quote:

And after each event, they take more and more of our rights away.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah--- the movie showing the squibs is intriguing, gonna look at that some more-- in fact it was what I said about the yellow substance squirting out below the cantilever floor having nothing to do with with the building coming down (not that it wasn't a misfire and intended to assist in that function) and if that was organized we should see similar events occuring all over the building but the (apparent) squibbs shooting out the windows are doing just like that...........however, it flies in the face of logic to attach  charges OR SET NEAR to the exoskeleton instead of the core to implode the fucking thing, but then that rules out thermite, it is not explosive in that manner, in and of itself. Oxygen is easy to come by.........they had the following sources for chimneys, the cabling corners, the huge basement connections into the sewers (possible source of much methane) and cabling tunnels (possible source of natural gas) and the elevators and central core.............

Evidence of the connection (agreed not the additional sources of underground fuel) -- If I remember correctly manhole covers were blown off for several blocks around those buildings on the explosion part.

The smoke/debris staying low and billowy (the volcanic theory) is another red herring, walk down the streets of the city that time of year and you will see that the air around tall buildings (especially fearsome in winter) will want to bounce you off the sidewalk it comes down so hard..............

So, still cogitating, and it's funner than crossword puzzles.

Ron


.........now it didn't really look like it imploded but pancaked down..........simple pancake theory has been debunked in my mind as explained by NOVA simulations.........
Nevertheless, that fuckin' thing came down pancake and not folded in.


So I am at a loss to explain these things, but they have caught my attention, and I will observe them until there is nothing more to be usefully learned from them.

Ron

quote:

got a pic?

The only fires i saw were barely hot enough to lite a cigarette, do show us the blast furnace you are talking about, or is that just a passing off handed remark?

quote:

9/11 Rescuer Saw Explosions Inside WTC 6 Lobby In an exclusive Killtown interview, Ground Zero EMT Patricia Ondrovic talks about her harrowing day at the WTC on 9/11. Within minutes after the South Tower collapses, she witnessed the WTC 5 blowing up, cars exploding, and explosions inside the lobby of the WTC 6, all the while narrowly escaping with her own life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

got a pic?

The only fires i saw were barely hot enough to lite a cigarette, do show us the blast furnace you are talking about, or is that just a passing off handed remark?

Unfortunatly that might be a bit hard, given that those wood-fired blast furnaces were in use some 2500 year ago. Crude steel was made in about 500 B.C. Here's a link or two to back it up.
<snip>
I think that should settle that.

quote:

9/11 Rescuer Saw Explosions Inside WTC 6 Lobby In an exclusive Killtown interview, Ground Zero EMT Patricia Ondrovic talks about her harrowing day at the WTC on 9/11. Within minutes after the South Tower collapses, she witnessed the WTC 5 blowing up, cars exploding, and explosions inside the lobby of the WTC 6, all the while narrowly escaping with her own life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Just a question...since you are willing to believe that the government faked the whole hijacking aspect of the events of 9/11

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
then why do you not accept that it might be possible that this person is a plant or fake or that the fireman's radio message mentioned earlier in this thread might be a fake.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
I mean since you have accepted that all the bereaved familiy members of the people who were not killed on the planes that were never hijacked because they never actually took off are all faking it, why is it not possible in your warped worldview that the "witnesses" who support your version of events might not, equally, be fakes and plants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Seems to me that if I was behind a plot that blew the fuck out of downtown New York and triggered a massive US invasion of two (so far) countries in my part of the world, it would be very much in my interest to plant a few rumours and a false witness statement or two to the effect that it wasn' the poor peace-loving non-violent Islamic fundamentalists behind the dastardly deed, but rather your own government....Gee if that's the case we should pull our military out of there and appologise for invading (not a bad idea in and of itself, but still one very much desirable from the al-qaeda point of view, you must admit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Kindly explain to me why every single "eyewitness" who says it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon is credible, yet those "eyewitnesses" who say it was a plane are automaticly deemed to be liars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Why is it that the people who claim to have had family members die on the planes that crashed into the buildings are clearly government stooges who are operating under false identities, and the folks who say there is no proof the dead folks existed (despite the existence of social security numbers, drivers licenses, photographs and children who will attest to the fact that their mommy or daddy was real, despite the existence of passenger manifests and radar and ground control records of the non-existant flkights from the moment they took off, are somehow 100% credible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
It seems to me that anything at all, no matter how patently absurd, that suggests some sort of plot you will accept as Gospel, and anything that counters that you view as by definition a lie.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Ron has looked over your so-called evidence, and he has, based on his rather extensive personal experience and knowledge in the field of steelwork, determined that the girders that you claim to be solid evidence of a thermite charge are in fact a result of after the fact cutting with a torch. Yet you continue to insist that thermite was to blame, despite the fact that somebody who has a very open mind on the subject has told you that isn't the case. Why is that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Anyway, as I have said before, in the words of the great Rule himself: "Again your ignorance disqualifies you as a participant in 9/11 discussions."

quote:

Arpig, ignorance may disqualify us from drawing definitive conclusions about this topic but it must not prevent us from joining a discussion of the significant mysteries still surrounding the catastrophic and coincidental collapse of those three buildings. 0

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

RealOne, you are correct. You have kept your discussion pretty much to the collapse of the buildings. I used the fast reply function, and I apologise for the confusion caused by the impression that I was replying directly to you. My question was more generally posed, it was directed at the 9/11 conspiracy believers in general, not specifically at you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
Oh and as for the "blast" furnaces...you used that term yourself, so I just repeated it. And since you knew very well what these were, why did you ask for some evidence of their existence. A bit of intellectual dishonesty on your part methinks, or is just that you can't keep your own untruths straight in your mind...."what a tangeled web we weave, when first we practice to decieve" eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
And as for my repeated closing statement, you did not call Rule on it when he used it to simply browbeat somebody who disagreed with him, I assume you feel it is entirely appropriate to use it. However, if you do feel it is inappropriate, then kindly explain to me why you did not mention it when Rule first used the line? Can anybody say "double standard"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
I do not believe that al-qaeda was responsible for the WTC disaster because the US government says so (I am not a US citizen, as a foreigner I have quite a good understanding of the US government's ability to lie), I believe it for two reasons:

1. It fits all the facts better than any other scenario. It also satisfies Ockham's razor...it fits without having to do all the mental gymnastics involved in the conspiracy theories.

2. The al-qaeda spokesmen have admitted that they were behind it.

I will readily concede that it is entirely possible that Bush & Co. were well aware of the impending attack and did nothing to stop it, hell I will even concede that they (or at least parts of the administration) were in on the whole thing right from the start. Myself, I don't believe that the buildings were supposed to come down, not in the plans of the islamicists, nor in the minds of their american co-conspirators (if any existed), but that, as so often happens when any plan is implemented in the real world,something went terribly wrong.

If you see your government as a sinsiter enemy, capable of executing, what even you must admit, would have to be a vast, globe-spanning conspiracy involving thousands, if not tens of thousands, of conspirators, then you have a far higher estimate of the capabilities of the US governments covert operations capabilities than is justified by the present record, or that of the past.

That is the 3rd reason I don't accept the conspiracy theories, they are simply beyond the capability of the US government's covert agencies to pull off without fucking them up.

It is not blind reliance on Government reports or spin that brings me to believe that it was indeed a bunch of fundamentalist muslims acting at the behest of OBL that carried out the attacks pretty much in the manner they are said to have done. It is that rarest of human attributes: common sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

Arpig, ignorance may disqualify us from drawing definitive conclusions about this topic but it must not prevent us from joining a discussion of the significant mysteries still surrounding the catastrophic and coincidental collapse of those three buildings. 0

It was not me who first formulated this insulting formula. If it bothers you, then take it up with its author: Rule.
I figure if its ok for your side to say, its ok for me to say it as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

First started, note the bright yellow (HOT) fire compared to the cabling (COLD) fire on the left:

can see its dripping off of something:

Can see its coming from what appears to be a ceiling:

Now its the same temperature as as the plastic fire on the left as it has burned out and began to cool:

Coincidentally the building collapsed about (guessing) 7 seconds later.

Ron that would be one hell of a lot of glass to have in a nearly a cube shape to pour out that long and all come from the same spot...  windows stand up and that should have burned down if that were the case.  yet it is all concentrated on the ceiling just about where the next floor mount would be.

I admit that is curious and that it is indicative of an explosive that went of - or igniting and burning - prematurely.
 
As for melting glass: what I understand from fire is that the glass does not melt, but shatters and is blown out.
 
On the other hand, I can well imagine that if the fire is truly very hot and localized, that nearby glass will melt instead of shatter.
 
I have googled: Glass "melts at 2600-2900 °F (1425-1600 °C) depending on its composition".
 
I have also googled: "Thermite/thermate burns well over 1000C more than steel's melting temperature".
 
And: "Steel melts at around 1370 °C".
 
I have also googled: "Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). "
 
So jet fuel cannot have molten mnottertail's glass, but thermate most certainly will.
 
If there is molten glass, then most certainly there also will be molten steel.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Im still having trouble understanding how all this thermate got into the concrete structure of the building unnoticed by anybody.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
Perhaps you could now google the temperature when high voltage electric cable shorts out.  All it has to do is start the steel burning and the rest is history.

Im still having trouble understanding how all this thermate got into the concrete structure of the building unnoticed by anybody.

But that is just me, and I could be wrong.

Sinergy