0
   

The Physics of 911

 
 
Olivier5
 
  0  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2017 02:12 pm
@camlok,
I have discussed it at length with you already. Do you even remember?
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2017 02:21 pm
@Olivier5,
"it" - you are so common, so predictable, so unscientific, so poor at using language, so farmerman-like.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2017 02:36 pm
@camlok,
What seems to be the problem with the word "it"?
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2017 02:59 pm
@Olivier5,
That only highlights how poor you are at language.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 03:56 am
@camlok,
Unlike you, I'm not a native speaker, so my spelling sucks and my grammar is shaky. Still, my writing makes far more sense than yours, because it* is not cluttered with hatred.

* in this context, the pronoun "it" refers to "my writing".
Glennn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 08:07 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
"In certain instances, firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of 3000 to 4000 degrees, we were told . . ."

You're being dishonest again. You've included a second "we were told" at the end of the quote you copied. He only said it once. Here, I've transcribed the pertinent segment:

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

So, he is describing things they'd seen; not heard about. And he was telling what he was told about what the temperature in the area was.
Quote:
Why did you stop your quote right before "we were told"?

I didn't.

Here is the quote I provided:

"In certain instances, firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of 3000 to 4000 degrees . . ."

You added the extra "we were told" into the actual quote, and you did so because credible eyewitnesses were detrimental to your storyline. I left it out because it's not there.
Quote:
The FBI didn't clean up the WTC site, so even the description of the scene is by force second hand.

After 9/11, 400 FBI agents from around the country were dispatched to New York to look for evidence in the ruins of the World Trade Center. But now a federal investigation reveals that, while they sifted through piles of rubble . . .

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4373627/ns/nbc_nightly_news_with_brian_williams/t/fbi-agents-took-ground-zero-souvenirs/#.WNPemoWcHIU

So here we see that, once again, you've decided to change the facts in order to maintain your own narrative.
Quote:
Who disproved it and when? Some blogger, while dumping a ****?

NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system - that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns - consisted of a grid of steel 'trusses' integrated with a concrete slab..”

https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation
Quote:
You WANT to believe your ****. You WANT to believe that the US government is terminally evil. Therefore ypu are incapable of tginking straight. I think to push racism to such extreme qualufy as a mental illness.

You Want to believe that discussing the physics of 9/11 is pushing racism, and is indicative of mental illness. You're now officially off the deep end.
Quote:
You are a coward too.

No, a coward is someone who accepts degrading, secondhand hearsay directed against firefighters who lost their lives in the line of duty. That would be you. And you did it because you needed to damage their integrity and destroy their credibility in order to maintain your own integrity and credibility; and in the process, you lost both.
_________________________________________________

In videos of the collapse of the North Tower, the upper block is clearly seen dropping down without stopping. You believe that this upper block acted as a pile driver to crush the lower intact core structure below it. But if that were the case, there would have been not only a visible jolt and pause of the downward movement of the upper block, but also the destruction of the more heat-damaged upper block as it met with the lower block. As such, the collapse would have been arrested because the upper block would have been destroyed easier and faster than the intact lower block. But that's not what happened. Once the upper block is in motion, it does not slow down.

In the case of the South Tower, the upper block (according to you) tipped over the edge of the building, thereby removing the pile-driver effect which is necessary to your theory. So you claim that some collapsing floors pulled the core and perimeter columns down with them. Of course, you understand that the purpose of the core structure and perimeter columns was to support the floors; not the other way around. Right?

Now how about you tell me at what temperature steel melts. Recall that you did say that cement melts at a lower temperature than steel.

And if you would, can you please produce the video that accurately shows the collapse times that you use for your own calculations? I'd like to see it.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 10:16 am
@Glennn,
I answered all this already. Go upthread and read it.
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 10:33 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
I answered all this already. Go upthread and read it.

No, you didn't answer it.

Here is your response to that post:

"I think they are mistaken, but it would take me a very long time to make you understand why. I don't have that much time anymore. So let's just say I disagree with them."

Saying that you disagree with the NIST in no way answers my post. Try again.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 11:07 am
@Glennn,
It's an answer even if you don't like it.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 01:26 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
It's an answer even if you don't like it.


You are getting lamer and lamer, Olivier. You are turning into a farmerman the "scientist".

Remember, this exceedingly nonsensical US government official conspiracy theory duped you guys for a long time and here you still are, lamely trying to defend the indefensible.

And that is supposed to be the rock solid story.

Don't you feel used?

Don't you feel ashamed?

Tricking your own mind into believing that three buildings could fall, one at free fall, the other two at accelerating speeds, from fires, when it had before happened, never since has happened, [fires that had burned, some for almost a day], all on one day, in one city, one state, caused by magical hijackers who could do three towers with two planes.

Can you say GULLIBLE?
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 06:16 pm
BUSH SLIPS UP - Bush Admits Explosives Used at World Trade Center 9/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpcJyn3N5ks

=============

There has never been, to my knowledge, any official, US or otherwise, who has suggested that any alleged hijackers/Al Qaeda official have ever said what Bush says here in this video; listen starting at 0:40.
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 10:22 pm
@camlok,
I do recall seeing that snippet in another video, where it was claimed that the escape routes to the roof areas were blocked off completely.

Interesting that there was no visible effort to land rescue crews on the roofs, to release people trapped above the impact zones. There was almost an hour to do so.

But then, NORAD was still under the assumption that this was all a drill; a scenario dreamed up by one Richard Cheney.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 10:31 pm
@Builder,
Quote:
I do recall seeing that snippet in another video, where it was claimed that the escape routes to the roof areas were blocked off completely.


They didn't want anyone reporting that there was no plane. Smile
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2017 10:45 pm
More on explosions at WTC

https://able2know.org/topic/190940-3#post-6404486
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Apr, 2017 12:12 am
@camlok,
I'd be ashamed if I were an conspiracy lunatic without a conspiracy, which is exactly what you are.

You have no clue who did it and how. You cannot even explain the planes. The most obvious thing in these vids is: two planes hitting two buildings, and you can't explain it AT ALL. Rather you look at tiny absurd details which you spin endlessly and absurdly. And all this out of racism. Have you no shame???
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Fri 14 Apr, 2017 09:42 am
@Olivier5,
A page right out of Max's silly book and no attribution.

You are a conspiracy lunatic, Olivier, one who denies science to support the wackiest tale ever written.

One who denies science to support the evil people who did this, the evil of those people who then used their evil to commit much much more evil acts, the deaths of a million or so, hundreds of millions of lives wrecked, ... .

0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:13 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
You have no clue who did it and how.


Et tu? You kinda wanna believe the NIST report on the incidents, but you know that it's full of holes a toddler could easily see through.


Quote:
The most obvious thing in these vids is: two planes hitting two buildings,....


If you think there's video of both buildings being hit, then let's see it. Can't recall any footage of the first one. Though Bush said he saw it on the telly. Did you catch it as well?

In this video, a jetliner lands on top of a car. Trooly it does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqy5M_arLAo
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Apr, 2017 03:29 pm
@Builder,
Video of the plane hitting the North Tower:
https://youtu.be/Ys41jnL2Elk
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sat 15 Apr, 2017 07:38 pm
@Olivier5,
Murray St engine was from the wrong plane.

Murray Street Engine - Scene from 9/11: IDENTIFY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhqZQqQdjyk
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sat 15 Apr, 2017 07:44 pm
If Bush was put on the stand for 5 minutes, the whole USOCT would be blown up in short order.

NEW! George Bush Caught Still Lying About 9/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32qB7On8ngM

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Physics of the Biblical Flood - Discussion by gungasnake
Suggest forum, physics - Question by dalehileman
The nature of space and time - Question by shanemcd3
I don't understand how this car works. - Discussion by DrewDad
Gravitational waves Discovered ! - Discussion by Fil Albuquerque
BICEP and now LIGO discover gravity waves - Discussion by farmerman
Transient fields - Question by puzzledperson
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Physics of 911
  3. » Page 44
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 01:55:28