Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

To those who believe WTC 7 didn't fall due to fire, how did it fall?

Options
1969798100102

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Not true. His papers are about radiation effects in glasses, optical fibers, fractal kinetics, electron spin resonance geology of major impacts on the earth.

    He has a PHD in Physics from a Top University.

    You’re just spouting off the keywords from the top of the page - and that fact that you’ve told me None of what you just mentioned was involved with glass tells me you literally have no idea what you’re talking about.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    You’re just spouting off the keywords from the top of the page - and that fact that you’ve told me None of what you just mentioned was involved with glass tells me you literally have no idea what you’re talking about.

    You now upset I exposed your lies :) He papers were not all about glass, you lied man up to it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    So those red dots are all just little pools floating in mid air? :D

    Red Dots? Image of this, please?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    You now upset I exposed your lies :) He papers were not all about glass, you lied man up to it.

    Where did I say each and every one of them were? I said most - virtually all, to be precise. But go count them. Go on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Red Dots? Image of this, please?

    It’s the same image.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,655 ✭✭✭storker


    weisses wrote: »
    And they also dont support the NIST conclusion

    They support the conclusion as it relates to the conspiracy theories: that it wasn't a controlled demolition. That's all that matters for the purposes of this thread.
    So what did NIST do with this conclusion from the council ?

    It doesn't matter - see above. Two entities squabbling about the mechanics of the collapse doesn't even come close to proving the "Truther" theory right, any more that finding an unanswered question with regard to evolution makes Creationism right.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    Where did I say each and every one of them were? I said most - virtually all, to be precise. But go count them. Go on.

    Quote you.
    This Dr. David Griscom previously of the NRL hasn’t published a paper that traveled outside the realm of silicon glass - all of his work was in glass.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    It’s the same image.

    Provide an image I don't see the red dots you see.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Quote you.
    This Dr. David Griscom previously of the NRL hasn’t published a paper that traveled outside the realm of silicon glass - all of his work was in glass.

    See my other post. And here is a clarification:

    Virtually all of his work is in glass.

    Prove me wrong. What research has he published on that is relevant to the 9/11 conspiracy? Was it lunar dust?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Provide an image I don't see the red dots you see.

    Then you’re color blind and I cannot help you.

    Dots of molten pools of metals that you so claim. Do you see them? How do you explain these floating pools, orange red yellow magenta cyan or otherwise?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    Then you’re color blind and I cannot help you.

    Provide the image why is so hard for you? Can you tell me where to look?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Provide the image why is so hard for you? Can you tell me where to look?

    Nope sorry.

    I’m just glad you don’t appear to see any pools. Because neither do I. :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    Nope sorry.

    I’m just glad you don’t appear to see any pools. Because neither do I. :D

    I see the pool. Are you talking about some of the liquid pourings flowing down a steep slope?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    I see the pool. Are you talking about some of the liquid pourings flowing down a steep slope?

    What flow?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    What flow?

    The liquid is pouring off slowly down a slope or incline. The liquid pool is higher up at an elevated point.

    475582.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,502 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Overheal wrote: »
    What flow?

    Ah ffs did you have to? Now we are gonna have to suffer the online version of crayon drawings where he MS paints everything.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The liquid is pouring off slowly down a slope or incline. The liquid pool is higher up at an elevated point.

    475582.png
    Lol


    What is causing this ‘liquid’ to pour?

    How is that volume or pouring rate of droplets considered slow?

    Can you provide a video of molten metal being slowly poured which scatters into so many droplets?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Ah ffs did you have to? Now we are gonna have to suffer the online version of crayon drawings where he MS paints everything.

    giphy.gif


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    For what more how is that guy manhandling a molten metal pool :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    Lol


    What is causing this ‘liquid’ to pour?

    How is that volume or pouring rate of droplets considered slow?

    Can you provide a video of molten metal being slowly poured which scatters into so many droplets?

    I don't understand your questions. There nothing there to stop some of the liquid pouring down the incline. There could be rubble there and the liquid will flow down between the cracks and spaces.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    For what more how is that guy manhandling a molten metal pool :D

    A guy with no legs and no hands :D It a reflection of the fireman we have been over this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,877 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe



    475582.png

    It's a ground zero worker cutting metal with either an angle grinder, acetylene torch or thermitic lance


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    A guy with no legs and no hands :D It a reflection of the fireman we have been over this.

    What reflective surface is present at ground zero? Do you have an independent source to suggest this?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    I don't understand your questions. There nothing there to stop some of the liquid pouring down the incline. There could be rubble there and the liquid will flow down between the cracks and spaces.

    But it wouldn’t break up into droplets.

    So you can’t show me a video that would replicate this? Molten steel being poured down a slope (rubbled or otherwise) that doesn’t flow as a stream but as a spray of droplets?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    What reflective surface is present at ground zero? Do you have an independent source to suggest this?

    It obvious the two anomalies are caused by the two firemen being there. An image effect of some kind.

    The fireman to left is standing exactly like the small man in between the columns hand position and body position is exactly the same. He holding something in his hands just like the stickman.

    Fireman to the right- his right-hand and head position, his looking down matches the image near the pool of liquid.

    475583.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,877 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Overheal wrote: »
    But it wouldn’t break up into droplets.

    So you can’t show me a video that would replicate this? Molten steel being poured down a slope (rubbled or otherwise) that doesn’t flow as a stream but as a spray of droplets?

    It's "spray" because it's "moving so fast"

    It's "spray" because it's "going over a rough surface"

    It's "spray" because it "reacting to hitting cold surfaces"

    Type "molten metal flowing" into google images and selectively pick out the ones with "spray" - proof that it can cause spray

    There is any number of cranks answers that can be given, it's relatively simple. It's all these circular and "whack-a-mole" techniques that CTers and truthers use to deflect from the fact that they can't support or even outline what alternatively happened


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    But it wouldn’t break up into droplets.

    So you can’t show me a video that would replicate this? Molten steel being poured down a slope (rubbled or otherwise) that doesn’t flow as a stream but as a spray of droplets?

    Of course, it would. You looking an image taken from a distance and has poor resolution. Those droplets could be small pools of liquid up close.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's a ground zero worker cutting metal with either an angle grinder, acetylene torch or thermitic lance

    I debunked this with your own video, ignored again of course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    It obvious the two anomalies are caused by the two firemen being there. An image effect of some kind.

    The fireman to left is standing exactly like the small man in between the columns hand position and body position is exactly the same. He holding something in his hands just like the stickman.

    Fireman to the right- his right-hand and head position, his looking down matches the image near the pool of liquid.

    475583.png
    So it’s an image effect you have no way to explain, when the glaringly obvious explanation is that is a worker using a metal cutting tool, which is sending sparks flying everywhere. We see similar in the video dohnjoe posted.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 82,286 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Of course, it would. You looking an image taken from a distance and has poor resolution. Those droplets could be small pools of liquid up close.

    But you just said they were droplets flowing down a slope not small pools.

    If they are small pools why are there no other images of this? Show me even a second photo that would support that these are dozens or more tiny little baby molten pools (which are magically staying molten, for no apparent reason) and not sparks in motion from a steel cutting tool.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement