Science Deniers are Everywhere

@Olivier5,

How nice to have such certainty in your life.

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Because I like you Finn.

Max is the equivalent of a really bad used car salesman. He says this to everyone. He is one of the most dishonest fellas I've ever come across, and that is saying a lot considering what A2K has for dishonest people.

1 Reply

@camlok,

What? Don't you like me?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

The graphs are accurate. If you are sure that they are inaccurate, then provide some graphs that are accurate.

I've provided excerpts from the paper. If you disagree with them, then prove them wrong by providing counter sources. We'll start here.

From the paper:

Figure 1: Surface temperatures in the Sargasso Sea, a 2 million square mile region of the Atlantic Ocean, with time resolution of 50 to 100 years and ending in 1975, as determined by isotope ratios of marine organism remains in sediment at the bottom of the sea (3). The horizontal line is the average temperature for this 3,000-year period. The Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum were naturally occurring, extended intervals of climate departures from the mean. A value of 0.25 °C, which is the change in Sargasso Sea temperature between 1975 and 2006, has been added to the 1975 data in order to provide a 2006 temperature value.

The average temperature of the Earth has varied within a range of about 3°C during the past 3,000 years. It is currently increasing as the Earth recovers from a period that is known as the Little Ice Age, as shown in Figure 1. George Washington and his army were at Valley Forge during the coldest era in 1,500 years, but even then the temperature was only about 1° Centigrade below the 3,000-year average.
___________________________________________

Go ahead and point out the inaccuracies in the above.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

What's not to like about a dishonest, science denying, US war crimes/US terrorism denying, supporter of mass murderers?

0 Replies

@camlok,

Quote:

7. NIST, the government agency that did the studies of the twin towers and WCT7 repeatedly lied, they repeatedly denied absolute realities such as explosions heard by firemen, police, first responders, reporter, eyewitnesses, ... .

At the 10:00 mark, it is explained how the low spectrum of the audio file had been scrubbed. At the 10:50 mark, forensic reconstruction of the file shows what was missed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJMPN66FHwY&t=1s

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

It never ends.

You never started, max. You engaged in outright deception from the get go. You weren't the least bit interested in addressing the science - you said so yourself. You were unscientific from beginning to end, a true science denier.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

It comes out of studying science instead of denying it. Nothing you can't do.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Well, if you don't understand the principle of lying, you cannot understand what's wrong with your piece.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier the stunning hypocrite, the science denier. How do you live with yourself? How can you continue to step up and expose yourself like this? It's incredible.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

The master "science deniers" of 9/11 are these conspiracy idiots.
1They have no evidence to argue gainst the facts that all the seismic stations recorded nothing but the air plane crashes an the buildings collapsing in a normal gravity fall.

2Glenn has assertd that firemen claimed that "they heard a bomb". Only one foremen even testified in that realm and he actually testified that the "Noise of the falling building was just as loud as a bomb,HE DID NOT SAY IT WAS A BOMB". The fireman later stated that these conspiracists had it all twisted.

3 temperture thresholds of 1500-1800 degrees achieved by the fires F were certainly enough to weaken steel beams beyond their structural integrity. This easily initiated the gravity collpse.

4These giuys totally ignore the several bunches of video or film that actually show the jets flying into the buildings, that coupled with
statements of hundreds of eye witnesses

The psychology of deniers via "conspircy theories" is kinda neat. There is commonality among these kinds of people who argue against common fact, visible evidence, and real science. All these people , according to psychologists, feel powerless and feel that they have no control over their life circumstances.
They basically develop an "alternate reality into which they descend. Pychologists whove reported on the 9/11 conspiracy "theorists" will, in all probability never come around to accept truth without some kind of professional help. In other words, the more e argue with them, the more empowered they feel to carry on in their alternative dimension.

I have no idea about whether JTT is still ranting about this fantasy, Ive only peeked at a post she did on another thread (I think it was the Civil war thread and she was just railing against an individual other than me). Smile

12 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

2Glenn has assertd that firemen claimed that "they heard a bomb". Only one foremen even testified in that realm and he actually testified that the "Noise of the falling building was just as loud as a bomb,HE DID NOT SAY IT WAS A BOMB". The fireman later stated that these conspiracists had it all twisted.

DEAD wrong, farmerman the scientist. It isn't possible that you can be this ignorant. You have to be outright lying.

Quote:

118 Witnesses:
The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers
Graeme MacQueen
August 21, 2006
One of the greatest mysteries of September 11, 2001 is the collapse of the Twin Towers.
Claims that explosions contributed to the collapses were made on 9/11 and have persisted, but studies supportive of the U.S. government’s account of events have ignored or denied these claims. A great deal is at stake in this debate. If explosions were critical to the collapses, the official al Qaeda narrative may need to be radically altered or abandoned altogether.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Article_5_118Witnesses_WorldTradeCenter.pdf

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

3 temperture thresholds of 1500-1800 degrees achieved by the fires F were certainly enough to weaken steel beams beyond their structural integrity. This easily initiated the gravity collpse.

All quotes from,

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso

The following article appears in the journal JOM, 53 (12) (2001), pp. 8-11.

"However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range."

Which is 1,382-1,472F, quite a bit below the temperatures described by farmerman the scientist who should be better informed.

Quote:

were certainly enough to weaken steel beams beyond their structural integrity. This easily initiated the gravity collpse

"It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire. "

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

4These giuys totally ignore the several bunches of video or film that actually show the jets flying into the buildings, that coupled with
statements of hundreds of eye witnesses

No one is ignoring those videos, farmerman. But you science deniers/US government conspiracy theorists ignore the video of the plane going into and out of WTC2, with no damage to the nose of the plane, when bird strikes can badly damage the nose of a plane.

You titanium hatted US government conspiracy theorists ignore the molten steel pouring out of WTC2, again, another totally impossible event that destroys, by itself, the US conspiracy theory.

You folks ignore the free fall of WTC7, another thing that destroys, by itself, the US government conspiracy theory.

Tighten your titanium hat, it's slipping.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

The psychology of deniers via "conspircy theories" is kinda neat. There is commonality among these kinds of people who argue against common fact, visible evidence, and real science. All these people , according to psychologists, feel powerless and feel that they have no control over their life circumstances.

As I have shown, you are describing yourself, farmerman. Visible evidence, from FEMA, the USGS, RJLee show molten and vaporized steel and other metals that could not have been caused by "hijackers".

You raised the wutectic steel of FEMA and then you ran from it. Eutectic steel is caused by thermate. There was zero legal/legitimate reason for thermate to have been at WTC and yet there was residue and unreacted particles of NANOTHERMITE found in WTC dust.

Nanothermite is a US military super explosive discovered by US Lawrence Livermore Lab scientists in the 1990s. No one else in the world has this solely US product. No one else in the world knows how to make this US patented super explosive. Certainly not 19 Arab "hijackers".

There are so many IMPOSSIBILITIES in the US government conspiracy theory, each one, on their own, sinks the government narrative.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

You know for a fact JTT/camlock is female? Not that it matters much but I'm surprised. There's a fanatism there that's in my experience more frequent among men. This said, the constant nagging thing...

I do think there's something SPECIAL about the most extreme deniers, a form of mental dysfunction. The constant repeating of the same stuff is clearly manic.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

2Glenn has assertd that firemen claimed that "they heard a bomb". Only one foremen even testified in that realm and he actually testified that the "Noise of the falling building was just as loud as a bomb,HE DID NOT SAY IT WAS A BOMB". The fireman later stated that these conspiracists had it all twisted.

This is what is so phantasmagorical about the denials. There are so many firemen, reporters, police, first responders, eyewitnesses who describe explosions, secondary explosions, bombs, going off before and after the plane explosions.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_firefighters.html

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

Watch from 0:55 on in the bottom left corner of this video and you will see a human being being exploded out of a twin tower window. Watch carefully for it is very fast.

Visible Explosion at World Trade Center

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=59&v=Ne1FJBVkh4s

==========

George W Bush describes bombs and explosions that "concussed" the firemen working within the twin towers. In PEOPLE magazine, in March 2017.

Quote:

The 43rd president recognizes, however, that his plight was “incomparable” to the firefighters, police officers and other responders who witnessed the tragedy firsthand.

“I had a job to do,” he says. “They had a job to do, but I didn’t see the horrific scenes they saw nor did I get concussed by the loud explosions and the bombs that went off around them.”

http://people.com/politics/george-w-bush-opens-up-about-his-sleepless-nights-after-911/

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I do think there's something SPECIAL about the most extreme deniers, a form of mental dysfunction. The constant repeating of the same stuff is clearly manic.

So why then do you continue to repeat the same US government conspiracy nonsense, Olivier, all the while totally ignoring the videos, the science, the free fall of WTC7, admitted to by NIST?

Notice how there is only this manic screaming by you, farmerman, the other US government conspiracy theory theorists. There is no science, no nothing from you guys save for these rants.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Glenn has assertd that firemen claimed that "they heard a bomb".

Where did I make this claim?

Anyway, at the 10:00 mark on the video below, it is explained how the low spectrum of the audio file had been scrubbed. At the 10:50 mark, forensic reconstruction of the file shows what was missed. What caused that huge explosion just before collapse?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJMPN66FHwY&t=1s

Quote:

temperture thresholds of 1500-1800 degrees achieved by the fires F were certainly enough to weaken steel beams beyond their structural integrity.

You're playing dumb about the fact that the lower intact core structure and perimeter columns were not exposed to such heat. Why are you playing dumb?

Quote:

The psychology of . . .

Sure. I've often wondered how it is that proponents of the government-sanctioned theory can accept the idea that the upper fire-damaged block can fall through the undamaged lower block at a rate just forty feet shy of freefall for an observed 360 feet drop. Obviously, psychology plays a major role in such acceptance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
30 second mark, and 1:12 mark.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

4These giuys totally ignore the several bunches of video or film that actually show the jets flying into the buildings, that coupled with
statements of hundreds of eye witnesses

More US government. US media, 911 conventional wisdom.

Watch from 9:55 on where firemen discuss the multiple secondary explosions.

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

The entire video is of people describing bombs and explosions.

Interview with John Schroeder NYC 911 fireman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaKL15W_4og

0 Replies

Science Deniers are Everywhere

Quick Links

My Account

able2know