The ongoing 9/11 cover-up.

[surada]

They sure care a lot about disproving us "truthers" don't they ?

Truther is not a good name for nincompoop... You are misled far too frequently.

 

[Briss]

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.

 

[surada]

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . .

Remind these jerks that aluminum burns... and the twin towers had aluminum skins.

Does Aluminum Burn? - Reference.com

Does Aluminum Burn?

Aluminum burns when exposed to a flame, as it is a reactive and flammable metal. It burns in oxygen with a white flame and by forming aluminum trioxide. The oxide layer that always covers the aluminum metal protects it from reacting with the air.

www.reference.com

Apr 10, 2020 · Aluminum burns when exposed to a flame, as it is a reactive and flammable metal. It burns in oxygen with a white flame and by forming aluminum trioxide. The oxide layer that always covers the aluminum metal protects it from reacting with …

 

[Briss]

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . .

Remind these jerks that aluminum burns... and the twin towers had aluminum skins.

Does Aluminum Burn? - Reference.com

Does Aluminum Burn?

Aluminum burns when exposed to a flame, as it is a reactive and flammable metal. It burns in oxygen with a white flame and by forming aluminum trioxide. The oxide layer that always covers the aluminum metal protects it from reacting with the air.

www.reference.com

View attachment 455461
Apr 10, 2020 · Aluminum burns when exposed to a flame, as it is a reactive and flammable metal. It burns in oxygen with a white flame and by forming aluminum trioxide. The oxide layer that always covers the aluminum metal protects it from reacting with …

Thanks for reminding me of the properties of aluminum. I don't know what that has to do with a melted handgun, but I'm not here to figure that out.

 

[AFrench2]

You actually believe 9/11 was a cover up? O_O lol

 

[Briss]

Why is that when someone knows something as fact, and they tell that fact, the lame limp in with accusations having nothing to do with the fact that was stated? If you've got a point to make about what I've said, stand up and come out from behind the bushes with your peashooter and try to make it.

 

[Soupnazi630]

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.

Fire ahead and prove it. Even if someone did see it such a thing would be absolutely irrelevant. The picgture you showed of molten sgteel was NOT specifically steel. Any number of flammable materials could burn that way and such buildings as the towers would have endless flammable materials.

You have nothing.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Why is that when someone knows something as fact, and they tell that fact, the lame limp in with accusations having nothing to do with the fact that was stated? If you've got a point to make about what I've said, stand up and come out from behind the bushes with your peashooter and try to make it.

None of your theories are based on anything you know for a facgt which is why you are called out for lame theories.

 

[the other mike]

You actually believe 9/11 was a cover up? O_O lol

What's your point sweet cheeks ?

 

[the other mike]

They sure care a lot about disproving us "truthers" don't they ?

Truther is not a good name for nincompoop... You are misled far too frequently.

I'm not a truther, which is why the quotation marks, Skippy.

 

[the other mike]

"I'm too deranged to notice".

More ad hominem attacks from the internet trolls and disinformation agents.

Your feelings get hurt awful easy.

There are no such agents. you fool

YES THAT WAS AD HOMINEN and an ACCURATE description.

Only a fool would repeat the same debunked proven bullshit over and over.

He's been shown repeatedly that beam was still standing until a cleanup crew cut it in October, 2001, to have it removed from the site. Despite being shown this repeatedly, here he is, still pedaling this bullshit. He's so dense, it doesn't even occur to him that by repeated debunked nonsense, it puts everything he says into doubt since it's obvious he has no compunction about lying to maintain his conspiracy nonsense.

They're images of 2 different sections.
Stop lying, bitch.

No, they're not. It's the same beam. You can't lie your way out of this.

Here's the image you posted...

Here's the image I posted...

Now look at the cut beam just above the white circle in the image I posted ... it's the exact same beam as the one in your image.

In your image, look at the beam in front of the one you claim was cut at a 45° to bring down the tower ... it's the exact same beam as the one I circled in the image I posted. Even if you stupidly try to lie about this, everyone else here will see you're lying.

It doesn't show that they cut the beam, just that it's been cut.

And, I could be wrong about how the nano-thermite military grade demolition charges were used, but you can't prove they weren't used.

The twins could not have collapsed in accelerated freefall without them.

The core columns' resistance would have stopped the collapses halfway down.

 

[AFrench2]

You actually believe 9/11 was a cover up? O_O lol

What's your point sweet cheeks ?

No point, just came to laugh at you hehe

 

[the other mike]

No point, just came to laugh at you hehe

And wound up showing your lack of knowledge
and ignorance. Congratulations are in order.

 

[Briss]

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.

Fire ahead and prove it. Even if someone did see it such a thing would be absolutely irrelevant. The picgture you showed of molten sgteel was NOT specifically steel. Any number of flammable materials could burn that way and such buildings as the towers would have endless flammable materials.

You have nothing.

You're a fukcing hair-trigger, ain't ya? If you slow down just a little, you'll recall that I have put forth no theory. Nor did I post any pictures. That's all in your mind. Your problem is that when you are angry, you become incapable of making a point, and you even recall things that didn't happen.

Anyway, one of the lead investigators into the collapses said he saw melting of girders at the WTC. Wonder why he would say such a thing unless . . .
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here's something from a guy named Gerry Fornino. He was an FBI bomb technician.

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

 

[the other mike]

..... But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Only thermitic reactions could have possibly done that .

 

[surada]

"I'm too deranged to notice".

More ad hominem attacks from the internet trolls and disinformation agents.

Your feelings get hurt awful easy.

There are no such agents. you fool

YES THAT WAS AD HOMINEN and an ACCURATE description.

Only a fool would repeat the same debunked proven bullshit over and over.

He's been shown repeatedly that beam was still standing until a cleanup crew cut it in October, 2001, to have it removed from the site. Despite being shown this repeatedly, here he is, still pedaling this bullshit. He's so dense, it doesn't even occur to him that by repeated debunked nonsense, it puts everything he says into doubt since it's obvious he has no compunction about lying to maintain his conspiracy nonsense.

They're images of 2 different sections.
Stop lying, bitch.

No, they're not. It's the same beam. You can't lie your way out of this.

Here's the image you posted...

Here's the image I posted...

Now look at the cut beam just above the white circle in the image I posted ... it's the exact same beam as the one in your image.

In your image, look at the beam in front of the one you claim was cut at a 45° to bring down the tower ... it's the exact same beam as the one I circled in the image I posted. Even if you stupidly try to lie about this, everyone else here will see you're lying.

It doesn't show that they cut the beam, just that it's been cut.

And, I could be wrong about how the nano-thermite military grade demolition charges were used, but you can't prove they weren't used.

The twins could not have collapsed in accelerated freefall without them.

The core columns' resistance would have stopped the collapses halfway down.

Nope.. The effect was cascading...It was a freefall NOT an "accelerated" freefall.

 

[surada]

..... But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Only thermitic reactions could have possibly done that .

There was no thermite.

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.

Fire ahead and prove it. Even if someone did see it such a thing would be absolutely irrelevant. The picgture you showed of molten sgteel was NOT specifically steel. Any number of flammable materials could burn that way and such buildings as the towers would have endless flammable materials.

You have nothing.

You're a fukcing hair-trigger, ain't ya? If you slow down just a little, you'll recall that I have put forth no theory. Nor did I post any pictures. That's all in your mind. Your problem is that when you are angry, you become incapable of making a point, and you even recall things that didn't happen.

Anyway, one of the lead investigators into the collapses said he saw melting of girders at the WTC. Wonder why he would say such a thing unless . . .
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here's something from a guy named Gerry Fornino. He was an FBI bomb technician.

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

High temperatures do compromise the integrity of steel girders. They will bend.

A thermal study of a new oil well plugging & abandonment ...

A thermal study of a new oil well plugging & abandonment operation

When the oil and gas extraction in a well is over or ended by wellbore issues, a Plugging and Abandoning (P&A) operation is required. The usual method…

www.sciencedirect.com

A multi-layer geometry, composed of dolomite, cement, carbon iron steel, and thermite, is used to simulate the oil well. The phase change problem is approached …

• Author: Elisan dos Santos Magalhães, Marcelo J.S. de Lemos

 

[Briss]

..... But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Only thermitic reactions could have possibly done that .

There was no thermite.

If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.

And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that even handguns had been found that had melted down into blobs in some burned out cars that were in the area.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.

No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though

Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.

Fire ahead and prove it. Even if someone did see it such a thing would be absolutely irrelevant. The picgture you showed of molten sgteel was NOT specifically steel. Any number of flammable materials could burn that way and such buildings as the towers would have endless flammable materials.

You have nothing.

You're a fukcing hair-trigger, ain't ya? If you slow down just a little, you'll recall that I have put forth no theory. Nor did I post any pictures. That's all in your mind. Your problem is that when you are angry, you become incapable of making a point, and you even recall things that didn't happen.

Anyway, one of the lead investigators into the collapses said he saw melting of girders at the WTC. Wonder why he would say such a thing unless . . .
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here's something from a guy named Gerry Fornino. He was an FBI bomb technician.

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

High temperatures do compromise the integrity of steel girders. They will bend.

A thermal study of a new oil well plugging & abandonment ...

A thermal study of a new oil well plugging & abandonment operation

When the oil and gas extraction in a well is over or ended by wellbore issues, a Plugging and Abandoning (P&A) operation is required. The usual method…

www.sciencedirect.com

A multi-layer geometry, composed of dolomite, cement, carbon iron steel, and thermite, is used to simulate the oil well. The phase change problem is approached …

• Author: Elisan dos Santos Magalhães, Marcelo J.S. de Lemos

Sure, girders bend. Why would a lead investigator say that he saw melting of girders at the WCT?

 

[AFrench2]

No point, just came to laugh at you hehe

And wound up showing your lack of knowledge
and ignorance. Congratulations are in order.

Yes, yes, I know, I know, you're more enlightened than me because Bush blew up the Twin Towers in an inside job and you know about it and I don't. yadda yadda

 

[Faun]

"I'm too deranged to notice".

More ad hominem attacks from the internet trolls and disinformation agents.

Your feelings get hurt awful easy.

There are no such agents. you fool

YES THAT WAS AD HOMINEN and an ACCURATE description.

Only a fool would repeat the same debunked proven bullshit over and over.

He's been shown repeatedly that beam was still standing until a cleanup crew cut it in October, 2001, to have it removed from the site. Despite being shown this repeatedly, here he is, still pedaling this bullshit. He's so dense, it doesn't even occur to him that by repeated debunked nonsense, it puts everything he says into doubt since it's obvious he has no compunction about lying to maintain his conspiracy nonsense.

They're images of 2 different sections.
Stop lying, bitch.

No, they're not. It's the same beam. You can't lie your way out of this.

Here's the image you posted...

Here's the image I posted...

Now look at the cut beam just above the white circle in the image I posted ... it's the exact same beam as the one in your image.

In your image, look at the beam in front of the one you claim was cut at a 45° to bring down the tower ... it's the exact same beam as the one I circled in the image I posted. Even if you stupidly try to lie about this, everyone else here will see you're lying.

It doesn't show that they cut the beam, just that it's been cut.

And, I could be wrong about how the nano-thermite military grade demolition charges were used, but you can't prove they weren't used.

The twins could not have collapsed in accelerated freefall without them.

The core columns' resistance would have stopped the collapses halfway down.

It's the same beam as the one you showed. It was cut some 5-6 weeks after 9/11.

And no, I don't have to prove nano thermite wasn't used. It's your claim that it was and it's your claim to prove. You only seek to shift the burden of proof onto me because you can't prove your claims.

Using your ridiculous logic that I have to prove you wrong when you can't prove yourself right is as stupid as had you claimed Superman melted those beams with his heat vision ... now prove he didn't.