|
September 11th Attacks - Do You Think It Was a Conspiracy? (pg. 18)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
And I really don't have to answer you, either. I'm just doing this for my country in order to get the message out to those who can see through the veil of lies and deception that has been put into place. Some people will hold on to the lies with all of their might. Perhaps their grip on reality is too tenuous and the truth too much for them so they just deny all of the inconsistencies and the whitewash and make it a point to ridicule anyone who tries to get to the truth.
|
glad you can still manage to bend over far enough to blow your own horn there mate....
no amount of google video or internet sleuthing will ever combat common sense...... im not going to get into this argument again... i already stomped all over it once in the other tin foil hat thread. out of all the explanations for liquefied metal pools found at ground zero, thermite/thermate is the worst. first of all in order to cut columns using heat, you have to first melt the metal, then blast the molten metal out of the cut so that it wont fuse back together again. lets put it this way, the most economical way to cut thick lifts of steel is oxygen lance. Its not widely used, but they did use it for the 911 cleanup, and it does liquefy steel, and it can cut through a block of steel that is 4 feet thick.
if your not a technical person, dont argue technical points you dont understand. and im sorry, 4 weeks of internet research doesnt equate to a propper engineering education and work experience.... you want to prove your theories, find a liscenced certified structural engineer with at least 15 years experience, who supports these theories by submitting a detailed technical paper for peer review. the CT's have yet to do this, and its not from lack of effort..... they have posted an impressive list of "professionals" on their tin foil hat roster..... and with 15 minutes of my own internet sleuthing, i had debunked 98% of that list. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
glad you can still manage to bend over far enough to blow your own horn there mate....
no amount of google video or internet sleuthing will ever combat common sense...... im not going to get into this argument again... i already stomped all over it once in the other tin foil hat thread. out of all the explanations for liquefied metal pools found at ground zero, thermite/thermate is the worst. first of all in order to cut columns using heat, you have to first melt the metal, then blast the molten metal out of the cut so that it wont fuse back together again. lets put it this way, the most economical way to cut thick lifts of steel is oxygen lance. Its not widely used, but they did use it for the 911 cleanup, and it does liquefy steel, and it can cut through a block of steel that is 4 feet thick.
if your not a technical person, dont argue technical points you dont understand. and im sorry, 4 weeks of internet research doesnt equate to a propper engineering education and work experience.... you want to prove your theories, find a liscenced certified structural engineer with at least 15 years experience, who supports these theories by submitting a detailed technical paper for peer review. the CT's have yet to do this, and its not from lack of effort..... they have posted an impressive list of "professionals" on their tin foil hat roster..... and with 15 minutes of my own internet sleuthing, i had debunked 98% of that list. |
Actually, I'm a very technical person. I started working on semi-complex electronics (taking stereo receivers apart and putting them back together - with precision) before I was even ten years old. I've been a tech-head for much of my life. Your baseless assumptions make you look like an ass, btw ;)
And why would you need to blast the metal out of the cut when the whole point is to walk the building off of them after cutting them all at a 45 degree angle? The company that dismantled the remnants of the towers (www.controlled-demolition.com) is right up the road from me. A good friend of mine is friend's with the owner's son and I'm probably going to be talking to them sometime in the near future in order to get a better idea of how these things could have been done.
You have to love due diligence. I freaking live for it. |
|
|
| culorut |
| Trancer-X great posts, you know your stuff. |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
Actually, I'm a very technical person. I started working on semi-complex electronics (taking stereo receivers apart and putting them back together - with precision) before I was even ten years old. I've been a tech-head for much of my life. Your baseless assumptions make you look like an ass, btw ;)
And why would you need to blast the metal out of the cut when the whole point is to walk the building off of them after cutting them all at a 45 degree angle? The company that dismantled the remnants of the towers (www.controlled-demolition.com) is right up the road from me. A good friend of mine is friend's with the owner's son and I'm probably going to be talking to them sometime in the near future in order to get a better idea of how these things could have been done.
You have to love due diligence. I freaking live for it. |
no offense but since when does an electronics technician know all about structural engineering?
to answer your question briefly, the reason why you have to blow the molten metal out of the cut is that it will fuse together since it is molten, Especially when you are looking at the WTC columns' gauge. RDX cut charges dont melt the steel they simply fire a jet of copper through the metal, so the cut will just walk itself apart. thermite on the other hand would melt the steel so you would need to clear the cut in order to achieve separation.
the thermite theory is retarded based on lack of evidence and lack of feasibility. we are talking thousands and thousands of TONNES of thermite. Controlled demolition requires too much preptime, and not to mention enough det cord to wrap around the world 12341234132 times. Pancake theory is theoretically sound, feasible and is the most probably cause of failure.
but what do i know im only a civil engineer....... |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | | the thermite theory is retarded based on lack of evidence and lack of feasibility. we are talking thousands and thousands of TONNES of thermite. Controlled demolition requires too much preptime, and not to mention enough det cord to wrap around the world 12341234132 times. Pancake theory is theoretically sound, feasible and is the most probably cause of failure. |
And you are positive that there is no other much more powerful thermite or thermate?
| quote: | | but what do i know im only a civil engineer....... |
Sorry not structural, you don't count. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
And you are positive that there is no other much more powerful thermite or thermate? |
yes, i've already posted evidence showing exactly that. how "powerful" it is is irrelevant. its the nature of the substance that is important. and thermite can't make nice clean cuts like any of you believe. the cuts trancer is referring to were made by rescue teams.
in any case, stop inventing explosives necessary for your crazy theories. this is not good science nor very logical :rolleyes:
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
The company that dismantled the remnants of the towers (www.controlled-demolition.com) is right up the road from me. A good friend of mine is friend's with the owner's son and I'm probably going to be talking to them sometime in the near future in order to get a better idea of how these things could have been done. |
this is an excellent idea. please do this. i look forward to you explaining how the demo experts tell you that it was impossible. im sure you'll just ignore them, but at least be honest with us about it ;)
somehow, im guessing they'll say something similar to THIS |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | yes, i've already posted evidence showing exactly that. how "powerful" it is is irrelevant. its the nature of the substance that is important. and thermite can't make nice clean cuts like any of you believe. the cuts trancer is referring to were made by rescue teams.
in any case, stop inventing explosives necessary for your crazy theories. this is not good science nor very logical |
And you seem to know as well if there is no military weapons that cannot do such a thing?
Fuking ignorance is bliss. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
a military weapon did it? so, now that thermite has been ruled out, you think that a nameless "military weapon" did it...
:) Yeah I can see that. Go ahead and accept the truth pkc |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
And you are positive that there is no other much more powerful thermite or thermate?
Sorry not structural, you don't count. |
and what do you think a civil engineer does dumbass.........structural is a sub discipline of civil engineering. there is no "structural" engineering discipline.
Mark Routhier B.Eng Civil Engineering, Structural and Infrastructure. PEO Registered EIT
good enough for you ? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
a military weapon did it? so, now that thermite has been ruled out, you think that a nameless "military weapon" did it...
:) Yeah I can see that. Go ahead and accept the truth pkc |
haha! exactly right. "ignorance is bliss" is pretty ironic, considering that arguing for a make-believe military weapon is arguing from ignorance.
ie
| quote: |
i need this technology to exist, therefore it does |
|
|
|
|
|
