Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
when fire investigator say there where incendiary used the do not mean what ever burns they mean a chemical accelerantthe use of an Incendiarywhat would be the earth-shattering implications of molten steel at the WTC site?
well------there was lots of incendiary-------anything burning is an incendiary----the more exothermic it is----the more INCENDIARY it is
concrete and steel will not burn at those temperaturesforest are not made of concrete and steelthat jet fuel burns hotter than the twoofers will admit.what would be the earth-shattering implications of molten steel at the WTC site?
when you get a chance watch the documentary national geographic science and conspiracy .
there's a chapter in the film that explodes (pun intended) all the twoofer bullshit about jet fuel and it's effect on the twin towers,
Last time I looked thru my little chemistry textbook---(about 50 years ago) I learned words like -----FLASH POINT----and EXOTHERMIC REACTION -----
and I learned that burning fires are EXOTHERMIC----they produce lots of
heat and once that heat gets on something else to the point of its FLASH
point-----a new exothermic reaction starts up -------SMOKEY THE BEAR told
me that one little lit cigarette can cause EXOTHERMIC REACTIONS
that can bring a WHOLE forest down. I fail to see the issue-----what is the
controversy-----what difference does the specific heat producted by airplane
fuel have to do with anything? The heat produced by a LIT CIG is not all that
much either.
trees are not the only things that burn up in forest fires
Posting these debunking links is stupid they are so full of inaccuracy its impossible to address them all are they are often in direct contradiction to NISTNIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.
Page 2 of Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts [Paperback]
Debunking 9 11 Myths Why Conspiracy Theories Can t Stand Up to the Facts Popular Mechanics David Dunbar Brad Reagan John McCain 9781588166357 Amazon.com Books
You should drop ten and punt. You can always resort to your Wesley Clark conspiracy theories.
Steel does not melt in a hydro carbon fireconcrete and steel will not burn at those temperaturesforest are not made of concrete and steelthat jet fuel burns hotter than the twoofers will admit.
when you get a chance watch the documentary national geographic science and conspiracy .
there's a chapter in the film that explodes (pun intended) all the twoofer bullshit about jet fuel and it's effect on the twin towers,
Last time I looked thru my little chemistry textbook---(about 50 years ago) I learned words like -----FLASH POINT----and EXOTHERMIC REACTION -----
and I learned that burning fires are EXOTHERMIC----they produce lots of
heat and once that heat gets on something else to the point of its FLASH
point-----a new exothermic reaction starts up -------SMOKEY THE BEAR told
me that one little lit cigarette can cause EXOTHERMIC REACTIONS
that can bring a WHOLE forest down. I fail to see the issue-----what is the
controversy-----what difference does the specific heat producted by airplane
fuel have to do with anything? The heat produced by a LIT CIG is not all that
much either.
trees are not the only things that burn up in forest fires
I will help you understand------other stuff gets to flash point and combustion
ensues-------the "other stuff" may be MORE exothermic than waxy hydrocarbons
or even a lit cigarette butt.......and on and on and on--------to the magic of a giant
marshmellow roast
But I believe that in this, as well, you taught me to distinguish between the important and the unimportant, and concentrate on the important,” said Benjamin Netanyahu. “The same foresight led Father to say dozens of years ago that the threat to world peace would emerge from the same parts of the Muslim world where oil, terrorism and nuclear go together. And it is also what led him to tell me in the early 1990s that the Muslim extremists would not rest and would attempt to bring down the Twin Towers in New York, a prediction that I included in one my books in 1995.”
Benzion Netanyahu father of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dies at 102 - Israel News Haaretz
Everyone is waiting for the end time prophecies, well some are, but this man knew more than God I guess, he got it right. (the towers went down, who did it is another story)
Also this is not saying Muslims will attack the US but is specific, Muslims will attack the twin towers.
the disgusting bitch seems to have forgotten that her people
tried to knock the WTC down in 1993-----that Netanyahu correctly
predicted that her people would try again is no surprise to anyone with
a brain.. The disgusting bitch is DESPERATE
The Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.
"We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor."
Netanyahu reportedly made the comments during a conference at Bar-Ilan University on the division of Jerusalem as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians.
Report Netanyahu says 9 11 terror attacks good for Israel - News - Israel News Haaretz
did just what it was suppose to do.
The Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.
"We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor."
Netanyahu reportedly made the comments during a conference at Bar-Ilan University on the division of Jerusalem as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians.
Report Netanyahu says 9 11 terror attacks good for Israel - News - Israel News Haaretz
did just what it was suppose to do.
oh-----right it was GOOD FER DA JOOOOS-----just like Auschwitz was. Dem jooooos really know how to manipulate brain dead goys
Before reading the below, it might be a good idea for the novice to read Mark Ferran's explanation on how "Iron Burns!!!"
Oxidation of iron by air is not the only EXOTHERMIC reaction of iron
ITS CALLED A CORROSION REACTION:
METAL + WATER = METAL OXIDE + HYDROGEN
WHEN IT HAPPENED AT THREE MILE ISLAND IT CREATED A HYDROGEN BUBBLE
- NEU-FONZE
that jet fuel burns hotter than the twoofers will admit.what would be the earth-shattering implications of molten steel at the WTC site?
when you get a chance watch the documentary national geographic science and conspiracy .
there's a chapter in the film that explodes (pun intended) all the twoofer bullshit about jet fuel and it's effect on the twin towers,
can you see video on your computer?that jet fuel burns hotter than the twoofers will admit.what would be the earth-shattering implications of molten steel at the WTC site?
when you get a chance watch the documentary national geographic science and conspiracy .
there's a chapter in the film that explodes (pun intended) all the twoofer bullshit about jet fuel and it's effect on the twin towers,
Last time I looked thru my little chemistry textbook---(about 50 years ago) I learned words like -----FLASH POINT----and EXOTHERMIC REACTION -----
and I learned that burning fires are EXOTHERMIC----they produce lots of
heat and once that heat gets on something else to the point of its FLASH
point-----a new exothermic reaction starts up -------SMOKEY THE BEAR told
me that one little lit cigarette can cause EXOTHERMIC REACTIONS
that can bring a WHOLE forest down. I fail to see the issue-----what is the
controversy-----what difference does the specific heat producted by airplane
fuel have to do with anything? The heat produced by a LIT CIG is not all that
much either.
Posting these debunking links is stupid they are so full of inaccuracy its impossible to address them all are they are often in direct contradiction to NIST
Good post. That would appear to define the tactics of you conspiracy theory loons.Posting these debunking links is stupid they are so full of inaccuracy its impossible to address them all are they are often in direct contradiction to NIST
its a dirty debate tactic, this is what its called
Gish Gallop - RationalWiki
The Gish Gallop is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of small arguments that their opponent cannot possibly answer or address each one in real time. More often than not, these myriad arguments are full of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments — the only condition is that there be many of them, not that they be particularly compelling on their own. They may be escape hatches or "gotcha" arguments that are specifically designed to be brief, but take a long time to unravel. Thus, galloping is frequently used in timed debates (especially by creationists) to overwhelm one's opponent.
Posting these debunking links is stupid they are so full of inaccuracy its impossible to address them all are they are often in direct contradiction to NISTNIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.
Page 2 of Article Former Chief of NIST s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation OpEdNews
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts [Paperback]
Debunking 9 11 Myths Why Conspiracy Theories Can t Stand Up to the Facts Popular Mechanics David Dunbar Brad Reagan John McCain 9781588166357 Amazon.com Books
You should drop ten and punt. You can always resort to your Wesley Clark conspiracy theories.
thats an act of desperation by the shill posting DEBWUNKER links that contradict NIST.His handlers are REALLY getting desperate now.
plus debwunker links dont counter a single thing in those four videos of mine.
thats an act of desperation by the shill posting DEBWUNKER links that contradict NIST.His handlers are REALLY getting desperate now.
plus debwunker links dont counter a single thing in those four videos of mine.
they havent countered anything that any truther has posted.
this is easier than shooting dead ducks!!!
really? how fucking gullible do you have to be to spout the bullshit you guys do even after you've been bitch slapped by the facts.The only thing you conspiracy theory loons have proven is that you gullible types are convinced of anything as long as it's presented in a YouTube video.yep as always,the Bush dupes only prove our point FOR us.
all they are is trolls, they shit on the thread and cant provide any evidence! What they do post has been thoroughly proven incorrect
all they are is trolls, they shit on the thread and cant provide any evidence! What they do post has been thoroughly proven incorrect
so very,very true.
And the only thing morons like yourself have proven over and over is how gullible and delusional you all are for believing that the government has been up-front, honest, and forthcoming in every aspect of 9/11.
So who said anything about the gov't being "up-front, honest, and forthcoming" about anything? Are you familiar with the concept of a Straw Man argument?
What is being argued is the loony tune CTs which have reduced the 9/11 CT Movement and those who persist in shoveling that BS to a laughingstock.
What's really a laughingstock is all those gullible idiots like yourself who actually believe and accepts the BS that the government put out in the so-called "Official Story" as being the truth.
I would have a problem with the gov't findings if they weren't produced by so many highly qualified professionals. I would be suspicious of their findings if their computer models made perfect sense of so complex a issue. On the other hand it is 13 years after the fact and the best your loonytoon 9/11 CT Movement can produce is "there were no planes!" Carry on.
I would have a problem with the gov't findings if they weren't produced by so many highly qualified professionals. I would be suspicious of their findings if their computer models made perfect sense of so complex a issue.
On the other hand it is 13 years after the fact and the best your loonytoon 9/11 CT Movement can produce is "there were no planes!"
