JTT
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 01:48 pm
@MontereyJack,
Why do you so despise science, MJ?

Quote:
Blahblsh blah molten steel.


https://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

Quote:
Yadayadayada nanothermite


NANOSCALE CHEMISTRY YIELDS BETTER EXPLOSIVES

One thousand years ago, black powder was prepared by
grinding saltpeter, charcoal, and sulfur together into a
coarse powder using a mortar and pestle. Since then, the
equipment for making energetic materials—explosives,
propellants, and pyrotechnics—has evolved considerably, but
the basic process for making these materials has remained the
same. That, however, is changing, thanks to an explosive
combination of sol-gel chemistry and modern-day energetic
materials research.
At Livermore Laboratory, sol-gel chemistry—the same
process used to make aerogels or “frozen smoke” (see S&TR,
November/December 1995)—has been the key to creating
energetic materials with improved, exceptional, or entirely
new properties. This energetic materials breakthrough was
engineered by Randy Simpson, director of the Energetic
Materials Center; synthetic chemists Tom Tillotson, Alex
Gash, and Joe Satcher; and physicist Lawrence Hrubesh.
These new materials have structures that can be controlled
on the nanometer (billionth-of-a-meter) scale. Simpson
explains, “In general, the smaller the size of the materials
being combined, the better the properties of energetic
materials. Since these ‘nanostructures’ are formed with
particles on the nanometer scale, the performance can be
improved over materials with particles the size of grains of
sand or of powdered sugar. In addition, these
‘nanocomposite’ materials can be easier and much safer to
make than those made with traditional methods.”


neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 02:21 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
If anyone can point out anything that I've missed, they are welcome to do so.

If no one points out anything that I've missed, then I probably haven't missed anything.


Exactly which bird (fighter jet) have you intimately worked with?
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 03:03 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
OK, well let me know if you ever manage to find any errors in anything that I've said.


Ever worked on one of these?

http://silverhawkauthor.com/images/site_graphics/Aircraft/New_Mexico/F-15A_9th_TFS_-19031653345-.jpg

Better yet, can you name this pilot?

I can...
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 03:09 pm
@neptuneblue,
Quote:
Better yet, can you name this pilot?


georgeob1?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:06 pm
@neptuneblue,
Can you point out anything that I'm wrong about?

That was a rhetorical question, by the way. It's already clear that you can't.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:07 pm
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:
Exactly which bird (fighter jet) have you intimately worked with?

Does it bother you that you cannot point out anything that I'm wrong about?
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:08 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
You just proved george is right.

That is incorrect. The fact that my capabilities are vast does not mean that I do not recognize my limits.

In fact, my superior capabilities actually make me better at recognizing my limits.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:09 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
Do we have someone here who can out-troll oralloy?

Pointing out facts does not make someone a troll.

If reality bothers you that much, maybe that's a sign that you should abandon leftist ideology.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:13 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Pointing out facts does not make someone a troll.

If reality bothers you that much, maybe that's a sign that you should abandon leftist ideology.


Left wing/alt right wing, oralloy, you and MJ are peas in a pod, willing to deny science, evidence and reality to support the impossible, totally ludicrous US government 9-11 conspiracy theory.

Neither you nor MJ seem able to explain how 1200 to 1300F WTC fires could melt WTCs 1, 2 & 7 structural steel. How come?
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:16 pm
@JTT,
In addition to the answer that I already gave you:
http://able2know.org/topic/468987-499#post-6898454

I can add:

c) It doesn't even seem to register with you when I bother to reply to you.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:30 pm
Cheryl is YELLING ALL THE TIME 🌹
@cclaypoole
·
2h
.
@WorkingFamilies
, 3 strikes & you're out!

1. Endorsed Joe Crowley over
@AOC

2. Endorsed Andrew Cuomo over
@ZephyrTeachout

3. And now endorses Elizabeth Warren over
@BernieSanders


WFP values its leadership over grassroots membership. Fail!
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:39 pm
@oralloy,
You are being your totally dishonest self, oralloy. You aren't "interested" because YOU KNOW FULL WELL that if you address it you have to admit and acknowledge that WTCs 1, 2 & 7 were blown up with usa nanothermite.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:48 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Does it bother you that you cannot point out anything that I'm wrong about?


You pretend to believe the US governments official conspiracy theory of 9-11 when you know that it is an impossible fable - Muslims, no one can melt steel with hydrocarbon fires - kerosene, office furnishings, etc. Yet there was lots of molten and vaporized WTC steel which means there were no Muslim hijackers.

That is something HUGE that you are wrong/lying about.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 04:57 pm
@JTT,
Thousands of blacksmiths would disagree with you on the ability to melt metal with hydrocarbon fires... do you know what they add to forges to melt steel? High pressure air increases the heat in a fire, hence the reason they didn't start making steel until they discovered this ability by adding flues and baffles to their forges. This allowed the higher temps to work harder metals.

I know you will refute this with something, but that is indeed the truth when working with steel in a forge. There are lots of blacksmiths on youtube, maybe check out a blacksmith video for some proof of how they work metal...

This will be my last and only post to you for this cycle. I'm sure we will be seeing you again in a few months when you come back online with your other login, Camlok.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 05:06 pm
@Baldimo,
A complete red herring, Baldimo, typical of your patent dishonesty. There were no forges in WTCs 1, 2 & 7. The fires were 1300F to 1500F below the temperatures needed to melt steel let alone vaporize it.

The usa military nanothermite explains it all. It's patently clear, Baldimo, WTCs 1, 2 and 7 were blown up.

Why do you ALWAYS avoid reality? Why do you despise science and evidence?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 05:18 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
I suppose, oralloy, you have got better qualifications than just a PhD in aeronautical engineering and flown more than a couple of different fighter jets.

I presume from your appeal to authority fallacy that you are unable to point out any errors in my posts.


There were indeed several noteworthy errors on your part. However the delusions you appear to entertain make pointing them out both useless and uninteresting.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 06:02 pm
@georgeob1,
Wrong. You cannot point out any errors that I've made.

All you can do is bluff and bluster about imaginary errors that you are not capable of pointing out.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 06:58 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Can you point out anything that I'm wrong about?

That was a rhetorical question, by the way. It's already clear that you can't.


Well, since I was an Eagle Keeper, I can assure you that your assessment of the F-15 is incorrect. ALL of it. But of course, you'll keep thinking Soviet aircraft is superior, only because you haven't seen the F-15X in action. When matched up head to head, it is the superior bird.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a26413900/air-force-buying-new-f-15/
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 07:10 pm
@neptuneblue,
What makes an F-15X superior to a fifth generation fighter?

Does it have stealth?

Does it have thrust vectoring?
neptuneblue
 
  3  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 07:16 pm
@oralloy,
It does not have stealth. Won't need it cus it's payload is twice the amount than the SU57.

Yes, it does have thrust vectoring.

Quit being a ******* poser. You might have book knowledge but I've watched these beautiful birds for many, many years. Go back to your video games while us veterans know the real deal. STFU.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 08:18:04