jet fuel, could not have been hotter than 1,000°C (1,832°F), meaning that they would have been at least 1000 degrees F. cooler than what would be necessary to melt steel/iron. The presence of molten steel or iron, therefore, would have implied that the building steel had been melted by something other than the airplane impacts and the resulting fires. http://www.consensus911.org/point-tt-6/ https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 I like this observation concerning 9/11 Truthers: You can't reason someone out of something that he didn't get into by using reason in the first place. That's why it's so difficult to refute conspiracy theories with logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htmJust as I predicted to myself before I clicked on your link, OGFT, there'll be no scientific experiments involved. I was right. It isn't about arguing with a supporter of the official government story or a truther, it's about science. Watch "interview with chemical Engineer Mark Basile". http://911truthnews.com/interview-with-chemical-engineer-mark-basile/ He performed the necessary experiments to enable to be sufficiently knowledgeable to stay focused on the science. Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Just as I predicted to myself before I clicked on your link, OGFT, there'll be no scientific experiments involved. I was right. It isn't about arguing with a supporter of the official government story or a truther, it's about science. Watch "interview with chemical Engineer Mark Basile". http://911truthnews.com/interview-with-chemical-engineer-mark-basile/ He performed the necessary experiments to enable to be sufficiently knowledgeable to stay focused on the science. And you call that informative...ho ho ho. Anyway, here is a travel tip for you just in case you want to take a trip for fun. Go to Dallas,I have been there a number of times doing training at flight safety, but in spare time I of course wet to Dealey Plaza. Take a stroll for a block ay direction and go into any bookstore of which there are lots and you will find the type of conspiracy theorists Im sure you would love to spend your holiday time with. It really is quite bizarre the stuff they have come up with over those many years. Im sure you would fit right in.Hey maybe you could conjure up some they havent thought of yet. Spaceship from Arcturus with a laser beam,that sort of stuff. You can get really good Tex Mex food as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 "The fundamental flaw of the aluminum hypothesis, though, is that the implied temperature of the white glow remains above 1200°C/2200°F, regardless of the metal involved. An independent researcher suggested that the molten substance could be lead from storage batteries, but this explanation fails as do all hypotheses based on alternative metals because the temperature required for the yellow-white glow of the metal is beyond the capability of the building fire. Perhaps from a building fire alone, but clearly with the inclusion of tons of aluminum (from the airliner) combined with jet fuel and water, the end result is a far hotter fire, including thermal explosions from liquid aluminium being rapidly cooled by water. Jones also notes that molten aluminum appears silvery as it melts at 660°C/1220°F, and that it remains silvery when poured in daylight conditions, regardless of the temperature. It is theoretically possible to continue heating liquid aluminum way past its melting point and into the yellow-white temperature range, but the office fire was not a plausible source for such high temperatures, ... ." Again the theory is based on a conventional "office fire", when in actual fact, the scenario is more befitting of other comparisons: The attack (and sinking) of HMS Sheffield was directly a result of a kinetic impact (the Exocet ASM) and the inability of the crew to control a supper hot fire created by the ignition of the ships aluminum hull......the warhead of the missile didn't even explode, but its fuel did (rocket fuel is comprised of powdered aluminum for that mater), the ensuing fire melted portions of the ships hull, combining both sea water and water used (incorrectly) to fight the fire.....aluminum fires (or most metal and alloys) are not fought with water, likewise metal fires result in thick grey/white smoke.... Now applying this to the WTC, we have large amounts of aluminum, combined with jet fuel, that would start the initial fire (in addition to fuel sources found within your cited building fires) and explosions, with water later introduced (from fire sprinklers and burst plumbing and heating lines), resulting in a far hotter and explosive fire (then found in your building fires), which though may not have melted structural steel, but made it far more weaker........likewise, aluminum is a far greater conductor of heat (than steel or concrete), which would also help spread the fire faster. This is one of the reasons firefighters at airports don't use water (but chemical foam) to fight aircraft fires, likewise, why modern navies use little to no aluminum in warship construction.....and is why a super hot fire occurred, and led to the collapse of the WTC towers........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Perhaps from a building fire alone, but clearly with the inclusion of tons of aluminum (from the airliner) combined with jet fuel and water, the end result is a far hotter fire, including thermal explosions from liquid aluminium being rapidly cooled by water. A December 2001 paper, "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation," dismissed early reports about molten steel at the demolished World Trade Center. Dr. Thomas W. Eagar, a professor of materials engineering and engineering systems at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and his graduate research student, Christopher Musso, pointed out that the theoretical maximum temperature of a building fire (maximum 1000°C/1800°F) is not even close to the melting point of steel (approximately 1500°C/2750°F). And they noted that the observed black smoke emanating from the Twin Towers was consistent with a typical oxygen-starved building fire. Eagar and Musso concluded that the actual temperature most likely remained below 650°C/1200°F. In so doing, they dispelled the myth that the jet fuel could have made the fires unusually hot, noting that it was "highly unlikely" that the temperature rose above 800°C/1470°F. http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/affiliate-marketing-program/899-what-was-the-molten-metal-seen-pouring-out-of-the-south-tower-minutes-before-its-collapse-steel-and-iron-or-aluminum-andor-lead.html Edited April 5, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.