22 of 23
22
Inside Job—9/11 Truth and other 9/11 Discussion (Merged)
Posted: 22 March 2009 12:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 316 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  89
Joined  2009-01-07
psikeyhackr - 22 March 2009 11:47 AM

It is because I knew there were significant variations in my chopped down toothpicks that I did multiple drops of each type.

Do you think that the variations of the toothpicks matter? The toothpicks are not interrelated with regards to the structural integrity of one being compromised affecting the integrity of any other directly. The experiment serves a purpose, but not with a correlation to the tower levels.

psikeyhackr - 22 March 2009 11:47 AM

Now if you can come up with a mathematical exposition of the effects you are alluding to influencing the result by as much as 10% then I would be interested.  But if all you can come up with is rhetorical speculation then I am afraid that I do not see the point.

It is not a mere speculation to forward the fact that each level of the tower had a direct physical relation and an interdependency with other levels. The above levels of the tower do not drop on an unaffected level(s) below. The compromised integrity of affected levels would ripple downward, the toothpicks do not suffer by this - the stationary washers may simply be allowing a greater wedge effect, the toothpicks are then being braced for impact. This is not how the design structure of the towers would correlate. You are not showing that variations of weight within the tower levels is affecting the integrity of the structure by a falling mass.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 March 2009 01:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 317 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
psikeyhackr - 22 March 2009 11:23 AM
VYAZMA - 22 March 2009 10:17 AM

In my video,I take a standard deck of playing cards and construct a tall tower out of them. Then I take a yardstick and briskly strike the top 1/3 of the Card tower.

Is the yardstick 1/2 of 1/10th of 1% the mass of the cards?

The planes were less than 200 tons the towers were more than 400,000 tons.

Don’t forget to pour at least a quart of kerosene on the cards before you start the fire.

psik

What is the amount of Joules when a 200 ton object is travelling at 500 miles per hour?

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2009 04:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 318 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2009-04-03
Pragmatic Naturalist - 12 December 2007 07:26 PM

Some folks around here are just too skeptical for their own good.  There is a healthy skepticism and there is an unhealthy skepticism.  To deny your own hands in front of your own face is unhealthy.  I’m not saying the 9/11 case is the same.  But there are sufficient holes in the story to warrant a healthy dose of skepticism about the “official story”, especially as it concerns WTC 7—which has basically gone unexplained.  Buildings don’t fall like that for no reason.


I joined to touch on this topic.  Sad to see 22 pages of dense debate on physics.  Police investigations consist of more than lab.  Criminal history, MO, etc. matter too.

“the amount of Joules when a 200 ton object is travelling at 500 miles per hour” this has no practical import on 9-11.

An oft-heard Strawman is that Bush-Cheney either could not or would not do it, that our military or govt is too incompetent. This ignores lucky outcomes of “errors”.

Ever heard of the Strategy of Tension?  Operation Gladio?  Launched following World War Two, victory over fascism.

Op Gladio was organised by ‘fascists’ within the security services of the West. Reportedly, the idea was to kill innocent people and then blame this on others.

Gladio was about keeping the right-wing elite in power.

Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony:

‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force ... the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti revealed the existence of Gladio in 1991.

Parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have given us a little of the truth.

The book “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe,” by Daniele Ganser documents some of what we know so far.

Run by fascist elements in NATO and Washington, right-wing militias carried out acts of terrorism and electoral subversion in states such as Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Turkey and West Germany.

Gladio was the name used in Italy. In Austria the name was Schwert, Belgium -Sdra 8, Britain - Stay Behind, France - Glaive, Greece -Operation Sheepskin, Holland, Sweden -Sveaborg, Switzerland -P26 and Turkey -Special War Department. [Source: “Operation Gladio.” users.westnet.gr/~cgian/gladio.htm]

Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, details methods for launching terrorist attacks.

85 people were killed on August 2, 1980 in the bombing of the Bologna train station.

According to the Italian Senate, after its investigation in 2000, the bombers were later discovered to be “men inside Italian state institutions and ... men linked to the structures of United States intelligence.”

There is much more info on these ops.  They shot shoppers in Belgium.  CIA issued denials, but former DCI William Colby admitted some CIA involvement.  Vinciguerra and others stated that “the Atlantic Alliance” and CIA were setting assignments and money.  It was to prevent commies from getting legally elected.

A BBC documentary called Timewatch covered Gladio.  Find it online.  Part of it shows former Italian President Aldo Moro’s body in the “boot” of a car.  Interestingly, a man named Michael Ledeen appears in the Gladio documentary denying US involvement.  He pops up as a key neocon intell consultant in the Bush admin.  Here’s a statement from Ledeen a year or so prior to Sept 11:

referring to public/Congress reluctance about war
“of course, we can always get lucky. Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor, and demonstrate the need for reversal, as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.”

Parsing language, Ledeen called a hypothetical future bloodbath on US soil “lucky” and “miraculous” a blessing from “god”.

Ledeen also openly stated his admiration for Benito Mussolini, and for a bigger, bolder global fascism, a ruling body modeled “on the Waffen SS”.  Literally. Ledeen also says he and his peers support Democracy, and oppose Tyranny.  He considers fascism to be a populist, middle class, democratic revolution.

Ledeen has ties to the Italian Secret Police and elites at the P2 Lodge.  Joe Wilson’s story connected Ledeen with SISME and the false “yellowcake” story that Ledeen fed to Cheney.

===

Without considering any other connections, the mere fact that these facts have NEVER BEEN MENTIONED ANYWHERE IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN THE USA WITH REGARDS TO SEPT 11—not even as an amusing coincidence, a mystery, a puzzle—is shocking proof of something blatant and serious being obscured.  It’s INTERESTING, no?

===

Alex Jones brings up Gladio in a few of his movies, but with not nearly enough info or emphasis.

Sept 11 Truth-seekers do their own efforts an injustice by focusing on scientific minutae and “clues” ad infinitum.

Take JFK for example. Oswald got a loan from CIA in Moscow, to fly himself and his wife to the US.  It’s in the Warren Report.  Oswald’s Fairplay for Cuba office had the same address as one of J. Edgar Hoover’s top cops named Banister, a staunch anti-communist.  It was on the fliers.  Oswald as teenager is seen in a photo at a Civil Air Patrol field with OSS officer David Ferrie, who was killed pending an examination by Garrison.  Also appearing in photo is Barry Seal, known CIA drug/arms pilot.  Seal had Poppy Bush’s phone number in his wallet when he was killed.  That’s a whole nuther story.  Clearly, Oswald was not a “lone nut”, whatever the trajectory of the bullets, whatever the smoke on the grassy knoll.  (watch Evidence of Revision—raw footage from that day, days)

ONE POINT RAISED BY LOOSE CHANGE is valid, but they fail to cover it properly:

Not only did groups within the USGov, NATO, and CIA bomb innocent Europeans for 40 years, they also had specific detailed preliminary plans to bomb and strafe US cities, such as Wash DC and Miami, to blame it on Castro.  James Bamford who has written numerous books on NSA, usually laudatory books, uncovered the Operation Northwoods Memo.  Hijacking airliners was one plan.  The plans included dead American soldiers and dead civilians, real and fake.


Any arguments that the State and Intelligence could not or would not do these things is laughably ludicrous.

Conceptually combining Gladio and Northwoods is a close approximate recipe for Sept 11.

But there’s more.  Besides Ledeen described above, numerous other well-placed US officials in Intell and Pentagon advisory roles advocated as to the need for a bloodbath on US soil, statements prior to Sept 11.  Ambiguity and weasel-words vary.

People have argued what PNAC meant precisely when they described the necessity for an attack on America like Pearl Harbor to move their plans forward rapidly.  Skeptics have pried open and highlighted ambiguities in PNAC statements, in defense of them.  Here’s what exists in some context:

Project for a New American Century is an offshoot of earlier groups with fascinating histories, such as Committee on the Present Danger and Team B.  The latter two attempted to prove that the non-existence of Soviet WMDs was proof of their existence, that the CIA lacked imagination, and that the US must initiate a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the USSR.  (It was estimated that this bombing would lead to some 170 million American deaths in retaliation, but still considered worthwhile and an acceptable death toll.  Sept 11 was only 3000, a pittance.)

This intellectual process was later applied to Iraq, with amusing consistency.

PNAC published statements since about 1996, on many issues in world affairs.  They offered a highly militaristic hard power viewpoint.  They opined on the entire world, but great emphasis on Saddam Hussein and Iraq.  They hounded Bill Clinton and Congress to topple Saddam.  Democrats dragged their feet, so PNAC helped Ahmed Chalabi court Republicans and AIPAC.

Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, John Negroponte, Michael Ledeen, Richard Perle (Prince of Darkness to his friends), John Bolton, Jeb Bush and William Kristol were members or associates, and about 140 others were members or signers.  Not all of them signed all statements.  Rumsfeld was a signer, but denied he was a member.

Besides these associations, Richard Perle was on the Defense Policy Board.  DPB advises the Pentagon, has access to classified docs.  In other words, PNAC has more access and more power than many Congressmen.  Sept 11 was CRITICAL TO THE PENTAGON.  Sept 11 was POLICY, not conspiracy.

Wolfowitz published a DoD strategy for Fiscal 1994 in 1992.  This strategy was echoed by PNAC, and later became Bush Doctrine, an ideological cut-and-paste job.  Check it out.

A sort of “summation” PNAC doc called “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” goes on for many pages on plans to upgrade the military and to wage wars. 
included: “calls for a blueprint maintaining global US pre-eminence and shaping the “international security order” in­line with America’s principles and interests.” This first American Grand Strategy “must be advanced as far into the future as possible,” and the US must “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars” “as a core mission.”

The September 2000 document also said: “This process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a New Pearl Harbor.” 

“catastrophic and catalyzing event”  One skeptic could not believe that it actually said that.  Bush and other officials raised the Pearl Harbor metaphor more than a few times.

“Skeptics” have argued that “transformation” does not refer directly to waging wars, but the overall context should be clear, their entire focus is on waging wars, with heavy emphasis on the Middle East.

Given all this—and similar pro-terrorism statements exist, both preceding Sept 11 and after—one must question what being a skeptic really means.  At what point does healthy skepticism become overwhelmed with blunt trauma of fact.

The largest fact—to me—is NOT what this arguably circumstantial evidence directly PROVES about 9-11.  It certainly shows motive, means, and opportunity.  Motive is spelled out.

What jumps out at me is that NONE OF THIS INTRIGUING AND COMPELLING INFO HAS EVER BEEN SERIOUSLY RAISED AND RED-FLAGGED with regards to Sept 11.  Even if only to clear their names, to disprove that Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Cheney, and other ruthless megalomaniacs could have done it, A SERIOUS NEWS MEDIA ON A SERIOUS PLANET WOULD HAVE BROACHED THE SUBJECT, THOROUGHLY.  Not a History Channel wash in 2011.

These statements came from Public Relations firms. Why is it such a secret for ordinary Americans that our protectors “wished” for us to be terrorized and killed?

——
I could go on and on about this background and framework, it’s fascinating.  It’s “the system”.  There are a few secrets and disputed facts, but most of it is verified public info.  This is a more complicated story than WTC BUILDING 7—or maybe it’s a simpler argument—but it’s a convoluted soap opera of covert intrigue.  I cannot imagine how anyone could address the PHYSICS ARGUMENTS while ignoring this contextual view.  Inside this context, it matters less HOW the Towers collapsed than WHO, altho it makes sense that “Al-Qaeda” would have had inside assistance to SUCCEED.

see Dr. Chossudovsky book America’s War on Terror

[ Edited: 03 April 2009 05:33 AM by g-doggy ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2009 04:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 319 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14

NB: the color blue is reserved for Mod/Admin official commentary, as per the rules.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2009 04:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 320 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2009-04-03
dougsmith - 03 April 2009 04:12 AM

Thanks for the correction, Doug.  My apologies.

 

————-
I meant to mention something above about a kind of “herd instinct” phenomena strongly evident amongst “Truthers”, and a mirror image “herd instinct” amongst “Skeptics” or “Falsers”.  I understand the purpose of skepticism on any weird issues.  That’s practical.  A lot of people are kooks.

What bugs me is the tendency for dogmatic rejectionism, and the general adherence to “official debunking points”, marching in lockstep.  I forgot to keep a tally:  Did anyone compare Truthers to Holocaust Denialism?  Moon Landings Denialism?  That’s standard fare.  (Holocaust Denialism denies that a fascistic State committed mass murder. Sept 11 accuses a fascistic State of committing mass murder. It’s the opposite. “9-11 Debunking” is more like Holocaust Denial.)

I would guess it’s a combination of mainstream news programming and NOT “fear” that “United for 911 Truth” suggested about 20 pages back, but probably a feeling of group superiority and intellectual pride that feels great and smug.

This coming from an arrogant semi-intellectual myself, so I’m not throwing stones, I’m just observing and wondering aloud.

It does not hurt the Art of Smug Skepticism that there is a huge level of cultism, religion, scamming, probably Operation Mockingbird [CIA disinfo], and general loony tunes paranoia around Sept 11, which makes it difficult to separate the wheat from chaff.  It does not help the search for accuracy that the Skeptics tend to focus on all the goofy allegations and distortions.

I wonder if “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” was treated as “impossible to believe” “conspiracy theory” that Johnson would launch/escalate a full out war that would kill 58,000 Americans, knowingly based on a lie, as his tapes later revealed.  Do we remember how many different lies were tossed around during Vietnam?

As for Sept 11, even throwing out everything I wrote, the Hearings included Condi testifying about a CIA report she handed to Bush entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside US”.  We know about the co-ownership of Arbusto with Bin Laden’s brother, this is not denied.  We know about billions in funding to the Taliban—WE told them to admit Osama Bin Laden from Sudan.  Bin Laden’s and Zawahiri’s bodyguard and strategic planner, Ali Muhamed, he was an FBI informant and became a US Army Sergeant, after helping kill Sadat for the Muslim Brotherhood.  He went AWOL to fight in Afghanistan, but came back a month later, with no punishment.  That story was on the State Dept website, and on Israel’s Debkafile.

This stuff is the unofficial “official” story.  It’s there, but it’s not there in the ‘official report’ or the conventional story.

That stuff alone, and much much more like it:  I can’t comprehend how ordinary people could accept all that known stuff from official sources, other stories of complicity from Republican Senate Committee reports, and official lies followed by new revelations, all at face value and say it’s normal and ok.  But they do!

[ Edited: 03 April 2009 05:06 AM by g-doggy ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2009 11:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 321 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05

“the amount of Joules when a 200 ton object is travelling at 500 miles per hour” this has no practical import on 9-11.

That calculation is extremely important to what happened on 9/11 but it is so easy to find on the internet it is ridiculous to ask the question these days.  I searched for the info the day after he posted but I was going to let the post scroll down a while since I wasn’t eager to see another pointless response.

Kinetic Energy Calculations of Flight 11 and Flight 175 Impacts

——————————————————————————-
Formula for Kinetic Energy (KE)

KE = 0.5 · M · V2
———————————————————————-
Takeoff Weights for Boeing 767 –200ER and Boeing 707 –320B

The Maximum Takeoff Weight for a Boeing 767 -200ER is 179,170 kg
(http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family/pf/pf_200prod.html)

The Maximum Takeoff Weight for a Boeing 707 -320B is 152,400 kg
(http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/product.html)
———————————————————————-
Aircraft Type, Speed and Kinetic Energy Impact Calculation the WTC Towers Were Designed to Withstand and Survive

KE of Boeing 707 at 270 m/s*

(0.5) · (152,400 kg) · (270)2

= 76,200 kg · 72,900

= 5,554,980,000 Joules
———————————————————————-
Actual Aircraft Types, Impact Speeds of Flights 11 and 175 and Kinetic Energy Impact Calculations

Flight 11 Impact Speed into North Tower at 08:46:

KE of Boeing 767 at 198 m/s**

(0.5) · (179,170 kg) · (198)2

= 89,585 · 39,204

= 3,512,090,340 Joules

Flight 175 Impact Speed into South Tower at 09:03:

KE of Boeing 767 at 243 m/s**

(0.5) · (179,170 kg) · (243)2

= 89,585 · 59,049

= 5,289,904,665 Joules

http://deanjackson60.googlepages.com/notsodeepimpact

These calculations are important because if it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a 200 ton airliner to destroy a 400,000 ton building in less than 2 hours then this 911 Psychosis that has dragged on for SEVEN YEARS says some very strange things about the nation that put men on the Moon.

The laws of physics do not, and are not capable of giving a damn about America, Islam, NATO, Christianity, Israel, Capitalism, Money or anything else that might be involved in human behavior relating to 9/11.

At the time of impact the planes were not fully loaded or fully fueled so the mass was only about 150 tons, not 200.

But that kinetic energy DID TWO THINGS.  It punched the hole doing structural damage and it shook the buildings.  We don’t have much video of the north tower impact but there were lots of cameras running for the south tower hit.  The NIST says the building moved 12 inches at the 70th floor even though that was 130 feet below the impact point.  A linear extrapolation indicates it must have moved at least 14 inches at the impact point but since the building had to curve it would have been somewhat more.  But this means that the 92nd floor, 130 feet above the impact, should have moved 12 inches also.  So 22 stories of the south tower moved at least 12 inches in less then 3 seconds and the kinetic energy of the plane is the only possible cause.

This means that the energy that did structural damage cannot be computed without knowing how much of it moved the building and that cannot be determined without knowing the distribution of mass.  So why don’t we know this information and why haven’t EXPERTS been demanding it for SEVEN YEARS?

This distribution is of course going to affect the analysis of any supposed top down, straight down, gravitational collapse.

Is that what these videos are about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

Are those models too complicated and expensive for our engineering schools that charge $100,000 for 4 years?

After we get the physics straight then move on to figuring out who was responsible for the physics and all of the idiotic human behavior.  But this 911 Psychosis of supposedly intelligent, rational people not solving a grade school physics problem in seven years may be a bigger deal than who actually did the deadly deed. [21,940]

psik

[ Edited: 06 April 2009 12:00 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2009 03:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 322 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

What is it called when one refutes all theories,when somebody puts forth all kinds of testimonials against all the normal ideas, but fails utterly to put forth their own version of events? I suggest that you offer an idea of what happened that day, to “bolster” your “video documentary”. To bolster the thousands of words you have typed, in an effort to leave us all “quivering” with anticipation at what really caused the Bldgs to collapse.
So far, I, maybe others, have only received a “frenetic” posture from you regarding the “physics” of the 9-11 collapse. I have asked you at least 2x to offer up your own theory on what happened. You have NOTHING!!
This combined with your statements about automobile depreciation, leaves me to question your analytical abilities. But stay focused please, if you respond. Don’t stray towards the Auto industry, and economics. Just please, offer up your own ideas on what caused the Bldgs to collapse.
Can you do this??? Huhn?? It really is important, if you want to keep refuting all these other claims.
Believe me- Spock would not tolerate your irrational posturing. Not for one second!!

I’ll tell you what, if your hesitant to offer up your theories on what really went down, because you feel your life, or freedom may be in danger,if you “spill the beans”,well then I guess I’ll understand.

[ Edited: 06 April 2009 03:33 PM by VYAZMA ]
 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2009 05:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 323 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05

Believe me- Spock would not tolerate your irrational posturing. Not for one second!!

So you claim to know a great deal about the thinking of a fictional character that is portrayed as being exceptionally intelligent and LOGICAL.

I’m impressed.

So you don’t think Spock would check the NCSTAR1 report himself and notice that the total for the concrete WAS NOT THERE, or that the weights and quantities for the 12 types of perimeter wall panels WERE NOT THERE even though they were used to support 50% of the buildings’ weight. 

So what percentile did you rank in on the SAT?

I could provide a link on a recently released paper about some microscopic thermite chips.  What the hell, it is being discussed here:

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/active-thermitic-material-in-wtc-dust-t150.html

I’m not planning on reading it myself.  If someone gave me some dust and said it was from the WTC, how would they prove it to me?  I would not know how to do the necessary testing to detect the thermite chips anyway.  That kind of evidence depends on taking someone’s word.  Anyone that cares to can run my washer and toothpick test for themselves.  The conclusions should be obvious.

But I expect high school kids to be able to understand grade school physics and that a skyscraper must hold itself up.  I have said before I DON’T CARE WHO DID IT or WHY.  It is the fact that so many people in the nation that put men on the Moon can’t understand a grade school physics problem that is the important issue now.

Did you check the Kinetic Energy problem?  Was it correct?  LOL

It is as though you don’t understand the idea of ELIMINATING A NEGATIVE.  Just because one eliminates a negative it does not necessarily follow that the positive can be determined.  If you are so sure the planes could do it, why do you bother reading my posts?

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2009 06:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 324 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
psikeyhackr - 06 April 2009 05:51 PM

Believe me- Spock would not tolerate your irrational posturing. Not for one second!!

So you claim to know a great deal about the thinking of a fictional character that is portrayed as being exceptionally intelligent and LOGICAL.

I’m impressed.

So you don’t think Spock would check the NCSTAR1 report himself and notice that the total for the concrete WAS NOT THERE, or that the weights and quantities for the 12 types of perimeter wall panels WERE NOT THERE even though they were used to support 50% of the buildings’ weight. 

So what percentile did you rank in on the SAT?

I could provide a link on a recently released paper about some microscopic thermite chips.  What the hell, it is being discussed here:

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/active-thermitic-material-in-wtc-dust-t150.html

I’m not planning on reading it myself.  If someone gave me some dust and said it was from the WTC, how would they prove it to me?  I would not know how to do the necessary testing to detect the thermite chips anyway.  That kind of evidence depends on taking someone’s word.  Anyone that cares to can run my washer and toothpick test for themselves.  The conclusions should be obvious.

But I expect high school kids to be able to understand grade school physics and that a skyscraper must hold itself up.  I have said before I DON’T CARE WHO DID IT or WHY.  It is the fact that so many people in the nation that put men on the Moon can’t understand a grade school physics problem that is the important issue now.

Did you check the Kinetic Energy problem?  Was it correct?  LOL

It is as though you don’t understand the idea of ELIMINATING A NEGATIVE.  Just because one eliminates a negative it does not necessarily follow that the positive can be determined.  If you are so sure the planes could do it, why do you bother reading my posts?

psik


After all this, you still haven’t offered up your theories on why the buildings collapsed. There is no negative. It is an indisputable fact that 2 planes crashed into both buildings respectively, and they fell down shortly thereafter. That isn’t a negative.
I’m not following any links. I did follow your You-Tube link,to see your video. The video and the experiment were non-scientific.In every last regard,they were non-representational, and were very inconclusive. They were even inconclusive in proving the strength of toothpicks. Your experiment didn’t even uniformly show the strength of toothpicks under the influence of falling washers!!
Again,unless you are disputing that jet-liners hit the towers,then there are no negatives that you are eliminating. All you are doing is disputing the fact that the planes took the towers down. You have offered no alternative, which I’m supposing must somehow work independently of the plane impacts, and the ensuing fires.

I can’t remeber what my exact score was on my SAT’s. I know it wasn’t good. A few notches below average I think.

[ Edited: 06 April 2009 06:16 PM by VYAZMA ]
 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2009 04:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 325 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05

Things are getting strange on Danish television:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o

That can’t be good science.

Good science comes only from the US.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2009 05:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 326 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29

Do you know of anybody else who has made a comment about the possibility of the nano-thermite at the WTC, Psik? I can’t find anything else…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2009 09:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 327 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05
George - 13 April 2009 05:30 PM

Do you know of anybody else who has made a comment about the possibility of the nano-thermite at the WTC, Psik? I can’t find anything else…

There has been talk about microscopic “RED CHIPS” for months now.

http://aviewfrommybalcony.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/red-chips-found-in-wtc-dust/

I have only begun seeing the term nano-thermite recently.

You may have noticed I really do not approach this from the explosive perspective.  I concentrate on the Newtonian physics aspect of the IMPOSSIBILITY of the top smaller, lighter mass destroying the larger heavier mass in a ridiculously short time.  I ran across that link on another board.

psik

[ Edited: 14 April 2009 09:57 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2009 05:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 328 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
VYAZMA - 06 April 2009 06:11 PM

After all this, you still haven’t offered up your theories on why the buildings collapsed. There is no negative. It is an indisputable fact that 2 planes crashed into both buildings respectively, and they fell down shortly thereafter. That isn’t a negative.

GOD DID IT smirk If you were to ask the taliban, that’s the answer you would get, and their answer makes no less sense than the argument here!!

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 April 2009 08:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 329 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05
asanta - 14 April 2009 05:05 PM
VYAZMA - 06 April 2009 06:11 PM

After all this, you still haven’t offered up your theories on why the buildings collapsed. There is no negative. It is an indisputable fact that 2 planes crashed into both buildings respectively, and they fell down shortly thereafter. That isn’t a negative.

GOD DID IT smirk If you were to ask the taliban, that’s the answer you would get, and their answer makes no less sense than the argument here!!

It is somewhat amusing how atheists seem to drag the God/religion business into arguments totally unrelated to religion and yet portray themselves as intelligent, rational and scientific.

We are talking about airliners hitting a couple of skyscrapers.  Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up and withstand the wind.  The WTC towers did that for 28 years.

So if the top 10% of the north tower came straight down destroying everything below then doesn’t the conservation of momentum have something to do with it?  Shouldn’t atheists be mildly curious about how that could happen and how the distribution of steel and concrete in a skyscraper relates to it?  I guess curiosity is not part of atheist make up.  They just function on atheist GROUP THINK.  smirk  But no, the atheists are a bunch of believers.  Grade school physics is too difficult for them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

I am not talking about who did it or why.  After SEVEN YEARS that is not even the most important issue.  How is it that the nation that put men on the Moon has a citizenry that can’t figure out the obvious questions to ask about a supposed top down gravitational collapse of a skyscraper, 40 years after the Moon landing?

Atheists are great believers in EDUCATION.

This is embarrassing!

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 April 2009 09:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 330 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Sorry Psikey. You witnessed the event. All of your observations point towards some alternative means of collapse. By default.
So what was the cause? Considering that there is absolutely ZERO empirical,or tested evidence considering the events that took place at that time, under those circumstances, with those materials and those planes, it is bombastic of you to make these assumptions about the structures and their ability to withstand highly arbitrary dynamics.

What, Along with the planes impact, caused the towers to collapse?
Look…I’m giving you an out here!! Take it. Can you figure it out?

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
   
22 of 23
22
 
‹‹ Eveyone a humanist?      Your Work and You ››