Pressure Cooker Control

Gilbert, you’re like a turd that won’t flush. Change your ip address and come back to see us!

“Troothers also have a right to have arrived at the scene and collected their own evidence?”

Gill the Shill, I know you can’t help being stupid but you could STFU. I’m glad I have never had a dog as dumb as you are. It would be a real chore keeping him from sitting in the road, licking his asshole while a car ran over him.

Does you supervisor have to make you stay at work until the traffic thins out? Don’t be mad at him, he’s just protecting you, the way I’d try to protect a dog as dumb as you, if I had the misfortune of owning such a dog.

Did your classmates in school trick you into repeating, one word at a time:
I…
am…
sofa…
king…
reet…
todd…
it………..?

Bet you’re still pissed off at them about their trick, ain’tcha?

Take a major pill, Gil the Shill. Be nice to yo’mama, ’cause she’s yo’ onliest friend. Stay out of the road unless someone is there to keep you from sitting down, or there’s no telling what you might do.

Good bye, and good luck. Don’t forget to write.

Aw what? You complain “they were quick to take away the evidence” then complain “yeah right, as if I actually wanted a chance to survey the wreckage”? After all, if it were a false flag bombing then the evidence would all contained in the rubble: thermite residue, explosives residue, the structure showing signs of being cut back at critical points, even some charges that failed to detonate properly, etc.

Clover, the “ground zero” area was an armed camp and no civilians were allowed to take away samples of anything – much less steel and so on.

Independent investigators have had to resort to extraordinary measures to deconstruct the government’s mountain of lies and misinformation.

“I’ll bet the retarded little runt isn’t over 40 years old.”

Yep, the little homo is probably under 30. I’ll bet my teenaged daughter could stomp a mudhole in his ass and walk it dry.

“Parasitic Brat” is more like it.
It must be a tax-taker parasite with a childish little mind like that.

“It’s really a waste of time for them to…” Really now, that’s the hallmark of goberment most everywhere. Isn’t it?

Because if it’s OPM, who cares?

Insert image of fifteen city workers standing around a hole in the ground while doing nothing, here x.

Par for the course.

I should have added: I get the drift. Who needs goberment spooks if the populace is well trained to do the job of the spooks? Outsourcing of a sorts, perhaps?

Social conditioning sickens me.

Morning, Brent!

These creatures do exist – that has been established. And Dom and I have good reason to believe they come here. And that Gil is one of them.

“There are lots of people like that who aren’t government. Plus government types seem to single out the least intelligent and most gullible people they can find to work their manipulations of the masses. ”

BrentP, they aren’t trying to convince anyone, they’re here to reinforce the media line that anyone who questions an “official version” presented in the mainstream news media is a nutjob who thinks that black helicopters follow them around, and/or sees a government conspiracy behind everything.

There are, indeed, paid internet trolls. On several political discussion sites I frequented from ’95 to about ’02, there were certain IDs who started posting their “debunking” comments promptly at 9 am and were off the boards at 5 pm, every weekday. They didn’t post at night or on weekends. Their posting habits became the subject of jokes, because they were so obvious, like a signature.

This “trolling” still goes on and it’s fairly easy to spot, though some patterns have been changed up. There was an article a few years ago written by someone who told of being hired as a forum troll.

Sure, there are amateur trolls as well as paid professionals, and they have various styles. The amateurs probably do it to entertain themselves.

One common identifier is that they all post as though they assume that everyone is as dumb as they are. “Gil” is probably being paid. “Clover” appears to be an amateur.

The ones who hit and run under names like “WAKE UP AMERICA”, or “SAVE OUR COUNTRY”, and post little screeds suggesting that it’s time to “start shooting the oppressors” are most likely paid trolls.

I know there are paid trolls. But there are also real people who act like this. I know this for a fact. Their reality is the reality government shapes for them. To question it really bothers them. However most of them do tend to stay in places where their bubble isn’t threatened, where standard left-right rules the day.

“I know there are paid trolls. But there are also real people who act like this. I know this for a fact.”

Yes, I agree. In fact, the ones who do it on their own even seem to be a little more intelligent than their paid troll colleagues. ‘Course it doesn’t take much to be a little more intelligent than someone like ol’ Gil the Shill. ahaha

You, Ed (& co.), believe people who don’t agree with you are not only “trolls” but “government-sponsored”? Why? Because it would mean you’re so important the gubmint must silence you? I s’pose if you ever had a girlfriend and you had you’re first argument you’d assume she was a government-paid troll because you’re super-correct on everything and dissent cannot be tolerated.

“You, Ed (& co.), believe people who don’t agree with you are not only “trolls” but “government-sponsored””

No, Gil the Shill, I don’t believe any such thing. I can spot a troll, though. You’re a troll. You’re dimwitted, full of shit, and you keep jumping into discussions where you clearly have nothing intelligent to add.

It isn’t that you “disagree”. It’s that you are so determined to disrupt the discussion of ideas that your betters tell you are dangerous.

Anything you have to say here has already been said on a TV news show. Nobody is interested in hearing it again.

Ed, I took Eric’s “40 IQ points” comment more or less as an insult to the rest of us. I’m confident the vast majority of posters on this site have an I.Q. well above eighty. 😉

“I’m confident the vast majority of posters on this site have an I.Q. well above eighty”

Ain’t that the troothe, Boothe? ahaha Even me, with my 42 IQ beats Gil by 40 points. 😉

Or better yet I have to extra for a standing I.P. address.

Hi Brandon,

There is outward thinking (I’m assuming you mean being broad-minded, taking other positions into account) and conceptual thinking – thinking in terms of principles and applying those principles to particular thing. Government schools – in my experience – never taught kids to think conceptually, at least not outside of mathematics.

I am speaking of ethical-philosophical issues. For example, the question: If something is impermissible (ethically) for an individual to do – such as stealing – can the same act become permissible (ethically) when a group (or its claimed representatives) does it? Etc.

One of the things that stands out from my own days as in inmate in government schools was the chaotic – deliberately chaotic, I think – way the day was structured. You’d start with 50 minutes of, say, history. Then the bell would ring – and off you’d go to chemistry or some other completely different thing. No real time spent on a given subject. This engendered lack of focus. Also, much of the instruction consisted of rote memorization rather than understanding something. One learned to regurgitate the expected information for the test – then promptly forgot it.

I had the interesting experience of experiencing both private school (first) and (later) government schools. It gave me some insight into the differing methods and purposes of both.

I was referring to outward thinking, right, conceptual thinking isn’t something I remember too fondly.

We touched on, “if someone steals food from a store out of starvation, is it still wrong?” not sure if that’s what you mean.

The other high school in town does four, 90-minutes classes, intended to reduce chaos and help with understanding. Not sure how it works.

Even teachers know that students don’t remember 90% of what they learn. I had a teacher tell us that we would just go over a few topics in the chapter, since she knew we’d forget everything after the tests.

Wonder if it can be fixed.

Hi Brevard,

I’ve just got questions – that’s all.

My real problem is with what happened to WTC 7 vis-a-vis the Official Narrative.

The collapse looks exactly like a controlled demolition – which of course is not proof that it was a controlled demolition.

However, I’d like to know how/why this building failed the way it did. Not hit by an airplane; no jet-fuel fire – the reasons given for the collapse of the twin towers. Yet, like them, it fell at or near free-fall speed onto its own footprint. My understanding is that such a thing has never happened before – and there have been numerous instances of tall buildings subjected to multi-floor/extensive fires, etc.

Again, not proof of a controlled demolition – but it makes me question.

Ditto the way the WTC steel was just removed and disposed of. Why do this? It is evidence. At minimum, evidence in support of the government’s claims (if they are true).

Why the rush to dispose of it – all of it?

The Pentagon thing is really fishy.

I lived near DC; grew up there. On a warm fall day, there are thousands of tourists in that area – with cameras and video recorders. Why are there no video recordings of an airliner descending rapidly and flying at low altitude toward the Pentagon?

Why was there – initially – just a relatively small hole in the Pentagon facade? What happened to the wings and tail? To the enormous jet engines?

Then you get into the real nitty gritty stuff – pilot stuff. How does a barely qualified to fly a Cessna A-rab successfully execute high-performance maneuvers in a heavy jet? I know some pilots – including a retired fighter pilot – and none of them buy it.

That makes me disbelieve the Official Story.

There’s too much debate over POSSIBILITIES ergo “anything is possible”.

Shouldn’t the discussion be about what is PROBABLE?

It is POSSIBLE that I can win Powerball, but it isn’t PROBABLE.

“It is entirely possible that the WTC fell because a small gang of lunatic arabs flew planes into a building, the fuel leaked, ignited, raised the temperature of the metal structure to the point of instability and the buildings caved in on themselves.”

No, it isn’t even remotely possible. The reason we use the term, “Laws of Physics” is that there are observable, demonstrable, and repeatable principles governing the physical world.

Naturally aspirated kerosene fires can’t heat structural gauge steel to even the lower ranges of stress failure, no matter how much kerosene is there or how long it burns. That’s a hard and fast rule, or, if you prefer, a law of thermodynamics.

That’s all anyone needs to point out to knock the official conspiracy theory into a cocked hat.

The way the building fell? Do you expect buildings to topple like dominoes? Or that there’s any other direction to fall than down?

From the editor: Clover’s government-sponsored post has been deleted.

Gil,

There are often very poorly thought out out theories that are put out into the public on things. These are then ‘debunked’. Then the simple minded who believe the government story on authority think that all alternatives are false. So much so some believe that the most insane theories are intentionally put into circulation by the government itself.

The government also never releases simple evidence that it should have in its possession that would prove its story. For instance, the video footage of the plane that crashed into the pentagon. Why don’t they release it? Because the footage would match what various witnesses, including cops, say. These witnesses were interviewed while they were unaware of the official government story’s flight path. They clearly witnessed a different flight path. So the government is lying, which is why they don’t release it.

And that’s the problem. Government lies are the root cause of the theories. Government lies over and over again in big and small ways. People see the lies and make a jump of logic.

I don’t know what really happened. I just know what the government says is full of lies.

So, perhaps you and others should put in the hard work to prove the government’s story by something other than authority. You’re nearly a dozen years behind the ‘kooks’ who have proven the government story to be bullshit on many levels.

You can nail the most absurd theories, but the well researched ones remain standing and never addressed. Not even talked about. Why? Because they come from solid work. Physics, chemistry, engineering, media, and investigative reporting. So they are ignored. Instead the theories of idiots are addressed and used to smear the good solid work by ‘association’. You and many others buy it.

So, get to work proving the government theory without a bunch of rigged tests and computer models that were shaped and reshaped until they matched the narrative.

The Achilles Heel the article brings to the troother movement is why any insider would keep quiet. As said “how much would it take to not blab to the media” and “even then what’s stopping from blabbing to the media anyway and double-dip your pay”? Everyone’s heard of the troother argument and no one cares despite the fact a great many people who suffered on the day would care if it were all true. Troothers are pottering around the evidence like Creationists and Moon Landing Deniers.

Tell us Eric, how much force do you think it would create when you take 30 to 60 feet of support from under 100s of tons of building over head. Do you think it would smash something with all that force? It is kind of like driving your car at 100 mph into a cement wall but with thousands of times the force! Maybe you can get Brent to give you the force of 100s of tons of building dropping just 30 feet free fall.

So you are esentially saying that the WTC was built out of railroad ties?

Clearly you are not an engineer/architect involved in building steel high-rise structures – as many of the ‘9-11 truthers’ are.

I am not sure who you were talking to Ray but the facts are the support gave out for many floors of building at the point where the airlines crashed. The other fact is that when you take out the support and there are many many feet to drop the tons of weight above gets moving at a high rate of speed and hits with a tremendous amount of force. What part of this do you disagree with? What part of this do you disagree with Eric? There are many pictures that show this?

Yeah right, if people could conclusive prove the Moon Landing was definitely fake then this would be breaking worldwide news. If people could prove all sciences was wrong and the Earth was young and all species could not have evolved then this would be breaking worldwide news. Hence if troothers could conclusively prove the guff they believe then this would be worldwide breaking news yet everyone has heard their stories and it has been parodied in “South Park” years ago so it’s not as if troothers are somehow holding onto hidden facts.

It’s a perfectly fine sequitor – if you & co. suppose the 9/11 conspiracy is true then it would be instant worldwide news (“Indisputable Proof Sept. 11 Was A False Flag Attack By The U.S. Government”). Other conspiracy theorists feel they are also in possession of secret information that they would be Earth-shattering if revealed.

Damn Clover, I’ve seen computer generated spam comments that are more coherent and flow better with the discussion than that mess.

Understanding the WTC structure makes the story fall apart. You clearly don’t understand how the structure worked.

And yet BrentP your truth can’t make the news? The people who lost families that fateful day aren’t turning their anger at the U.S. Government and the secret operatives who posed as maintenance staff for months on end as they were weakening the structures as well as planting bombs to make sure it was a controlled explosive (not implosive) demolition? Heck when the Lusitania was found to have transported ammunition after all it still made the news many decades after it would have mattered.

Clover’s take on the world is a classic example of just how conditioned mass-man is. Especially when he says, “then it would be instant worldwide news” such a statement dovetails perfectly with this article:

“A psyop depends on selling one centralized story.” …

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/reality-is-a-psyop/

Um Gil, you are clearly ignorant of many of the friends and family members who have demanded answers. Maybe you are government shill. Here you are envoking the victims with that outdated defense that the victims believe the government story. The problem is that stopped working years ago because of the family members who started demanding real answers.

And yes, 9-11, like the USS Maine, like the Lusitania, like the USS Liberty, like the Gulf of Tokin, like countless other events will have the truth come out finally 50-100+ years later when the mainstream public no longer gives a damn. It will come out again that a group of konspiracy kooks was again correct and nobody will pay attention but that day’s konspiracy kooks. That’s the problem with people like you Gil, you just shrug and say that happened decades ago without recognizing the pattern of institutional behavior.

The US federal government has been doing such crap for over a 150 years the pattern is well established. But people like yourself can’t bare to deal with coming to grips with your religious beliefs in government, in democracy, or whatever are wrong. So you shrug and believe that todays government wouldn’t do that….

The tombstone of the USA, and perhaps the whole western world should read: “It can’t happen here”.

idiots. The lot of ya all.

I have never seen so stupid statements. Conspiracy? There were hundreds of witnesses to the facts and dozens of videos. The building started falling apart right where the plane hit. When you have 100s of tons of weight free falling 30 to 90 feet as in this case it is like an explosion hits! That is the laws of physics. I guess you would rather bet on thousands of hours of someone trying to make this look like the planes caused it?

It is pretty much like looking at Brent’s videos of his driving. You can make up thousands of excuses but the facts that are shown is he has road rage and is a poor and dangerous driver that should be in jail!

“I have never seen so stupid statements.”

Is English a difficult second language for you? It’s insulting to be preached at by someone who is so inarticulate. For the sake of common courtesy, you really should learn to write in proper English and to express your thoughts clearly.

If you haven’t the decency to do at least that much, you really have no business butting into the conversations here.

This thread hasn’t been helped in the least by you or by your imbecilic colleague. Why not just toddle off somewhere else? DU would be a good site for you. Go there.

So we’re back to Brent’s so-called road rage?

Quite the change of subject there.

And I believe it’s non sequitur rather than “sequitor”

Clover, your comment is once again not coherent. What you seem to be attempting to say is that the failures initiated where the buildings were damaged. This is true and not disputed by anyone. However someone who says ‘controlled demolition’ would simply argue the wires were severed to points higher in the building. Someone such as myself that argues the government story doesn’t make sense with the structural design of the building will just tell you ‘well duh’.

The government says the floor trusses failed by fire and the building came down. The problem is that the floor trusses didn’t hold up the building and couldn’t hold it up if by some bizarre set of circumstances the loads were transferred through them. That’s where the government story falls apart.

Why doesn’t it work? Because it’s built on faith in authority. It’s built on the politics. It’s something the intellectual class came up to fit the narrative. Real root cause analysis doesn’t do that. It doesn’t care about the political narrative.

Why did the buildings fail so long after the impacts? I cannot tell you. The government story just doesn’t work for me because it does not match the way the structure works. The floors in the towers didn’t hold the building up. They might have supplied some rigidity against the wind by tying the core to the outside tube, but that doesn’t solve the problem nor is part of the government story.

The problem remains that the government story simply doesn’t work. If they really disliked “conspiracy theory” they should:
1) stop restricting access to evidence.
2) stop obviously lying.

But of course those like you keep believing them so why should they do either? Instead you imitate their behavior. You tell people something else happened and expect that repetition of that will have a mind control effect. You do that repeatedly with driving videos.

Now go brake check a cop and prove your theories.

Brent, apply a high heat to the springs of your car. Will they fail immediately? Hell no. Keep that heat on them for an extended time until they get red hot and start to soften and they are likely to fail. Are people like you and Eric so mentally challenged not to understand that? Are you and Eric so concerned that what someone says would be able to be printed in the New York news that common sense does not really matter? I would say you should get your money back for that engineering degree because they did not teach you anything.

“apply a high heat to the springs of your car. Will they fail immediately? Hell no. Keep that heat on them for an extended time until they get red hot and start to soften and they are likely to fail”

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Tempered springs lose their temper by being heated, and allowed to cool slowly. Heating them once, even for the shortest amount of time it takes to bring them up to the range of molecular excitation, will do the job if they are allowed to cool slowly.

Break it all the way down:

Was the structural steel subjected to high enough heat to bring it into the range where the temper could have been changed? Hardly. The kind of heat required to cause loss of temper or to cause sagging couldn’t have been produced by a kerosene fire, even if it had burned for the whole day.

It’s very obvious that Brent knows what he’s talking about. You, on the other hand…..

Clover, go heat up a spring in an open kerosene or office materials fire and see what happens.
Hint: there’s a huge difference in temperature between a torch and those fires.

Futhermore, a spring is not an I beam structure. The ability to disperse and transfer heat is very different. Furthermore the small mass of metal makes it a different situation.

Also, riddle me this, why is it that the people who blindly accept what comes down from authority often so insulting? Is it because that the only thing backing you have is the social order?

Just to be clear, I don’t subscribe to any particular theory of failure of the WTC towers. I simply don’t find the government story credible after the truthers released the structural details.

I originally thought it was simple tube failure. Take a pop can that is undamaged. Put a large load on top of it. It will hold it. pop cans are designed to be stacked upon. For this experiment it is important for the pop can to be empty and undamaged. No dings.

Now take a step back and ping a coin off the can. Watch it collapse into its own footprint.

This is what I thought was the failure mode of the towers. Then I learned about the core, the floor trusses,etc.

Now the tube failure didn’t make sense. The core should have remained. The government published their theory, it didn’t make sense, the core, the tube, or both should have remained.

Something broke the buildings free above the impacts to start the hammering from the mass above. But nothing slows it. I can’t see these floor trusses ever holding up the building. Not for an hour. Not for five minutes. Not at all. they simply couldn’t hold anything cantilevered over the hole in the first place. What pushed the building’s structure over the edge?

If the government had come out with poor workmanship being what tipped things over I would have believed that. But their story was meant to fit a political narrative. It just stinks the way how a narrative put out that day ends up being supported by all offical reports. BS. It’s never that clean to find out why something broke in the real world.

Brent, when it all comes down to it does it make any difference what you say happened? The fact is the building started coming down when the things that were supporting the building above where each plane hit were weakened by heat and gave out! I do not know what was holding the building floors up at the time and you do not know either. The experts would even have to guess because no one lived through it close up. The fact is the building was still standing when hit by the planes and the heat is what eventually brought everything down. If you say that is impossible then I guess you are saying it all never happened.

If we would drop a sledge hammer onto your head from 60 feet above then you would drop like a pile of bricks. Pretty much the same way the building came down when the supports gave out from the heat.

clover you’re so stupid I just had to jump in on this thread.

I’ve been watching it from afar, marveling at the sheer idiocy of your thinking. Unsophisticated, brutish, churlish, thuggish, pig-headed, ignoramus, cretin, retard, idiot, fool, knave…at times like these I wish my decent vocabulary were simply excellent, such that I might find terms sufficiently superlative to even begin to describe the wasted space between your ears.

The sucking vacuum where once a human brain existed; a maw into which intelligence disappears to die like the event horizon of some giant Idiot Black Hole, the ideas paused in time dilation stretched out and spaghettified like serfs on a medieval rack screaming their last.

Ideas tortured to death by a stupidity so monstrous it consumes the world.

A stupidity so lumbering, so vast, thermonuclear warheads of piercingly intelligent debate disappear into the folds of its rolling flesh with a dull “Thump!” their ferocious fires extinguished by blubbery nothingness.

You’re the Jabba the Hut of stupidity, the ultimate expression of dumb.

But please, don’t die; be very careful. We NEED people like you! You will serve as an example of what went wrong, and how to avoid it when we rebuild civilization after you’ve destroyed it.

Nice methylamine. Who has air between their ears? You typed a couple hundred words and said nothing? Why? You said how I was all wrong about what I said but did not bother saying what I was wrong about?

At least give us your interpretation on why the buildings came down. Video evidence and eye witnesses seems not enough for you? If someone smacked you in the head would you question if it really happened?

clover, you can’t bait me.

I’m Neo standing in the hallway seeing the green Matrix code; I take a deep breath, and the Agents’ bullets stop; I open my hands, they fall to the ground.

You’re not real. You’ve lost…no, you’ve committed a much worse sin…you’ve given up voluntarily what it is to be human.

To be creative, responsive, intelligent, questing, seeking, correcting, striving.

Others on this thread have explained so very capably just a few of the massive holes in the Official State Explanation of Reality As Seen Through Statist Glass.

I agree with and amplify their responses.

You refusal to research it on your own displays your hopeless–because self-imposed–ignorance.

No further convincing will help.

I spend my efforts on people who are still that–people–not automatons-of-their-own-making.

I sometimes debate your kind to sharpen my own arguments, to crystallize in my mind what is salient and true.

On occasion a non-clover arises; a reasonable person, clinging to the Official Narrative but still imbued with that spark of life. And I’ll engage with him because I see another Neo floundering in the sewer outside the Matrix. Let him aboard the Nebachudnezzar, teach him the truth.

You’re a turd floating in the sewer; why would I airlift a turd? It can’t be educated and it’ll stink up the place.

Clover, I don’t have the energy to try and parse your incoherent babble. It appears you want to be lazy and trust ‘experts’. Experts who are state intellectuals. That is they make a living finding reasons to support whatever the political power structure says. Which is exactly what they did.

These state intellectuals simply eliminate possibilities because they don’t fit the narrative. Did you know that government investigators did not look for explosives? They did not even consider it. This is how they do things. They automatically eliminate as impossible anything that doesn’t fit the narrative already established. They had to come up with a fire-induced failure story so they did. Everything else was off the table from the get go.

I notice that once again instead of using facts and logic you turn to violent murderous imagery. You’re really a despicable person.

“while someone heated up the supports to a couple thousand degrees”

You keep pounding your little pink pud over this lie. The point you insist on ignoring is that nothing happened during the time the kerosene was burning off to heat the steel to ‘a couple thousand degrees’.

Jet fuel is kerosene. It isn’t rocket fuel, or even gasoline. Kerosene burning doesn’t produce the heat needed to melt steel, just as your feeble little brain spinning at redline revs doesn’t produce any interesting thought.

If your brain could be transplanted into a hummingbird, the poor bird would fly backwards and suck a mule’s ass instead of a morning glory.

Now, run and tell that.

“This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures.”

That’s so ridiculous that it would be funny if someone told it as a joke. ‘Slender structural’ steel’s ass.

Anyone with even two brain cells to rub together would have STFU by now, but you keep it up. Who do you think you’re convincing?

There’s no way in hell a normal person would continue to post as he/she/it does after all this. Seems like they have a third shift too. oR, he/she/it is totally a wack job.

Maybe a jetliner should be slammed into a Chechnyan building to find out.

OMG! You should take that to the press – the Empire State Building survived a plane crash. I’m sure no one’s ever heard that one before!

Tell us Eric, did you see the videos of the buildings coming down? Tell us what you think caused it. I may have missed that explanation? I need a good laugh. The facts shown and viewed by thousands seems not to be enough for you.

What evidence do you have that you were born? Maybe you are not really alive if you have no real undisputable evidence. Maybe you are just a government conspiracy to make us think there is an Eric out there.

No, Eric, you and co. can’t come up with any scenario. Real engineers and investigators won’t support your crackpot notions.

Actually Gil many “real” architects and engineers have questioned the official story repeatedly and still do. I personally know several mechanical engineers that question the official story. One electrical engineer I know pointed out that this very same government, which stores the remains of crashed aircraft for analyses often taking years, wasted no time in disposing of the the forensic evidence in what is arguably the biggest criminal case in this century. That should not even make sense to you Gil.

One of the few things any government including this one is typically good at is covering up its crimes and mistakes. It is ususally only after the guilty parties and their victims are long dead and buried that the facts come out. Have a look around this site: http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/
This is “your” government ‘fessing up to what horrible things they did to US citizens in the name of Cold War era research. That’s just one of numerous examples of the US government abusing the people is has been entrusted to protect. Notice how all this came out only after those who could be charged have shed the mortal coil.

What is really telling about your positions is the way that both you and clover carefully avoid any real discussion of the collapse of WTC 7. That cannot be logically explained in any other reasonable way than staged severing of structural columns. That is the sole method of causing a near free fall collapse of a structure of that type so neatly in its own footprint. So I surmise that you two are are either engaging in some shared delusion akin to religious fervor or you are both shills for the regime.

Nietzsche said “Everything the state says is a lie, everything it has is stolen.” I would argue that the state does occasionally tell the truth, but only when it suits their purposes. As far as everything they have being stolen, that’s indisputable. The state is seldom productive and when they are it is with stolen resources. No, the people that gravitate toward “public service” are consumptive. Their appetites for the belongings of the productive are never sated.

Government’s girth, built from political power and stolen private treasure expands continually until checked by a superior outside force or the system finally collapses under its own weight. But in the mean time, its denizens will make every effort to exploit any crisis for their own benefit. And as history proves, when there is no good crisis immediately available to exploit, they will cultivate, foment and create crises as needed.

It saddens me to think that you two are so comfortably ensconced in your little cloverian cocoons of delusion that you can’t even consider the fact that criminals (i.e. evil people) seek out government employment so they may more readily ply their trade. Perhaps it is because you are among their ranks?

OK Eric, are you saying that heat has no affect on steel? It does not make it expand or break easier? What about all the other building materials? Heat does not affect cement, walls or any of the other building materials?

If you believe all of that would you be willing to risk your life with you so called facts? Would you be willing to sit under tons of building while someone heated up the supports to a couple thousand degrees? Maybe we should try it. Better yet maybe we should have your expert engineer try it. Did you or the engineer take into consideration that much of the supports were taken out when the plane hit. If you take a 4 leg table and took out one and weakened another would you be willing to sit under it if we added a few thousand pounds to it and heated up the steel legs that were left? I want to see you support your theory!

And creationists can find scientists who back them up and yet they can’t get anywhere. By the same token, you know I’m not going to link anything to the WTC7 collapse because it will be a link to the “official narrative” just as you readily linked “proof” which inevitably is a troother site.

Eric you are a joke. Heat does nothing to steel you say. Did the experts tell you this? Why is it that if someone wants to remove rusted bolts or thousands of other reasons they heat up the steel to make it expand, bend, break or cut. Are you saying this is never done? It is done on steel better than you structural steel.

There was also more than jet fuel in those fires! Does the anger of government have the ability to over ride facts and physics?

I want to see it in your own words actually happened that day? Like I said, I would like a good laugh a day?

Well Boothes If “sheep” is a derogatory term someone who goes with the crowd just because then I believe term “goat” is a opposite derogatory term for someone who goes against the crowd just because. Once again if Sept. 11 “facts” are so true and dangerous then you’d think people would disappear or wind up in “accidents” similar to the TV show “The X Files”. Instead troothers yak all day long and host web sites and yet are still alive and well for exposing such deadly trooths.

Nonetheless you and Eric have nil metallurgical experience. I have seen lead being melted and molded while the stainless steel container holding the molten hasn’t melted the heat makes it rather malleable (yes from ordinary hot temperature) – it starts to take the form of putty in that it hold its form yet it can be easily bent and twisted hence prolonged exposure of the burning jet fuel weakened the structural steel and it couldn’t hold up the weight of the stories above it: simple physics.

Gil – ” I have seen lead being melted and molded while the stainless steel container holding the molten hasn’t melted the heat makes it rather malleable”

Then you and the folks melting the lead are truly clueless about working with lead to start with.

Lead melt point, a little over 600F.
Stainless melt point (varies with alloy), about 2600F.

Exactly what temperature was the SS crucible for the lead heated to to make the SS malleable Gil? What thickness was the stainless?

If you are going to bullshit, at least try to keep the story plausible.

Actually Gil, you do not know what my level of metallurgical expertise is. From a practical standpoint I have actually cast items in metal myself, not merely watched; metals including lead alloys, bronze, brass, sterling silver and karat gold. I was performing lost wax casting in a jewelry store, professionally, at sixteen years old.

My grandfather and father taught me blacksmithing quite young (before I was ten). I have actually hand forged and tempered my own springs, knives, tomahawks, fire steels and other specialized tools over the years. In addition to this I have engaged in steel fabrication, welding and cutting (using MIG / TIG / stick and oxy/fuel gas) both on the job and off. So I have a very clear understanding of the effects of varying levels of heat applied to many different metals.

As I’ve told you before, I am an Instrumentation & Controls technician with over 32 years of experience in my field. A big part of what I do involves measuring temperature in and around steam boilers. These are typically fairly high temperatures and they are often applied to steel. So I have seen the effects of prolonged (years, sometimes decades) heat exposure to steel.

Perhaps you saw a phenomenon where a stainless steel vessel became malleable at the melt point of lead (621.5F for pure lead). I doubt it. But not knowing the actual alloys and temperatures involved I can’t be sure. You may have also seen a chemical reaction occur similar to the cupellation process when assaying gold. In other words, depending on conditions, exposure to the lead itself may have damaged the stainless steel vessel’s structure.

Stainless steel is hardly “indestructible” and is known to be susceptible to attack by various chemicals; things you wouldn’t think of like chlorinated solvents. Chemical reactions are frequently augmented by the application of heat or the presence of a catalyst. Depending on the heat source (Was it electric resistive or induction? Fuel gas? Was it a carburizing or oxidizing flame?) you may have seen chemical, galvanic and thermal phenomena occurring simultaneously.

The point is, my grammatically challenged rube, with the WTC collapse we had jet fuel (kerosene, fuel oil, whatever your preference) and atmospheric air available for combustion initially. That was consumed fairly quickly. That left combustible solids from the aircraft and the office for fuel: upholstery, paper, plastics, cardboard, wall coverings and the like. You may believe these materials would generate enough heat to compromise structual steel in the presence of air (20.9% O2). I do not. Eric did a very nice analysis of this (complete with math to back it up) some time ago. You should go find it and read it. With WTC 7 there was no jet fuel. Explain that.

The government of its day has lied to the public innumerable times down through the ages to accomplish the ends of the insiders. Often the church and the media aid and abet them. The people will run around frantically like a flock of sheep when spooked by those they look up to. It doesn’t take much to spook people who simply won’t question what they are being told by official sources into giving up their liberty, their treasure and even their lives. Hence the frequent allusion to Homo Ovinae Americanus on this site. Or in language you should be able to clearly grok Gil: Baaa-aaa-aaa.

Editor’s note: Clover copied and pasted the paragraph below without quotation marks or attribution, hoping to pass it off as his own material. I have added quotation marks to avoid any confusion.

Tell us Eric which part of this do you disagree with?

“Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.”

Like I told you, steel expands or distorts under high heat. Yes if you took a piece of steel that is at freezing temperatures and you laid on it there would be an affect on that steel although small. When you add hundreds of degrees to parts of a steel beam it becomes distorted and joints will break. Do your engineering friends disagree with that? Do your so called engineering experts say heat does nothing to steel? Maybe you are right. Our school system has major problems. Even mechanic with a 75 IQ knows that steel is affected when he heats it. Do your engineers have a lower IQ than that?

Clover, stop using terms and words you don’t understand. It just makes you look even more ignorant.

Furthermore the only steel that could have an issue with an office fire was the floor trusses. The government intellectuals in their struggle to claim the fires pushed the buildings over the edge decided on the floor trusses pulling down the core and outer walls as they failed. Here’s the problem, the weaker member has to pull down the stronger member. Normally the weaker member simply fails.

The government intellectuals have to claim the thin and relatively weak floor trusses have to be failing from the fire, soft, weakened, etc while at the same time being strong and pulling down the core.

It only makes sense to people like you Clover, those who bend reality to match the narratives of the political class.

Clover, you ignorant slut.
How many times have I stated that the floor trusses could have failed from fire? That’s all your reference (in your yet to be approved or canned comment) to some lame skeptic site says.

Yes the floor trusses could fail from fire. But the floor trusses did not hold up the building. The structural plans show that clearly. The floor trusses held up the floors between the structural elements of the building.

I disagree that weakened, burned away, thin, light weight floor trusses could pull down the core and the outer tube structure. Your dear government says they did. This does not make sense. It would be pulling your car with the parking brake on with a shoelace while a candle burns through said shoelace.

Brent you are a joke. You need to get your money back from that engineering degree. You say floor trusses do nothing? I tell you what, drop a couple of thousand pounds on your ceiling or floor above where they fail and see if the walls are unaffected. If they are tied together the walls are likely to be pulled in with the ceiling. Do you disagree with that? If Eric’s engineers are as brilliant as you are I can see that his so called facts are worthless. Oh, I forgot, he has no facts but just guesses. It is pretty hard to disprove guesses that have no basis of facts.

What do you say about this information?
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4054

Re:clover on April 26, 2013

So Clover did a copy an paste form http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/eagar_jom/eagar_0112.html

Yet for some reason he edited out the very relevant;
“No buckling can be seen in any of the video and photographic evidence, only the instantaneous onset of a telescoping collapse, accompanied by explosions. ”

I wonder if he bothered to read the next segment “The Collapse”? Pretty sure not or he would have found another site to plagiarize as this follows his copied material;

” Note that the article never revisits the question of how the numerous undamaged perimeter columns failed simultaneously, even though there is no evidence they experienced significant heating from the fires”

Keep trying Clover, you are comedy gold.

Whoops, my bad. Looks like Clover likely plagiarized this;

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

Either way, Clover needs to go here;
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/eagar_jom/eagar_0112.html
to see his stolen prose poked full of holes.

Clover, I already addressed that ‘cite’ of yours. It’s a typical debunking article which slanders by association engineers who have valid disagreement with the government’s intellectuals.

You lie again, I stated the floor trusses held up the floors. They provided, as a system, together, a connection between the tube and the core, but held neither up. The failure of one or more floor trusses results in the floor being supported falling down to the next floor. I could even accept progressive collapse internal to the tube’s structure. That is of the floors themselves. But given the information available they could not and would not pull down the tube or the core.

Now their failure could make the tube and core more vunerable to wind load and earthquake. Neither was unusual on that day and thus unlikely to bring about a failure. But there is a funny thing about wind load and earthquake. They are side loads. They push the building to the side.

Simply put the government story doesn’t make sense and those who defend it use slander, ridicule, and other social techniques rather than scientific ones or engineering principles. Or they simply repeat the same government theory as if it were biblical text. This is not an acceptable argument.

Now when you can present an actual argument that bolsters the floor truss failure theory, that deals with the facts that
a) The load transfered does not change as the truss fails. The floors are not gaining weight as they fail.
b) when the floor trusses fail they relieve the core and tube of load. The load falls to the undamaged sections below.
c) When you pull weakened heated thin gauge steel the large I beam it is attached to does not fail, the piece you’re pulling on does.
d) use comparable structures as a analogies.

Gil, how did the floor truss failure translate into a structural failure of damaged tube and core? Feel free to summarize in your own words from the government report. I would be surprised if you can even comprehend the government report well enough to summarize the theory it presents.

This is an open book comprehension test. All you have to do is summarize a small part of the government’s report on the collapse of the towers. Don’t copy and paste another person’s summary. Put it in your own words.

Nice Eric. The video showed us nothing. It showed a guy making things up. He brought up how the structure was bent. I told you that. It was bent by heat and this caused the failure of joints he is talking about.

I had enough. If you really want to believe the earth is square then go for it. I look at the facts not with someone’s guesses to make some money and get in the news.

There is no evidence provided and statements like someone might have been working on the elevators? I guess that is all his basis of fact. There might have been someone working on the elevators but he does not even know? There was structural failure but his only theory is explosives? There was one hell of an explosion when the planes hit. Those planes were not on person mini planes.

This is it for me. I had enough of your theories with zero facts. I liked the one where he said steel was melting and it was in a video from a mile away or more? How did he figure out it was molten metal? Oh, it just sounded good to say. There was a lot of different materials and metals in the building. Aluminum was one of them.

Eric, that was an interesting talk. I wish he had been more technical but his audience probably wasn’t an engineering crowd.

Clover, what I disliked about the talk was that he offered an explanation for the evidence he found. Why? Because that fuels trolls like yourself. But I do not fault him. It’s human nature to do so and it is standard practice in analyzing failures to do so. I did it today with a product I work on wrt an internal test, although I had to explain why the one I changed did not fail. But I digress.

The government intellectuals who came up with the official theory neglected explosives as a cause of failure. This is not good method. When an engineer does failure analysis with a possible modes off the table the chances of correctly determining the cause of failure drop.

If I were to discuss that evidence I would leave it up to the listener to decide what fits the evidence. I would show beams from tests that demonstrated various failure modes and leave it to the audience to make the conclusion of which one looked most like the columns of the WTC. But that’s just how I deal with sensitive subjects. I put evidence and knowledge on the table and let people decide. It generally puts those with faith like yourself in a difficult spot. You of course just throw insults instead.

In the end, the floor truss theory was written to back up the political narrative. It was all they could come up with given what was off the table.

My challenge to Gil applies to you as well. Show me you can at least comprehend the official government theory of collapse by summarizing how the floor trusses pulled the rest of the building down when they failed in your own words. If you can do that, you can at least be taken seriously on this topic. If not you have zero credibility. It means you haven’t done even the most basic homework required for this debate.

OK Brent I will give you one chance to show us any facts? You said that the government ” official theory neglected explosives as a cause of failure” ? OK Brent you may be correct on that one. Show us your evidence there was an explosive involved? Do you think the government or a person or group for that matter if there was no evidence of such how are they not going to neglect it? Show us your evidence? Not what someone makes up! Brent there was no evidence!

Gee, Booth, Brent & co., I’m just going to link official sites while you link to troothers sites.

“I believe the towers came down from prolonged exposure to fire after the jetliners crashed into them.”

“I believe the towers came down because workers who were assigned to remove asbestos for months on end were in fact weakening the structure as well as planting explosives while C.I.A. agents hijacked the planes, set it autopilot then parachuted to safety.”

“Nuh-uh!”

“Yes-uh!”

And so on.

As always thank you Gil and Clover. Neither of you ever mentioned your credentials, or even what you do for a living. Anyhow, “I believe” I blocked your fucking range of ip addresses so hopefully we get a break from stupid for a bit.

dom, you must feel satisfied like I would after swatting a mosquito that had been sucking your blood time after time or buzzing your ear for an hour.

You guys have been asking what Gil/Clover did since, what, July? Boy do they ever avoid answering questions.

You guys voiced how he/she/it was a 9 to 5’er and how they never were on after that time. I think maybe they took notes and passed it onto their boss. I’ve noticed on other websites the clover types have uncharacteristically/recently been online 2-10p.m. It could be a lot of smucks, but it doesn’t seem like it. They’ve got a second shift! Ha. Reeks of desperation.

Clover/Gil was fun to read about at first, but now, it’s getting old. I do hope you prevail.

First off Gil, the only link I’ve provided recently was to an “official” website exposing the dastardly things the government did to Americans in the name of radiological research. You conspicuously ignored the “official” site when it impugned your beloved government. You suffer from confirmation bias at its finest, old bean.

You keep going on about those of us in the skeptics’ camp not providing “facts” to back up our theories. For the most part, we don’t even offer theories. Only questions and possibilities that make sense based on physics, thermodynamics and photo / video evidence. The “official” WTC story is fraught with numerous discrepancies that should raise reasonable doubts with any critical thinker. By the same token, there is no way you can provide any irrefutable “official” facts either. When a group of people in suits and uniforms tell us the “official” story, the fact that these story tellers are tax feeders and government sycophants does not make it true.

I know for a fact based on personal experience (four years spent enlisted in Uncle Sam’s airplane club) that government officials will lie and cover things up. The higher on goes up the chain of government, it would stand to reason that the lies would get bigger. You don’t want to acknowledge that because you are a true believer when it comes to government. It would stand to reason that you are either gainfully unemployed (i.e. on the dole) or working for the government (i.e. also on the dole). You and clover are both pathetic creatures.

Clover, I never claimed explosives did anything. I stated the government did not consider explosives. One does not lead to another. Why do you continually demand I defend arguments I never made?

I asked you to simply show you understand the government’s theory. You cannot rise to that simple and easy challenge thus you are not serious about this topic and just a troll. You cannot be taken seriously.

Gil, you have not bothered to meet the simple challenge of showing understanding of the government theory of collapse. Thus you can not be taken seriously.

It is one thing to understand and support a theory from government intellectuals. It’s quite another to just blindly believe it without a clue about the details.

Gee, Boothe, even a house fire will weaken a house frame to the point that when it is sufficient damaged the house will: fall on its own footprint. After all, where else can the building fall? Gravity operates like that. You keep pottering around saying “but experts said it would withstand a Empire State Building-like crash”. Did they really expect a jetliner deliberately smashed full speed and laden with fuel to occur as opposed to guy who was lost and tried to avoid the building and flying slow? The buildings actually did withstand the initials impacts yet prolonged fires weaken the structure. Those here who claim metallurgical or blacksmithing experience would note a metal become soft and malleable under heat long before it’s close to its melting point.

You might want to read the government theory of the collapse of the towers Gil. Well if you can understand it. Then you’d realize how stupid you look with that last comment.

Being able to comprehend and articulate the government theory of the collapse should be the first requirement of anyone who wishes to defend the government theory. If you can’t do that you’re just the ying to the UFO’s took out the towers crowd’s yang.

…. they get overtime too? Plus a bonus for derailing the conversation? Either that or, WTF kind of person spends a year or more doing what he/she/it does?

He/she/it has certainly been successful here. How-freaking-ever; I’ve learned more about Nine Eleven than I ever wanted to, so in that respect things have backfired, if in fact he/she/it is on a payroll.

Either way, he/she/it is a troll. I couldn’t imagine looking at myself in the mirror each day if I was them. I suppose if they don’t have a conscious that’s no problem.

Since all the engineering and scientific arguments have been effectively made. My only sentiment is that it couldn’t have happened to a better city. Sure there were innocents who died there and it bothers me that me or my family couldv’e been visiting when such an atrocious act was commited. I feel for the victims family. I feel for the nice and kind and respectable north-easterners, no matter how small your numbers are. We are all pawns of the captains and kings in this world it could’ve been anyone of us. It doesn’t matter you are the capital of the creeps and captains. Because I know you’re just trying to get by in life in NYC, again implying the rare but nice NYC person. But still is it just me or do middle easterner’s just naturally know how rude and cocky easterners are on average? At the very minimum you’d think they were western taxpayers who were mad at all the loot be passed to NYC (UN) and D.C.. Are middle easterners really teapartiers? Yes according to SLPC.

Now this middle eastern terrorist at the very least they know who the economic purveyers and political rulers are of all trash. You got to give them the so called government claimed enemy credit on that one right? I mean if I were a terrorist I’d target the head of the snake too. Still I’m a peaceful guy myself. But maybe a better answer is to follow the money. Who benefited the most from 911. That answer like always is not too shocking, it certainly wasn’t the victims families. Add it all up including the economics along with the engineering debate, still frames of the second jet (missing windows) just prior to slamming in to the building. And as Eric keeps pointing out the WTC 7 debacle.

See the proven motives of our government with “operation Northwood”. Like the Gulf of Tonkin official story this one also stinks.

The analogy of wood to steel is fair: both are structural frames. Structural steel isn’t some magical iron/titanium/tungsten mixture rather it’s similar to standard steel: mostly iron and carbon. Hence it’s if you like to say “jet fuel is just kerosene” then “structural steel is little more than steel” the melting point is higher but not that much higher. You think only modern technology can soften steel to the point of malleability thus steel could only exist within the last century.

Yes, it’s a straight forward analogy: load-bearing beams could no longer bear the load hence a collapse whether it be wood or steel. The reason towers didn’t topple like a tree or a domino is because the impact site was too high. Had the towers been struck near the bottom then the towers would have toppled and much sooner.

Nonetheless here’s a scientist who can answer your idiotic FAQs:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM

Albeit this was before the WTC7 report came out.

However the pattern here is quite clear:

* I don’t trust government.
* Government wants more power.
* The twin towers came down.
* The government got more power.
* They must have caused it.

Of course it’s not surprising that politicians would jump on a tragedy and exploit it but you’re not a real Libertarian until you believe they caused it.

“Then again, maybe the Bush administration paid the Saudis to send terrorists here to take flying lessons, hijack planes, fly them into WTC while behind the scenes Seal Team 6 set charges on every five floors below 90 and detonated all the bombs in a coordinated blast to contain the building(s) with a vertical drop using the hijacked planes as cover just because Sadam Hussein would not let UN inspectors search for phantom weapons of mass destruction after W’s daddy kicked Sadam out of Kuwait and then stopped at the Iraqi border. ”

Goddam, bum. You just demonstrated how to drag a whole bunch of pieces of the official story into a pile and drizzle a little sarcastic shit on them to form a perfect-fucking-put-down.

Boy, you’re a got-damn genius. Whatever they’re paying your ass, it ain’t near enough.

Admit it, though, you ain’t really from Brevard, they actually found you standing on the corner of Stonewall and Brevard bumming cigs, and they hired your ass on the spot to be their star troll.

You’re the smartest one that’s showed up here yet. Got-damn genius, I swear.

Truthers get their metallurgical knowledge from “The Core” where metal gets stronger under heat.

Did I say that it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that WTC collapsed because of failed materials courtesy of a jet fuel fire?

No, I did not. I pointed out that I have seen materials fail under other applications and I find the theory POSSIBLE. Before I drink THEIR koolaid, meaning that I accept their explanation as the gospel truth, I want another theory that is equally if not more possible. Convince me that their explanation is pure, unadulterated bullshit. Prove that there are more plausible scenarios.

All I have gotten from truthers is that the government planted the bombs and blew up the building. Forensics reports show explosive residue on the superstructure. Fine, that SUPPORTS the theory. It does not PROVE it.

I did not see explosions every few floors to collapse the superstructure when the buildings fell. Afterall, if the theory that weakened materials caused the first collapse and then the “domino effect” collapse for the rest of the way down does not hold water, then one explosion near the top to set the “domino effect” in motion does not hold water either. You need several controlled explosions every few floors to sustain that kind of damage.

When you watched the footage live and repeatedly, did you see visual evidence of explosions every few floors to back up the theory that the government set it up just to scapegoat arabs and then attack them in an illegal war? If you did, post a video link so that I can see it.

I am not UNCONVINCEABLE, but I need more than name-calling.

I don’t take liberals telling me that a progressive income tax is the best form of revenue for the government as the gospel truth. I have seen statistical evidence as well as my own anecdotal evidence that it is not true.

That makes me one of the good guys in your eyes.

I don’t take conservatives telling me that abortion is murder and should therefore be illegal as the gospel truth either.

That also makes me one of the good guys in your eyes.

But when I don’t accept what you tell me as the gospel truth without more convincing, you call me names? Like that is going to help?

You sink to the level of the left and right wingers for that.

Convince me.

I have had all the evidence I need to prove that politicians are stupid beyond the pale. Stupid does not always mean evil. Stupid policies allow evil people to do evil things. Even more stupid policies allow evil people who have been proven to do evil things walk free.

Does that prove that politicians did the things they do with intent, or did they just fuck up and then not have the guts to admit it so that they have to double down on their stupidity?

If a politician does something stupid/evil meaning we do not know what they intended to do, we only saw what happened, then they should be voted out for either stupidity or evilness. Who cares which one it is. The mistake or the intent screwed someone and the politician should pay by being fired.

Call me naive, but I find it real hard to swallow that Bush ordered a building collapsed so that he could go to war. Somebody would have spilled by now.

Is it possible that Chris Kyle was going to spill and was killed for it? Yes, it is possible. Do I believe it?

I just need more convicing.

Convince me.

bum it’s not my job to convince you–which I doubt anyone could do anyway, given the material one would have to work with.

Only you can convince you.

There are millions of pages on the ‘net chock-full of detailed, painstakingly thorough explanations of how 9/11 could not have happened according to the Gospel of the State.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are perhaps the most organized, but far from the only ones.

Numerous movies, among them Loose Change–one of the best.

Go forth, read, and watch.

And yes, the Chechnyan 40 story building burning for a long time, hours or days helps convince me.

But you do realize that for the WTC to be destroyed by operatives ordered by our own government even by the president himself sends shivers down my spine.

Are you telling me that we as a culture are no better than the terrorist arabs?

If you have the signed orders in your possession or some kind of real documentation that the order was given and carried out by our own people, you would not be alive. That kind of evidence -if it is true- will never be found.

Do you think that if BHO found out about it, he would not have blown the whistle on Bush and had the entire republican party keel-hauled?

If I am asking you to convince me, I am not closed minded. And, I am not trying to talk you out of your conclusions.

If you are trying to get me to reach your conclusions and abandon what I THINK and therefore accept a big fucking conspiracy theory, I need more.

I have not conducted any experiments with burning jet fuel, so I do not have my own data on the temperature change vis a vis jet fuel amount, duration of burn, oxygen supply for the burn etc.

I also have not seen a shitload of data from anybody else. I haven’t seen a shitload of simulations either.

Look, my default position is government sucks so a solid majority of the time they are guilty of whatever evil or stupid thing has occured.

Post a link of the material strength, weakening by heat stats.

Post a link of a simulation due to the material weakening or lack thereof.

Post something that will convince me.

I want to be convinced.

Let me turn that on its head.

Convince me that government is honest, trustworthy, competent, and/or good. Convince me I should believe what they tell me.

It’s not like they prove anything to us. They tell us and we are supposed to believe. Even konspiracy kooks go around trying to disprove the government people.
They can’t disprove government people. It’s like disproving faith.

Government doesn’t prove stuff to us, it tells us. Magic bullet… small fires in just the right places… the whys and how fors are structured with faith in the government being correct. It’s all built around what is told from higher up. The narrative comes first and then people scramble around trying to make evidence fit.

One must first become objective and demand the government prove their position. They never do. Most people simply accept it as the truth that must be dismantled because it comes from authority. The hell with authority, it means nothing to me, facts, logic, deduction, etc… that’s what means something.

Government hasn’t proven its case yet as far as sept-11-2001 is concerned.

Gee, Eric why didn’t you bring up the Lusitania – at least it was found to have carried armaments long after the conspiracy died down?

You’re killing me today Ed! I can’t remember what movie the dialogue reminds me of…but it’s sure funny as hell.

got-damn genius in fact 🙂

“I think that line comes from the Drill Sergeant in Full Metal Jacket!”

Close, eric. It came from the drill sergeant in “Forrest Gump”.

Building 7 was a cantilevered over an electric substation.

Cantilevered structures if they lose support fall over. Their structure has to resist the fact that gravity is trying to make them fall over. Remove structure except by severing it in just the right place(s) it will fall over.

Gee, the WTC collapse was like an earthquake and #7 was right near the epicenter. Fancy that.

Eric,

Perhaps the buildings were built wired with explosives. (Just in case someone needed to collapse the building into its own foot print. 😮 )

Although if the building was actually built in this manner, why does no one admit this?

This was one idea I heard today. Does not appear to make much sense to me, but it would solve the problem of how explosives were rigged in the towers without people noticing.

Eric,

Unfortunately, since I am a bit cynical, the other explanation seems more likely to me.

The wire theory seems to be something that could used by someone to potentially threaten the city (or nation) hostage. Give me “X” or the building disappears in a pile of rubble.

Also I’m fairly sure they shared a parking structure and other subterranean infrastructure.

Missing wing holes? Do you serious expect a perfect silhouette hole upon impact like a kiddies cartoon?

I have read in more than one place and firstly in A+E 911’s site that nanite thermate particles were found in the air and on some close by things much later on after people could get closer. Why all the security with the steel? One “official” was “caught” with a memento rivet on his desk. He was canned and sent to jail but I can’t recall his name or title. No doubt he thought little about that rivet as being part of what was verboten to keep, i.e., steel from the twin towers but they meant ANY steel. So why all the secrecy about the steel? All anyone needed to prove explosives were used was a single sample. I’d bet some worker has a piece or two hidden and can’t figure out how to get it to somebody without being caught. That steel recovered from those towers moved to China almost as rapidly as it moved from a great height to the ground.
The twin towers had workers in it for several months supposedly removing asbestos but nobody ever remembers any asbestos being carted away. Pictures that were taken by unknowns(damn, I wouldn’t be saying I’d taken them either)during this supposed asbestos removal show newly sprayed “paint” on the support beams and other steel parts(joists, etc.) It was later confirmed that a new Israeli technique and invention(nanotech thermate) of spraying nanite thermate and creating a huge fire could and would destroy practically anything it was applied to. This would certainly make one understand why the buildings fell as they did.

Oh, I’m not grasping at anything. I’m just forwarding some questions. And trying to cover every angle. You know, the stuff the MSM is supposed to do, but doesn’t.

Thanks for the reply.

Also, the guys in the black jackets and khaki pants are more interesting to me. And how the MSM (and the F.B.I.) ignores them, but this isn’t a khaki pants control thread, so I thought I’d stick to the topic. However; now that I’ve strayed, what’s your take on those guys? Who are they, and who paid them?

Yes–Khaki pants, desert boots, black tops. Many with the stylized “Punisher” or death’s-head logo a la Craft International or Seal teams 3 and 6…

…and bearing black backpacks.

Several of them. Why don’t we hear about them?

Why did the FBI say that photos other than the ones they’d presented “would not be deemed credible”?

Who the fuck are they to say what will or will not be “deemed credible”? Isn’t an investigation by definition the gathering of information prior to filtering and dissecting?

By the way–Bush Jr. and Obomber were indicted by the torture report that same day.

Just a coincidence. Nothing to see, move along, cows turn themselves inside out all the time.