Popular Mechanics

or it does answer the question but is beyond your limited intelligence...or blocked out in your denial disorder
i didn't even watch your stupid fucking videos
moron
i asked YOU a question, not that stupid shit in the video
YOU
answer the fucking question
in YOUR OWN WORDS
can you do that?
do you have the intellect to do so?

well if that's the case you are the stupid one ...the video is my answer...if you don't view
it ...you only further display your denial and avoidance of the facts
i dont deny FACTS but i WILL deny LIES
thats all your videos HAVE
 
Wait ... you mean Eots thinks that a building collapsing will have the floors in tact ... what? *confused* How the hell is that possible, doesn't that completely negate a collapse?

oh just shut the fuck up..you have no clue ..you proved that with your retarded melting oven and exploding stove nonsense...
actually, you first lied about your wood stove and claimed it was made out of steel, then you lated admited it was made out of cast iron, then you started talking about an old gas kitchen stove you had and i believe she got confused with that and thought you were still talking about the same stove(wood stove)
so, dont get upset at her for getting confused by your bullshit
 
Wait ... you mean Eots thinks that a building collapsing will have the floors in tact ... what? *confused* How the hell is that possible, doesn't that completely negate a collapse?

oh just shut the fuck up..you have no clue ..you proved that with your retarded melting oven and exploding stove nonsense...

actually, you first lied about your wood stove and claimed it was made out of steel,

actually i named the make and model and then when you try to imply there was a difference... i proved it irrelevant because..the melting point for both was virtually the same

then you lated admited it was made out of cast iron, then you started talking about an old gas kitchen stove you had and i believe she got confused with that and thought you were still talking about the same stove(wood stove)

well your wrong she clearly gave her stupid opinion on wood burnig stoves... and then gave her stupid opinion on gas ovens


so, dont get upset at her for getting confused by your bullshit


she is confused as a natural state ..your thoughts are a little more orderly but your denial makes up for it
 
Wait ... you mean Eots thinks that a building collapsing will have the floors in tact ... what? *confused* How the hell is that possible, doesn't that completely negate a collapse?

oh just shut the fuck up..you have no clue ..you proved that with your retarded melting oven and exploding stove nonsense...

No, all that proved was that you are a liar and not smart enough to make it believable ...
 
oh just shut the fuck up..you have no clue ..you proved that with your retarded melting oven and exploding stove nonsense...



actually i named the make and model and then when you try to imply there was a difference... i proved it irrelevant because..the melting point for both was virtually the same



well your wrong she clearly gave her stupid opinion on wood burnig stoves... and then gave her stupid opinion on gas ovens


so, dont get upset at her for getting confused by your bullshit


she is confused as a natural state ..your thoughts are a little more orderly but your denial makes up for it

You can't even quote right on here. No, I never realized you had changed to gas stoves in the conversation as it would have nothing to do with steel melting ...
 
actually i named the make and model and then when you try to imply there was a difference... i proved it irrelevant because..the melting point for both was virtually the same



well your wrong she clearly gave her stupid opinion on wood burnig stoves... and then gave her stupid opinion on gas ovens


she is confused as a natural state ..your thoughts are a little more orderly but your denial makes up for it

You can't even quote right on here. No, I never realized you had changed to gas stoves in the conversation as it would have nothing to do with steel melting ...
see, i was right
 
and it says pancake collapse where >I agree however it implies a pancake collapse to explain the squibs
even tho in the next breath they don't support the theory
in the earlier question where you are quoting from, seems like they are answering the CAUSE of the begining of the collapse and not the entire collapse
no, pancaking did not CAUSE it to begin with
but it DID pancake

I thought everyone agreed that it pancaked. The point the troofers usually make is that they collapsed at free fall speed AND pancaked, making explosives the only possible explanation.

err dont know where on earth you ever came to that conclusion.NIST has said it pancaked which is impossible to do from a mere collapse of a tower since it would fall gradually.Not at free fall speed like it did.
 
in the earlier question where you are quoting from, seems like they are answering the CAUSE of the begining of the collapse and not the entire collapse
no, pancaking did not CAUSE it to begin with
but it DID pancake

I thought everyone agreed that it pancaked. The point the troofers usually make is that they collapsed at free fall speed AND pancaked, making explosives the only possible explanation.

err dont know where on earth you ever came to that conclusion.NIST has said it pancaked which is impossible to do from a mere collapse of a tower since it would fall gradually.Not at free fall speed like it did.

in order to get a building to free fall at 32' / sec / sec .....what would you have to do to the structural system of the building.....in your own words....
 
no pancakes ..in a pancake collapse the floors stay intact and the support between gives way...as opposed to the wtc where it was turned to a fine dust

exactly.thats how we know it did not pancake like NIST and the NOVA propaganda series says it did.
 
Last edited:
actually i named the make and model and then when you try to imply there was a difference... i proved it irrelevant because..the melting point for both was virtually the same



well your wrong she clearly gave her stupid opinion on wood burnig stoves... and then gave her stupid opinion on gas ovens









she is confused as a natural state ..your thoughts are a little more orderly but your denial makes up for it

You can't even quote right on here. No, I never realized you had changed to gas stoves in the conversation as it would have nothing to do with steel melting ...





Quote: Originally Posted by eots
call me a liar.. what a stupid bitch...what a waste of time... if your feeble little mind can not understand that i have had the same stove for 20 years now and so have many of my neighbours ,,and in fact my gas stove was built in 1942... all of which needed to be certified as safe for home insurance if you cant deal with these facts..just fuck off


Just because something is certified doesn't mean you can't still kill yourself with it. Steak knifes are certified safe. Really, you have to be lying since what you state goes beyond all logic, the same logic you try to use to justify your conspiracy theories. But like the conspiracy logic it's based on lies and invented "facts". However, if yours was built in 1942, you do realize that there is no way it would have held up that long under the heat you are using it, so thanks for proving that you are a liar even more. Non of the stoves made before 1960 could pass modern inspections.



liar
 
Last edited:
ET FUEL TYPE A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg [3]

OK JUST SHUT UP RIGHT NOW WITH YOUR MADE UP FACTS AND GO CLEAN YOUR LITTER BOX OR SOMETHING
 
ET FUEL TYPE A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg [3]

OK JUST SHUT UP RIGHT NOW WITH YOUR MADE UP FACTS AND GO CLEAN YOUR LITTER BOX OR SOMETHING

Ok, I'll go clean the litter box. Then I'll come back and you'll still be a moron.
 
ET FUEL TYPE A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg [3]

OK JUST SHUT UP RIGHT NOW WITH YOUR MADE UP FACTS AND GO CLEAN YOUR LITTER BOX OR SOMETHING

with the fireproofing blown off the steal due to the impact...

with the perimeter, truss and core structural system damged.....

with the fire supression system compromised.....

with the jet fuel used as an accelerante to ignite the contents of the office building....

with stored energy of mutiple floors above this point.....

how hot would the fire need to get to weaken the remaining connection and support points and release the stored energy above....
 
ET FUEL TYPE A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg [3]

OK JUST SHUT UP RIGHT NOW WITH YOUR MADE UP FACTS AND GO CLEAN YOUR LITTER BOX OR SOMETHING

Ok, I'll go clean the litter box. Then I'll come back and you'll still be a moron.

ya good response to facts...you make a really strong argument......for how lame you are
 

Forum List

Back
Top