The Physics of 911

@Builder,

Max thanks you for helping him out, Builder. He has been faltering of late.

That scenario you describe sounds awfully Olivierian.

1 Reply

@camlok,

Ah, the irony is lost on you, Cam.

We both know there's not a snowflake's chance in hell that those temperatures were reachable without the assistance of quite complex aparatus.

1 Reply

@Builder,

You both know ****.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Ah, so your bloomery concept still holds water, Olly? Pray tell, without careful tendering, and insertion of fuel applicable to the process, just how did your imaginary bloomery reach those astonomical temperatures required to achieve such results?

1 Reply

@Builder,

Nah. YOu tell me what vaporized lead and molybden. Since apparentky you're under the impression you know some ****. 'splain your ****.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

That's a negatory. You're supremely confident of your bloomery fantasy, and farmerman likes it too, so back it up with some realistic scenarios that don't require airflow, regular fuel additions, and careful tendering.

You've failed dismally, up to this point in time.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Thanks for the laugh. I really appreciate your comic talent.

So you have nothing, zilch, nada? Not even a little miracle or two? Lead and molybden got vaporized and you have absolutely no idea how? You're one phoney truther.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

So you have nothing, zilch, nada?

Self-explanatory.
Oh, but thank you for the laughs. Your gaslighting tricks aren't that new, but very chuckle-worthy.

We've blown your bloomery fantasy out of the water several times already. What fantasy could you be proposing now?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

You've got nothing, haven't you?

Bloomery schloomery. Absotively nada.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Oh I have already explained the vaporised lead. The planes impacts are the most likely cause of it. So I do have an explaination for it. You don't.

3 Replies

@Olivier5,

Farmerman has not once agreed with any of your silly theories, Olivier.

All these mysterious events are easily explained by the nanothermite, the super thermite, the by products of which were found in WTC dust. One of the products of thermitic reactions are the production of iron microspheres.

Quote:

It [RJLee report] said: “Particles of materials that had been modified by exposure to high temperature, such as spherical particles of iron and silicates, are common in WTC Dust … but are not common in ‘normal’ interior office dust.” [21] This 2003 version of the report even pointed out that, whereas iron particles constitute only 0.04 percent of normal building dust, they constituted an enormous amount of the WTC dust: 5.87 percent (meaning that there was almost 1,500 times more iron in the dust than normal). [22] This earlier version also explicitly stated that iron and other metals were “melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles.” [23]

http://www.consensus911.org/point-tt-6/

How did you miss this, Olivier?

9-11: Military nano thermite unknown to the general public found in the dust

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA-AqM7JNuo

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Farmerman has not once agreed with any of your silly theories, Olivier.

I don't think so but don't really care either. I have disagreed with the farmer before.

Quote:

All these mysterious events are easily explained by the nanothermite

The only mysteries here are yours. I have a perfectly clear and simple explanation for the events of 9/11. You don't have a clue who did it, why or how...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Nothing but useless, idle chatter from Olivier, as always. Did you watch the video, have you ever addressed anything like the link which describes a top US forensic engineering firm showing you are a little putz who knows nothing at all about the science of 9-11.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Oh I have already explained the vaporised lead. The planes impacts are the most likely cause of it. So I do have an explaination for it. You don't.

The no-science guy advances another of his cockamamie fantasies.

No, it didn't come from airplane crashes anymore than it came from the collapse of the buildings.

It came from the high temperatures created by the nanothermite found in WTC dust.

0 Replies

@camlok,

Why the angry tone? Did I hit a nerve?

You have no clue. No facts, just lies. You don't even have a THEORY about 9/11.

That's convenient. Nobody can contradict you since you are literally SAYING NOTHING.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Nice try, Ollie. But so lame.

You didn't look at any of the science, which was found in the links. Why are you and farmerman so dismissive of science? Why do you two engage in so much useless, idle chatter?

1 Reply

@camlok,

I have looked at it in detail. It's not science, it just superficially LOOKS like it to the clueless like you. And I have already explained these things to you countless times, but you don't remember any of it now.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

But you can't discuss any of it - why?, because it is all far beyond you just like it is far beyond farmerman the scientist.

And what are you, this guy who makes huge pretense but can never discuss anything?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

So I do have an explaination for it. You don't.

I've not mentioned lead at all. You have.

0 Replies

It has be done by foreign media because US/western media is too frightened, too busy providing pics of another Kardashian ass, literally and figuratively.

A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc3EZMuerWY

0 Replies

The Physics of 911

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know