9/11 Poll

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And what did Jones or Harrit say is the speed of the energy release of the paint... er.. i mean sooper-thermite?

It can be anything you want it to be.

If Jones or Harrit were so certain it was nanothermite, they'd want to have it inspected by independent experts. They won't though, because they know it will come back with the results of it being paint. They don't want to offer it up to actual experts because they know it would be the nail in the coffin of the truth movement.

It's just an immensely stupid idea, and you know it. Show at least some shame.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

.
So why do we see that same damn picture so much? People admit they only found ONE filing cabinet.

It is like that ONE picture we always see of the ground zero worker standing in front of a column with that slanted cut. Like one column proves something.

Richard Gage doesn't even talk about the distribution of steel. Who's side is he on? Does the distribution of steel have anything to do with reality of skyscrapers? No, it can't possibly be related to the square inches of cross sectional area of the columns on each level.

psik

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You are simply arguing from indredulity here. You have no basis to deny the reality of that umbrella being a weapon other than you can't believe it.

There is proof that there was such a weapon designed, and we have a guy standing with an open umbrella on a sunny day during a murder, with the victim having an entry wound from that direction of the same diameter as that weapon's projectile and smaller than any rifle or pistol rounds.

As far fetched as it may sound initially, it is real. It just wasn't investigated.

 

you can interpret the video any way you wish. which essentially makes the video worthless. the video also cuts immediately after his statement which implies that he did in fact state later what he did or did not do.

yes. in the nist report on building 7.

i specifically said "WTC 1 & 2", not the government.

i'm convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that WTC 1 & 2 was not taken down by explosives.
the only real mystery here is 7.

 

thinking and knowing are two different things.

i have asked, numerous times, for the evidence that links these chips to WTC 1 & 2. so far this evidence hasn't been forthcoming.

 

2308 posts ? This is absurd..

 

of ONE thread out of how many threads?
we might have some kind of record here.

 

Nah, I think the Startrek thread has this one beat.

 

No, it implies they are within the region \( 10^{-9} \) m

Not \( 10^{-8} \) or \( 10^{-7}\) m

Particles 200nm across, are not 'nanometre sized particles, they are TWO ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE GREATER IN SIZE. You said 'nanometre sized particles, and you are talking out of your butt.

 

phlog, you're right about the first part. A nanometer is indeed \( 10^{-9} \). But you failed the test on the second part, thinking that a particle 200 nanometers in size shouldn't be described as a nanometer sized particle.

Why? Because when measuring things that are very small or very big in meters, the measurement types are every 3 powers of magnitude. Thus, meter, and then kilometer \( 10^{3} \) m. Millimeter \( 10^{-3} \) m, then micron \( 10^{-6} \) m, and then nanometer \( 10^{-9} \) m. A 200 nanometer object is only .2 microns; it simply can't qualify as a micron sized particle. Hope this helps.

 

I think you mean the Star Wars vs. Star Trek thread, in which case, yes it does, by a large margin. While this is only one of the 9/11 threads, I think that it may well be that even all of the 9/11 threads combined might not beat it. I must admit I laughed at the Star Trek TNG enterprise going against the Death Star ;-).

Actually, I think it's fairly hard to keep threads on 9/11 going at times, because emotions can frequently run high and emotions running high can (and frequently do) equate to people blowing their tops; and that, in turn, can lead to the ruination of a thread. Clearly, it's good if a few cool heads can try to dampen down excessive emotional input, and while I certainly believe there is room for improvement, it seems that we've more or less managed to do this.

 

"200 nanometers" is not "a nanometer".
a 200 nanometer particle is not "a nanometer" particle.
in fact it can be described as "a particle 100s of nanometers across".

 

Here you go again, avoiding the evidence and the facts.

As for comparing to "reference spectrum", this shows you are confusing the matter, I'm afraid. Jeffery Farrer is an expert in X-EDS and regarding the beams and regions of focus, the respective spikes for aluminium and oxygen are clear.

The rest of the facts about the lack of zinc oxide and magnesium are clear, and you have avoided them. This completely rules out paint from the WTC.

So, I again ask you to stop spreading disinformation.

 

Correct.

Again, correct. It is a nanometer -sized- particle. That is, it is within the nanometer range- equal to or larger than a nanometer and smaller than a micron.

Sure. It can't, however, be described as a micron sized particle. What measurement type would you use to describe it?

 

.
Isn't ASSUMING ANYTHING outside the laws of physics invalid?

You are just muddying the waters without contributing anything.

Doesn't every skyscraper have to hold up its own weight? Didn't that problem have to be solved in the Empire State building? So why shouldn't we be told the distribution of steel and concrete and not have to ASSUME ANYTHING?

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/worl...ate-towers-should-have-remained-standing-9-11

psik

 

Trippy, I took a look at the data Hoz presented, and what he's saying makes sense to me.

 

I don't think that knowing the destribution of steel and concrete would mean that we would the know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth concerning 9/11

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

However, it would be nice. It would also be nice to know conclusively if there was anything other than anything of the floors survived other than this meteorite like piece. Your mentioning that there was only one filing cabinet found is strongly suggestive that little if any more of it survived. This all goes back to the issue of how much energy would have been required to create the type of collapse debris that was found at ground zero. I used to think that the quantity of dust in the following link may be off, but now I'm not sure; Tony told me something that led me to believe this, but I'm now wondering if the number I was thinking of, which had been supplied by an official story supporter, was in fact a misinterpretation of something that was said in it. I definitely think that some useful things can probably be ferretted out of the following article from 9/11 Research concerning the North Tower's dust cloud:
The North Tower's Dust Cloud - Analysis of Energy Requirements for the Expansion of the Dust Cloud Following the Collapse of 1 World Trade Center