The Physics of 911

I take it this as your way of saying that there was no steam present at Ground Zero. Why don't you show something to back your claim.

No, it was just a question.

Why don't you provide such a video? I'll look at it.

Also, is this your way of saying that if the guy in the video I showed you had dumped the steel beam with the plastic, diesel fuel, aluminum, steel, gypsum board, and crushed concrete and all the fire into a pit, and then dumped a shitload of cement dust over it, the beam would have melted?


Now, explain how the energy required to pulverize everything in the building below the impact zone, and the energy required to produce the explosive lateral ejections--as seen in photos and videos of the collapses--still allowed for enough reserve energy to allow for a virtually freefall descent through the course of most resistance.

Rather, YOU are the one who is trying to pit us against one another. Try again.

No, you guys have been very shy all through this discussion. I think I should give you a chance to express your opinion and speak your mind now. It's not all about me me me, as much as I would want that... :-) It's also about what happened on 9/11. Who did it, how, and why, according to you?

Just google "bloomery". Millions of vids there... Check a few out and see how it's done.

Exactly, Olivier, and here you have been pretending to be some expert, and making a god awful show of it. farmerman won't touch your BS with a 20 foot pole because you are shredding the entire US official government fable.

Why have you waited 15 plus years to come out now? Where were you when NIST needed you and your grand pretensions of dog knows what? A confused hodgepodge of arrant nonsense.

Olivier: Just do all of what is supposed to be my work so you can come back here and illustrate, with stupefying ease, what a damn fool I am.

Yeah, we already did. I've stated that the collapses of the WTCs occurred in a manner that defied the laws of physics. I thought I made that clear when I asked you to explain how the energy required to pulverize everything in the building below the impact zone, and the energy required to produce the explosive lateral ejections--as seen in photos and videos of the collapses--still allowed for enough reserve energy to allow for a virtually freefall descent through the course of most resistance.

Apparently, you believe that it is not necessary to explain these physics-defying collapses unless we know how it was done, who did it, and why they did it. I'm afraid that such conditions of discussion only exist in your mind.

I've never pretended to be an expert and you know it. I'm relying on logic and a decent understandiing of thermodynamics (the laws governing the behavior of heat and more generally energy in gasses, liquids and solids), chemistry, including metals, water and saline solutions of course, minerals and biochemistry, alm part of what I studied in depth at college and university.

For the record, Farmerman knows much more than I do in chemistry, geology of course, and paleontology. He's also practicing his trade while I moved out of these fields so his knowledge is deep and current while mine is an old and rusty school exposure.

IMSHO I still know more than Farmerman in biology, genetics and biochemistry. (throw in geopolitics for good measure)

I also know the facts of the matter reasonably well, because I was living in NYC at the time, went downtown on 9/11 to see it with my own eyes, and read the news a lot afterwards.

I have my own doubts here or there with the "official account", like I suspect we all have. But there are very different from yours. And that's the thing: we both have an alterative theory but not the same one.

How on earth can you advance that you are a reasonable, thinking human being with the above, excuse my honesty, nonsense. You "read the news a lot afterwards".

The news changed 180 degrees from day one to day two. And then another 180 after that and then again and again, all the while ignoring the facts right in front of their faces.

Watch,

Jonathan Cole - 9/11 Theories: Expert vs. Expert - AE911Truth.org

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_oEs33VD5A

Logic, you say,

Three steel high rises collapse on one day, in the same city, all from fire, when it has never, before or since happened.

All the reports of explosions from firemen, reporters, news anchors, eye witnesses, ...

It's all in the video in my last post.

The biggest giveaway that this was not the alleged hijackers is the tenacity of the science/truth deniers, and this goes to the highest levels of NIST, their vitriol, their refusal to look at anything that would punch a hole in their really wacky, crazily wacky official story, filled as it is with lies, impossibilities, and totally ILLOGICAL happenings.

If that were true, it would follow that we should review our understanding of the laws of physics, because our theories and models would have been proven wrong on that fateful day.

Yes it kept changing but I read it all, at least all the NYT and New Yorker, plus a lot of TV and Internet.

So what's your theory then?

The NYT is a rag, a science denier, complicit in the cover up of the century's biggest crime.

Totally backward and illogical. Coming from an admitted non-expert. Newton is doing somersaults in his grave, as is Richard Feynman, Albert Einstein, ... .

Watch the video. The only theory, now proven to be an outright lie, is that of NIST and the US government.

Are you too, calling all those firemen who reported explosions, who sit there telling their stories with bloodied faces, liars?

Really? farmerman too. And all the myriad frightened, science deniers who inhabit this website.

I don't care for your vid. Write down the claims made by whom and we can discuss. I was very close when the second tower fell. I remember that I heard no explosions, but a humongous friction sound, very loud but strangely "soft", a sort of "frfrfrfrfrfrfrfr". No explosions. Then the (second) dust cloud came.

The whole CIA termites theory is downright ridiculous. So improbable that it is laughable. You should be ashamed of yourself.

What???

When the old laws of physics are broken by facts, new laws of physics are made. Remember Galileo?