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: Al Dykes on 5 Oct 2009 12:11 In article <qdGdna6miLDjhFfXnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d(a)posted.choiceonecommunications>, AllYou! <idaman(a)conversent.net> wrote: >In news:hacu2q$6kh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, >Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> mused: >> Daniel wrote: >>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: >> >>>> And even there had been, it couldn't have melted the steel, >> >>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. >> >> We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only thermite >> explains it. > >There was no melted steel. There is only some anecdotal, second >hand reports of some amount of molten metal. No molten steel. > >(Insert links here that you mean to imply is evidence of your claim, >but which is only actually proof of mine) >------------> > > >>> Get back to us once >>> you have some credible sources to back up your claims. >> >> Since you agree that the fires couldn't have produced >> the molten metal, what claim are you disputing? > >That there was any molten steel. > >> Here are two of our 9-11 rescue heroes who observed molten metal >> "flowing like lava - like a "foundry" > >Which is not any kind of evidence that it was molten steel. It >could've been any amount of soft metals and other low-melting point >substances that were in great abundance in a fully occupied sky >scraper. The "foundry" quote is from a few seconds of video of firemen speaking about WTC. It's been edited out of something and I have been unable to identify the source. The firemen are not identified. Nowhere in the video is "I saw" spoken. The editing is so tight that the words that preceded "like a foundry" could very well be "i was told some bullshit about ...".. -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: knews4u2chew on 5 Oct 2009 12:23 On Oct 5, 9:06 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > Innews:hacu2q$6kh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, > Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> mused: > > > Daniel wrote: > >> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > > >>> And even there had been, it couldn't have melted the steel, > > >> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. > > > We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only thermite > > explains it. > > There was no melted steel. There is only some anecdotal, second > hand reports of some amount of molten metal. No molten steel. > > (Insert links here that you mean to imply is evidence of your claim, > but which is only actually proof of mine) > ------------> > > >> Get back to us once > >> you have some credible sources to back up your claims. > > > Since you agree that the fires couldn't have produced > > the molten metal, what claim are you disputing? > > That there was any molten steel. > > > Here are two of our 9-11 rescue heroes who observed molten metal > > "flowing like lava - like a "foundry" > > Which is not any kind of evidence that it was molten steel. It > could've been any amount of soft metals and other low-melting point > substances that were in great abundance in a fully occupied sky > scraper. > > And why have you never been able to produce even one example of a > building destroyed by controlled demolition to have ever resulted in > pools of molten steel flowing like lava in a foundry. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6498070204870579516# Watch. Listen. Then come back and lie and deny some more.
From: Al Dykes on 5 Oct 2009 12:39 In article <7107fa1d-1794-4a70-b6cd-b40a8f531265(a)i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Oct 5, 9:06=A0am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >> Innews:hacu2q$6kh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, >> Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> mused: >> >> > Daniel wrote: >> >> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: >> >> >>> =A0 And even there had been, it couldn't have melted the steel, >> >> >> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. >> >> > =A0We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only thermite >> > explains it. >> >> There was no melted steel. =A0There is only some anecdotal, second >> hand reports of some amount of molten metal. =A0No molten steel. >> >> (Insert links here that you mean to imply is evidence of your claim, >> but which is only actually proof of mine) >> ------------> >> >> >> Get back to us once >> >> you have some credible sources to back up your claims. >> >> > =A0Since you agree that the fires couldn't have produced >> > the molten metal, what claim are you disputing? >> >> That there was any molten steel. >> >> > =A0Here are two of our 9-11 rescue heroes who observed molten metal >> > "flowing like lava - like a "foundry" >> >> Which is not any kind of evidence that it was molten steel. =A0It >> could've been any amount of soft metals and other low-melting point >> substances that were in great abundance in a fully occupied sky >> scraper. >> >> And why have you never been able to produce even one example of a >> building destroyed by controlled demolition to have ever resulted in >> pools of molten steel flowing like lava in a foundry. > >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3D6498070204870579516# >Watch. >Listen. I see nobody there that says "I saw". There are no first-hand eyewitness reports of molten steel on the pile at WTC. All the reports are second-hand. There is no physical evidence for molten steel on the pile. There is no science that would show how the temperatures needed to maintain molten steel were created and maintained for weeks. Given that there is no evidence and no science, we can dismiss the second-hand stories as hyperbole. -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: Iarnrod on 5 Oct 2009 12:46 On Oct 5, 8:02 am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > Daniel wrote: > > On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > >> And even there had been, it couldn't have melted the steel, > > It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. > > We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Everyone knows steel did melt, Hankie the Bottle Washer. > Only thermite explains it. Only chemical fume inhalation explains your mental retardation, Hankie. It has been proven that thermite is not physically capable of producing what happened on 9/11, nor was any in use. But thanks for being consistently a dummy. \
From: knews4u2chew on 5 Oct 2009 12:48
On Oct 5, 9:11 am, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: > In article <qdGdna6miLDjhFfXnZ2dnUVZ_tGdn...(a)posted.choiceonecommunications>, > > > > AllYou! <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >Innews:hacu2q$6kh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu, > >Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> mused: > >> Daniel wrote: > >>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > > >>>> And even there had been, it couldn't have melted the steel, > > >>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. > > >> We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only thermite > >> explains it. > > >There was no melted steel. There is only some anecdotal, second > >hand reports of some amount of molten metal. No molten steel. > > >(Insert links here that you mean to imply is evidence of your claim, > >but which is only actually proof of mine) > >------------> > > >>> Get back to us once > >>> you have some credible sources to back up your claims. > > >> Since you agree that the fires couldn't have produced > >> the molten metal, what claim are you disputing? > > >That there was any molten steel. > > >> Here are two of our 9-11 rescue heroes who observed molten metal > >> "flowing like lava - like a "foundry" > > >Which is not any kind of evidence that it was molten steel. It > >could've been any amount of soft metals and other low-melting point > >substances that were in great abundance in a fully occupied sky > >scraper. > > The "foundry" quote is from a few seconds of video of firemen speaking > about WTC. It's been edited out of something and I have been unable > to identify the source. The firemen are not identified. > > Nowhere in the video is "I saw" spoken. The editing is so tight that > the words that preceded "like a foundry" could very well be "i was told > some bullshit about ...".. > > -- > Al Dykes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KglmMbprfkw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afZaK8zVbUw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-99CLdHWCc&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx33GuVsUtE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrrJCa1haaY&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ogrupgt4mI&feature=related |