The Physics of 911

@farmerman,

Quote:

how many patents do you hold JTT?

You're off topic. Seems that you have a bone to pick with someone. This thread not the forum in which to express your discontent with someone, or whatever emotion it is that is definitely motivating you here.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

not with you. I just abhor your piteous attempts to sound as if you know of what you speak.

Ok , if youre running from my question about how many patents you hold, HOW many papers have you had published in journals (Ill include editorial columns and columns in science newsletters.

Or did you move upstairs when your parents left so that you dont have to live in the basement anym ore

Off topic again! If you really can't control your anger, why don't you PM camlock, say what you think you need to say, and just get it off your chest.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Now how about explaining how the upper block--the part of the North Tower above the impact zone that sustained the most damage--dropped down and crushed the intact core structure below. How is it that the lower intact core structure offered no resistance to speak of. Again, are you familiar with the law of conservation of energy and how it applies to the issue of the speed of collapse?

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman stated;

Quote:

and the Titanic was unsinkeable.

That was an urban myth, though rather short-lived. (my bolds)

Quote:

It seems incredible to us today that anyone could believe that 70,000 tonnes of steel could be unsinkable, but that was exactly what people in 1912 believed. The information on this page will seek to look at some of the reasons why people at the time had that belief.

The shipbuilders Harland and Wolff insist that the Titanic was never advertised as an unsinkable ship. They claim that the ‘unsinkable’ myth was the result of people’s interpretations of articles in the Irish News and the Shipbuilder magazine. They also claim that the myth grew after the disaster.

Yet, when the New York office of the White Star Line was informed that Titanic was in trouble, White Star Line Vice President P.A.S. Franklin announced ” We place absolute confidence in the Titanic. We believe the boat is unsinkable.” By the time Franklin spoke those words Titanic was at the bottom of the ocean. It would seem that the White Star Line President was also influenced by the ‘myth’.

It is difficult to discover exactly where or when the term ‘unsinkable’ was first used.

source

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
I have already answered that. There were plenty of holes and cavities in the 911 rubble, as there always are in any pile of rubble.

Well, actually you've simply restated that you believe [... pack of lies by Glenn the liar]

I have very little patience with liars, Glenn. Either you stop lying about what I say, or I will have to cut you short.

In the end, this discussion is entirely futile. There WAS a fire burning in those rubble, as evidenced by dozens of independent sources including remote sensing (satelites). The fire burnt for over 3 months. This is undeniable. So you can keep pretending such a fire was physically impossible, and on my end, I will stick to the truth, and the truth is that this fire happened...

3 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

The fire burnt for over 3 months. This is undeniable.

Yes it did; in an oxygen-starved environment, in the flooded basement "bathtub" section of a demolition-site.

You still haven't managed to explain how such a "blaze" could melt steel columns, though.

1 Reply

@Builder,

whatever happened to Steve Jones, the professor at Brigham Young U who started this "truther" conspiracy??
Has he been lauded for his insights into whether this was an explosive assisted building drop or the result of an attack with a jet airliner??

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

whatever happened to ...

Really, farmerman, have you no sense of human decency at all. The implications of NIST being grand liars is troubling but why do you continue to defend what all these lies have engendered - another Holocaust. You know full well that the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were based on huge lies.

We can get a good idea of the lies that were spread about the Jews in pre-war Germany by following the long lines of lies against Muslims, Iraqis, Afghans, ... .

You know, have known for a good long time, just how huge those lies really were/are and still you show no sign of professional responsibility or, as mentioned, human decency.

How many more people do you want to see murdered before you come to your senses?

Quote:

http://www.icsu.org/publications/reports-and-reviews/standards-responsibility-science/SCRES-Background.pdf

2.2 Freedom and Responsibility in Science
The pursuit of knowledge has throughout human history been closely linked to a need for courage and integrity, notably, the courage to carry new ideas across ideological boundaries and the integrity to resist temptations to gain fame by unsound methods. A possibly less powerful but no less faithful companion has been the desire to pursue knowledge not only for its own sake, but also in the aim of producing a better world and of improving the living conditions of those who inhabit it.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

There WAS a fire burning in those rubble, as evidenced by dozens of independent sources including remote sensing (satelites). The fire burnt for over 3 months. This is undeniable. So you can keep pretending such a fire was physically impossible, and on my end, I will stick to the truth, and the truth is that this fire happened...

Exactly! And the only thing that could have caused these fires, the molten and vaporized steel is the nanothermite that was found in the WTC dust. It was not a legal or legitimate fuel source that could have been at WTC.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I have very little patience with liars, Glenn. Either you stop lying about what I say, or I will have to cut you short.

I'm not lying about what you've said. You said that fires in the rubble spread downward through some holes in the crushed and compressed concrete and made it into the "crater" to create pools of molten metal and melted steel girders even though water was present in that crater.

Maybe you're just upset with yourself because now you're being confronted with how your beliefs sound when coming from outside yourself. But taking it out on me is not very productive.

Quote:

So you can keep pretending such a fire was physically impossible, and on my end, I will stick to the truth, and the truth is that this fire happened

I'm not denying the presence of fire in the rubble. I'm explaining to you that fires in the rubble cannot account for the pools of molten metal and melted girders down in the "crater" under tons and tons of pulverized, compacted concrete floors.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

You said that fires in the rubble spread downward through some holes in the crushed and compressed concrete and made it into the "crater" to create pools of molten metal and melted steel girders even though water was present in that crater.

I never ever said anything remotely approaching that. Keep lying to yourself if you need to, but I will have nothing to do with it.

Quote:

I'm not denying the presence of fire in the rubble.

So why did you say that such a fire could not possibly spread in the rubble, that the rubbles were too densely packed and too much flooded wih water for any fire to happen in them????

There WAS a fire, and enclosed as it WAS, it reached temperatures that could well have melt some iron. That much is obvious.

Stop denying the obvious. Stop trying to make this very simple issue a complicated one. And most importantly, stop your stupid and ugly misrepresentions of my posts. You are entitled to your opinion, Glenn, but you have not rights on mine.

2 Replies

@camlok,

Quote:

Quote:
the truth is that this fire happened...

Exactly! And the only thing that could have caused these fires, the molten and vaporized steel is the nanothermite that was found in the WTC dust.

Actually, any flammable material could have produced this fire in the rubble. As for the vaporized lead, it was (as explained to you several times now) unrelated to high temperatures.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Actually, any flammable material could have produced this fire in the rubble.

Even farmerman isn't willing to follow your travels into this nutty territory. Why would it have so shocked the fire-wise professors when all they had to do was ask Olivier5?

Quote:

As for the vaporized lead, it was (as explained to you several times now) unrelated to high temperatures.

You offer no sources and you rely on your complete lack of competent judgment.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

tell him about the coal mine fire in Centralia Pa where the fire is propogating against air flow and gravity. Its totally methanogenic yet is still burning at 1500 F. It will continue because the O necessary for continuous burning is being acquired by chemical breakdown of Sulfate and Carbonate minerals where the molecules are mostly OXYGEN.
At its hottest (when airflow was "chimneyed " from holes along surface fracturesthe surface, the original temps were over 2500F. SUlfosalt minerals are being deposited along the smoke release areas. Several new minerals of the sulfosalt family were named just for this mine fire.

Burning in holes is not unusual no unexpected where ignition occurs into flammable material and sufficient fuel is lying there.

Ive seen compost fires in almost completely reducing conditions in mushroom country. and It takes week to exhume the burning compost and douse it.
______________________

These guys seem to be skipping over and denying any assocition with Steve Jones (who, after being discredited by Brigham Young U nd ALL the fellows of his department)-was given an "Emeritus status" and he was retired, most likely to just get rid of him. I believe that he was already given tenure so he was only able to be separated from the U by unusual means (like treason). But being retired and given emeritu status, he missed the dishonor label as a wacko.

It appears that he has associated himself with some "fringey" newsletters that purport to be objective science but are really shilling for "TRUTHERS" It seems that almost ALL the Truther articles since 2012 haveJones as the head author or at least the major "source of their truth".
What a scam these guys have.

5 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Its totally methanogenic yet is still burning at 1500 F.

tell him that that is at least 1,200 F below the melting point of steel, and much much much lower than the vaporization point of steel.

tell him to remember the nanothermite.

tell him to stop throwing in silly words just to make a pretense that he knows what he is talking about.

tell him that a scientist discusses the issues, rather than just playing childish games.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

You should self report yourself to your professional association, farmerman. You sound like McGentrix, layman or oralloy.

0 Replies

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Quote:
Actually, any flammable material could have produced this fire in the rubble.

Even farmerman isn't willing to follow your travels into this nutty territory.

I seriously doubt that.

Quote:

Quote:
As for the vaporized lead, it was (as explained to you several times now) unrelated to high temperatures.

You offer no sources and you rely on your complete lack of competent judgment.

I have, actually. You just didn't pay attention.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I don't use complicated language with them. Rather I try to explain things in a very plain and simple way, hammering the same argument again and again until they start to take notice. It takes them a huge amount of time and repetition to notice, let alone understand or address, any single point.

Camlock kept speaking about you. He missed you I thought. But now that you're back, he is talking about McGentrix, layman and oralloy. He likes arguing with absent folks, in essence.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I never ever said anything remotely approaching that.

Sure you did. The collapse produced rubble which included pulverized and compressed concrete. When asked how there could possibly be pools of molten metals and melted steel girders in the crater, you claimed that the fire in the rubble pile found its way down through all that and managed to melt and vaporized steel. When told about the presence of water due to several sources in the crater, you didn't say anything. I assume you were quiet about that because it kind of helps to show your claim for what it is.

Quote:

So why did you say that such a fire could not possibly spread in the rubble, that the rubbles were too densely packed and too much flooded wih water for any fire to happen in them????

I never said that fires never spread in the rubble. I said that the fires didn't spread downward though pulverized and compressed concrete and into the crater which was being inundated with water from several sources.

Now how about explaining how the upper block--the part of the North Tower above the impact zone that sustained the most damage--dropped down and crushed the intact core structure below. How is it that the lower intact core structure offered no resistance to speak of. Again, are you familiar with the law of conservation of energy and how it applies to the issue of the speed of collapse?

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Well, any fire located anywhere within the pile of rubble could have melted some iron... It doesn't need to be at the bottom of the pile. Why are you focussing on that area in particular?

1 Reply

The Physics of 911

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know