911 and the Demo Truth
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Intermediate Accounting 12th and 13th edition Kieso Weygandt
Next: JSH: Back to conic section parameterization result
From: Henry on 15 Oct 2009 12:58 AllYou! wrote: > In news:hb7gbl$5ah$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, > Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >> AllYou! wrote: >>> In news:hb7dt7$ps$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, >>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >>>> AllYou! wrote: >>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >>>>>> AllYou! wrote: >>>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >>>>>>>> Actually, I'm relying on photo and eyewitness evidence, >>>>>>>> Evidence of molten metal is well documented. >>>>>>> But not molten steel. >>>>>> Because thermite reactions produce molten metal. >>>>> If thermite interacts with steel, it can produce molten steel. >>>> Wrong nut job. Learn how to read and think. >>> So if thermite reacts with steel, it results in some other kind >>> of pools of molten metal? >> Correct, nut job. The thermite reaction changes the chemical >> properties of the steel, nut job. Your ignorance seems to have >> no limits. > Heating a metal can change its chemical properties, A thermite reaction involves far more that simply heating steel, nut job. >>>>> There is no evidence that whatever people think they saw which >>>>> might look like molten metal was, in fact, molten steel. >>>> They called it molten steel >>> Actually, all the quotes you've provided so far are that they >>> called it molten metal. Why would you now lie about that? >> You're lying and being very stupid and illiterate again, nut >> job. Here are two of the quotes that you failed to comprehend >> because you're barely literate and you're insane. >> "The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, >> described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 >> days after the attacks." > He was there? One step at a time for you, nut job. You said that no one I quoted mentioned molten steel, and that by claiming they did, I was lying. Do you now see you were dead wrong again and that you're a lying, insane nut job? >> Can you find the words "molten steel" in that quote, nut job? >> <chuckle> >> "A witness said �In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker >> would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam >> would be dripping molten steel". > How does that worker know the difference between molten steel, and > molten metal other than steel? One step at a time for you, nut job. You said that no one quoted mentioned molten steel, and that by claiming they did, I was lying. Do you now see you were dead wrong again and that you're a lying, insane nut job? >> Can you find the words "molten steel" in that quote, nut job? If >> not, is there anyone nearby who is sane and literate that could >> help you find it, nut job? <chuckle> > Still exceeding your own definition of a whacko. Did you find the words "molten steel", ya silly, psychotic, deluded, lying nut job? If not, is there anyone nearby who is sane and literate that could help you find it, nut job? <chuckle> -- http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org
From: Henry on 15 Oct 2009 13:30 AllYou! wrote: > In news:hb7gjv$5m2$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, > Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >> Iarnrod wrote: >>> On Oct 15, 9:19 am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>> You're still not making any sense, nut job. >>> I know that having been fired from your janitor job >> Just like you "know" that two planes hit WTC7, and that >> a controlled demolition displays none of the >> characteristics of a controlled demolition. <chuckle> >> What you "think" you "know" is easily proved to be at >> odds with reality, nut job... <vbg> > Just like you know that beams weighing thousands of tons each landed > 600 feet from the WTC? I never made that claim, nut job. You sure do lie a lot. > As to your claim, prove that it's been proven, because no other > building has been damaged that severly, and had to withstand > fires for that long. Ever. You're either *completely* ignorant of the facts or deliberately lying. Either way, thanks, because you're making a complete joke of yourself and your insane conspiracy theory. Even NIST has been forced to admit that structural damage from the tower demolitions played no significant role in WTC7's "collapse". As always, here's hard proof of your ignorance, lies, and insanty. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html "Finally, the report notes that "while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7." And of course, many high rise buildings have suffered fires of far greater size, intensity, and duration than the minor, oxygen starved office fires in WTC7 without collapsing. Google One Meridian Plaza yourself. Never mind, you're far to helpless and stupid - I'll do that for you too, nut job. http://www.iklimnet.com/hotelfires/meridienplaza.html "A fire on the 22nd floor of the 38-story Meridian Bank Building, also known as One Meridian Plaza, was reported to the Philadelphia Fire Department on February 23, 1991 at approximately 2040 hours and burned for more than 19 hours. The fire caused three firefighter fatalities and injuries to 24 firefighters. The 12-alarms brought 51 engine companies, 15 ladder companies, 11 specialized units, and over 300 firefighters to the scene. It was the largest high-rise office building fire in modern American history -- completely consuming eight floors of the building.." Notice that the Meridian Plaza inferno raged for "more than 19 hours", nut job. WTC7 caught fire around 10:00 and was demolished at 5:20. How many hours is that, nut job? Never mind, I'll figure that out for you too. I doubt you can do math, either. 10:00AM to 5:20PM is 7 hours and 20 minutes, nut job. What's longer, 19 hours or 7 hours and 20 minutes, nut job? Is there someone nearby with a working mind who you could ask? Your lies and idiocy are getting so blatant and extreme that at this point there's no doubt that you're either mentally ill, or you're deliberately trying to make followers of the official cartoon conspiracy theory seem even more clueless, deluded, and stupid than usual - which is no easy feat. It doesn't really matter which is the case, but I'd like to thank you for helping 9-11 Truth advocates prove their case and expose Bush parrots as deluded, ignorant, and utterly clueless nut jobs. Well done, nut job... <chuckle> -- http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org
From: Iarnrod on 15 Oct 2009 16:09 On Oct 15, 10:58 am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > A thermite reaction involves far more that simply heating steel, > nut job. A thermite reaction involves GRAVITY, nut job, A thermite reaction involves intense light and thick smoke, nut job. There was no thermite. > >> "The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, > >> described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 > >> days after the attacks." > > He was there? > > One step at a time for you, nut job. You said that no one I > quoted mentioned molten steel, and that by claiming they did, > I was lying. Do you now see you were dead wrong again and that > you're a lying, insane nut job? You are the one who is wrong, insane nut job. Was it the chemical huffing that got you fired from your janitor job? No one saw any molten steel ever. No one says they saw any molten steel. All your quotes are from people claiming what others are supposed to have seen. FAIL. There was none, not on 9/11 and not 21 days after. Tell us, janitor boy, did the janitors union come in and spirit it all away? > >> Can you find the words "molten steel" in that quote, nut job? > >> <chuckle> Can you find the words "I saw" in that quote, nut job? > >> "A witness said In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker > >> would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam > >> would be dripping molten steel". > > How does that worker know the difference between molten steel, and > > molten metal other than steel? > > One step at a time for you, nut job. You said that no one > quoted mentioned molten steel, and that by claiming they did, > I was lying. Do you now see you were dead wrong again and that > you're a lying, insane nut job? Do you see how you are dead wrong in ascribing eyewitness status to hearsay witnesses? We have seen photos of this incident; there was no molten steel, insane nut job. > Did you find the words "molten steel", ya silly, psychotic, > deluded, lying nut job? Didja find the words "I saw," ya silly, psychotic, > deluded, lying nut job? >: If not, is there anyone nearby who > is sane and literate that could help you find it, nut job? Well, let us know when you do. Maybe you need to check back into rehab, Hankie the Self-Admitted Fired Janitor. <chuckle>
From: knews4u2chew on 15 Oct 2009 16:41 On Oct 15, 1:09 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Oct 15, 10:58 am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > > > A thermite reaction involves far more that simply heating steel, > > nut job. > > A thermite reaction involves GRAVITY, nut job, So? Thermite reactions can be directed. You can even make the "shaping device" out of thermite. So, you have "nothing" left after the burn except micron sized "iron" particle. The USGS found level of this far above any expectation. >A thermite reaction > involves intense light So? We saw molten "metal" near white hot streaming out of the S Tower? How could we see anything in the core, through the walls? It was smoke engulfed, covered with "dry wall," dark windows, and outer building. But, why don't WE SEE the fire department's infra-red video? >and thick smoke, Well, said. Ever heard of a "smoke screen?" Of course you have. It's you middle name. Why is there sooooo much smoke as the collapse begins, continues, and spreads like "a volcano" across Manhatten? >nut job. > Spook. > There was no thermite. > Again? What possible motive could Jones et al have for spreading "lies" in order to lose their jobs, careers, and good name? What are all the "iron" particles that resemble thermite doing in WTC dust. See the USGS Report. What great reward are they getting by being "Truthers?" What reward are you getting for being here twisting up everything posted? What is you grand experience that gave you all these proofs, that you never produce, of "impossible this and that?" The CIA/Mossad does "war by deception." The CIA/Mossad and the Bush crime family are complicit in 9-11. Daddy Bush probably set it up and planned it then let Jr. have all the "glory" while his CARGYLE GROUP cleaned up on the "unending wars." It has "insiders,"military precision, and Global "psy-ops" written all over it. It also has "controlled demolition" written all over it no matter how much you lie, deny, name call, twist, obfuscate, misdirect, misquote, clutter, and spew.
From: AllYou! on 15 Oct 2009 17:30
In news:hb7kbj$bjb$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: > AllYou! wrote: >>> Correct, nut job. The thermite reaction changes the chemical >>> properties of the steel, nut job. Your ignorance seems to have >>> no limits. > >> Heating a metal can change its chemical properties, > > A thermite reaction involves far more that simply heating steel, > nut job. so what? >>>>>> There is no evidence that whatever people think they saw >>>>>> which might look like molten metal was, in fact, molten >>>>>> steel. > >>>>> They called it molten steel > >>>> Actually, all the quotes you've provided so far are that they >>>> called it molten metal. Why would you now lie about that? > >>> You're lying and being very stupid and illiterate again, nut >>> job. Here are two of the quotes that you failed to comprehend >>> because you're barely literate and you're insane. > >>> "The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, >>> described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 >>> days after the attacks." > >> He was there? > > One step at a time for you, nut job. You said that no one I > quoted mentioned molten steel, and that by claiming they did, > I was lying. Do you now see you were dead wrong again and that > you're a lying, insane nut job? LOL! I was only going by the 'evidence' that YOU had posted here. Don't hold me responsible for the fact that you got it wrong. >>> Can you find the words "molten steel" in that quote, nut job? >>> <chuckle> > >>> "A witness said �In the first few weeks, sometimes when a >>> worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of >>> the beam would be dripping molten steel". > >> How does that worker know the difference between molten steel, >> and molten metal other than steel? > > One step at a time for you, nut job. :-) You're really getting quite mad now, aren't you. Did you know that anger is the result of fear? Of what are you so afraid? so how does a fireman know the difference between motlen metal of any kind, and molten steel? >>> Can you find the words "molten steel" in that quote, nut job? >>> If not, is there anyone nearby who is sane and literate that >>> could help you find it, nut job? <chuckle> > >> Still exceeding your own definition of a whacko. > > Did you find the words "molten steel", ya silly, psychotic, > deluded, lying nut job? If not, is there anyone nearby who > is sane and literate that could help you find it, nut job? > <chuckle> Of what are you so afraid? |