The Physics of 911

@farmerman,

Quote:

The globs (spherules) of iron are no doubt superheated dust particles.

"superheated" by what? Remember, there was no super heating, just normal routine jet fuel/office furnishings fires.

Super heating would cause molten steel and molybdenum, which you deny existed at WTC.
=========

Point TT-6: The Claim that There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTC
Point TT-6: Buildings

New York Times journalist James Glanz, writing near the end of 2001 about the collapse of WTC 7, reported that some engineers said that a “combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down,” but that this “would not explain,” according to Dr. Barnett, “steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.” [13]

----------------

The above illustrates that you have lied or been miserably uninformed, neither of which is a desirable quality for scientists. I'm sure that you and I, and everyone can agree on that.

I repeat, so it is crystal clear for everyone.

"... but that this “would not explain,” according to Dr. Barnett, “steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.” [Ibid]

Yet you maintain, in complete defiance of reality, when I had provided you with this link very early in the discussion in other threads, you now advance the notion that all molten steel is the result of "firefighters CUTting steel"!

Did these same firefighters "partly evaporate" steel members while they were playing around digging "in the debris pile"?

Are you seriously offering this up as science, your best science?

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

There are so many common sense (not high handed) scientific observations available to us

And you, like Oralloy, are going to keep them closely guarded secrets. Is that right?

0 Replies

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Quote:
Are you just cutting and pasting from another source? Booooooo...

No, why would you advance such a lie, McGentrix?

Note the complete absence of anything remotely scientific or having to do with 9-11 and the molten metals, the impossible free fall speeds, the ... .

Are you also a scientist?

Then why did you say

Quote:

Why would a fireman cut the end of a "girder" in the fashion of the one that John Gross, the NIST scientist who lied about molten steel, is touching in the following picture?

without having a picture? Looks like something someone would have on a web page immediately preceding a picture...

Looks to me like you are cutting and pasting from an on line source.

Oh, and yes, I am a scientist by training.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Then why did you say

Quote:
camlok: Why would a fireman cut the end of a "girder" in the fashion of the one that John Gross, the NIST scientist who lied about molten steel, is touching in the following picture?

without having a picture? Looks like something someone would have on a web page immediately preceding a picture...

Looks to me like you are cutting and pasting from an on line source.

Because I had supplied the necessary means to everyone, numerous times, to find that picture. If you were a scientist, you would have been able to check, very easily, [it's called research, something that scientists do regularly, even to refute other's claims] my myriad accusations that John Gross had lied.

Is it really necessary for me to spoon feed you, a scientist?

Quote:

Oh, and yes, I am a scientist by training.

That simply cannot be true given your incredible disdain for science, your absolute refusal to address the science issues raised. But most of all for your admission that you are a scientist who never acts like a scientist.

Care to start addressing the issues being raised here like one would expect a scientist would?

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Care to start addressing the issues being raised here like one would expect a scientist would?

Nope. You are spreading lies, falsehoods and pseudo-science. The only science that you have shown is

A> Other people's work
B> Not correct
C> Made up
D> divined by conspiracy theorists in attempt to do something. I haven't figured out the reason for it yet. To show the govt can't be trusted? That's silly, everyone already knows that.

So, What you have provided is trash you found in the scrap heaps of the internet. I am glad that you have such devotion to what you are talking about as it is good to be passionate about something.

3 Replies

@centrox,

Quote:

Really? Source please.

There have been lots of sources, centrox. Have you had a chance to go over them yet?

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Quote:
Really? Source please.

There have been lots of sources, centrox. Have you had a chance to go over them yet?

I meant ones that aren't whackos.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Nope. You are spreading lies, falsehoods and pseudo-science. The only science that you have shown is

A> Other people's work
B> Not correct
C> Made up
D> divined by conspiracy theorists in attempt to do something. I haven't figured out the reason for it yet.

Another off his head rant from another scientist. Is there something in the water?

Scientists often describe others works, ideas, comments, suggestions, theories, ... . It's called discussing the issues.

The scientist, McGentrix, has not yet advanced anything scientific to counter the science that has been put forward. Was Desperation 101 a required course for you?

Quote:

To show the govt can't be trusted? That's silly, everyone already knows that.

I retract my last statement. I think.

Is the McGentrix conclusion we are supposed to draw now; "But we should trust them on this one"?

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

I do believe he is on a phone or other small device. That he types as well as he does is amazing. It's better than I can do on a phone.

I believe he has some sort of injured hand. I forget the details, if I ever knew them to begin with.

0 Replies

@centrox,

Quote:

I meant ones that aren't whackos.

Dr. J Leroy Hulsey says, in preliminary reports for the study due to wind up in May 2017, that the likelihood of the NIST report on the collapse of WTC being accurate is zero.

Do you understand, and are you able to discuss the implications of WTC7 falling at free fall speed?

Do you understand and are you able to discuss the implications of all the molten metals found at all WTC sites?

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

WTC 7 Evaluation is a two-year study by Dr. J Leroy Hulsey, Chair of UAF's Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, and two Ph.D. research assistants. It is being crowd-funded through the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

WTC 7 Evaluation is a completely open and transparent investigation into the cause of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted here and on the university's website so that the public can follow its progress.

WTC 7 Evaluation is a completely open and transparent investigation into the cause of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted here and on the university's website so that the public can follow its progress.

http://www.wtc7evaluation.org/

0 Replies

@centrox,

Are you able to discuss any of the issues surrounding the collapse of the three WTC towers?

0 Replies

1 Reply

@djjd62,

Could you please briefly describe the gist of the video? I don't care whether it is a for or against but just describe which side and the whys.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Quote:

camlok wrote:

Care to start addressing the issues being raised here like one would expect a scientist would?

Quote:

McGentrix: Nope. You are spreading lies, falsehoods and pseudo-science. The only science that you have shown is

And you, as a scientist, don't want to use your real science to refute. Are you afraid that you will use it all up? There's little chance of that because I have never once read any science in any of your posts.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Thse clowns are claiming its Physics of 9/11 but they forget the chemistry qnd metllurgy.
PS, I basically type ith one hqnd and only hit the qnd e and severl consonants with my left. Its blowed up real good. Thats why the "a" look like a q and "e" ofn comes out as a w.

Im trying with several hand held devices qnd vrp's .
But I know that most veryone is intelligent enough to decode. So I dont spend much time with spellcheck xcept with techy words.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Thse clowns are claiming its Physics of 9/11 but they forget the chemistry qnd metllurgy.

Again with the attacks not representative of a scientist. Again, misdirection from a scientist.

Why are you not, as a scientist, addressing the screwy NIST physics?

What metallurgy can explain away the eutectic steel that had no legitimate or legal reason for being there?

I have asked, of a scientist, myriad questions, some about your "lies" or your astounding level of ignorance and you come back with this.

Have you tried a speaking app? I have seen one used that was very accurate and very fast.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I am extremely fluent in typo. I had a minor in college.

1 Reply

@camlok,

Quote:

Why are you not, as a scientist, addressing the screwy NIST physics

Because my major areas are in mining geology and hemistry and geochemistry AND ART, I use geophysics but I have 2 consultant geophysicists that I work with (both were on my staff before I sold my company). Weve all got more degrees than a thermometer and years of combined expeerience. The NIST report is accurate and the other crap tht sserts to "critique" NIST , are mind masturbation qherein th writers hop around from point to point when the real truth gets too close an they want to dissociate themselves.
One of my geophysicists reviewed the seismic work done by Columbia and the USGS wand noteds that the extended returns of compressive waves propogating through NYC and recieved by seismic units at nano second differences qre very difficult to fqke i it wre a series of cutters.

I owe you no rspect because you are intellectually dishonest or else very ill informed about science. SO, pick one

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

I had two good hqnds then but till never lernt typing . To this day I use a tblet that allows me to rite and then the tablet turns it into words of type. Thts pretty good but all my tblets qre "WIFI only" I m not pying a double goddam fee for another "phone plan".

I just got my bill for the lst three month of phone and computers. JEEZ Louise , I need to come up with some scam that starts out t 29 $ a month qnd then, in 4 short years, explodes to 435$ a month. HOLY SHEEIT. (But thats a total nother thread)

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Thse clowns are claiming its Physics of 9/11 but they forget the chemistry qnd metllurgy.

Without getting too overly angry, explain how it is that there were melted girders at the WTC.

Then explain how the core structure of the buildings offered no more resistance than industrial-strength couch cushions.

0 Replies

The Physics of 911

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know