Watch the news - B777 missing

[bogan]

Unlike most of what I've read on here, those things are actually measurable quantifiable facts. I don't see any point going down the rabbit hole until those things can be addressed.

But Occam's razor say's they're much less likely to be valid. So the dying dude is right, if the first events can be seen as having a common cause then it's far more likely that later events have a related cause.

Yeh aight then, how much structural integrity would be lost if 1.4 trillion joules of energy was converted to heat in there. Some quick maths suggest that would be equivalent to over 300 tonnes of TNT right; which kinda suggests the answer would be, all of it.

[imdying]

Iif what you're saying about the towers isn't built on fact, I can't find any motivation to even bother looking into that one.... I assume all I'm going to find is more basic math that you're blindly ignoring because it doesn't fit your agenda. Having said that, the math for the actual fireball isn't basic, so I can see why you be reluctant (or possibly unable?) to verify it yourself.

[Katman]

Iif what you're saying about the towers isn't built on fact, I can't find any motivation to even bother looking into that one.... I assume all I'm going to find is more basic math that you're blindly ignoring because it doesn't fit your agenda. Having said that, the math for the actual fireball isn't basic, so I can see why you be reluctant (or possibly unable?) to verify it yourself.

Give it a go. See if you can find any logic in the collapse of Building 7.

It might be a revelation for you.

[Woodman]

Do you understand the concept of freefall?

No, I was just asking questions, not just accepting others theories like one of the two kinds of people you mentioned earlier.

[imdying]

Yeh aight then, how much structural integrity would be lost if 1.4 trillion joules of energy was converted to heat in there. Some quick maths suggest that would be equivalent to over 300 tonnes of TNT right; which kinda suggests the answer would be, all of it.

Now you've come up against a problem... we as layman aren't able to produce that figure, and those that do have that ability and access to accurate information are denounced as government shills. For that answer, you'll have to look at something like the NIST papers and draw your own conclusion as to whether they're making it up or not. I have to admit I don't actually care enough to do that, but I do find that the parroting of fiction in support of the conspiracy to be a little disingenuous, thus why I mustered enough interest to tear that to pieces.

[R650R]

There's nothing special about jet fuel, just glorified Kerosene. If anything the actual office fires themselves would generate possibly more heat under right conditions but as the official story is faked to hell they just say Jet Fuel cause it rolls off the tongue nicely and conjurs all sorts of horror images in tv viewers minds... And the majority of it exploded outside the towers in a giant fireball.
I've had some cranking hot fires in my kent log fire place over the last 20 odd years and it aint collapsed and prob made out of lower grade steel than high rise fireproofed RSJ beams...

Even if you believe the official line, the damage is at the top of the building, the lower floors are still doing their thing. There is not enough new energy introduced in a downward direction to explain the total catastrophic failure of the entire buildings.
Maybe tomorrow OSH will dictate loggers to cut the trees from the top, once a branch freefalls it will collapse the whole tree.
And EVEN if the structure failed the way they said, think for a moment of the massive amount of steel and concrete in the way in the lower floors. Just like the haybales at a racetrack they would slow the crashing structure but the buildings collapse at a uniform speed when the rate of failure of lower floors should have slowed the fall in an exponential function.

[Katman]

Now you've come up against a problem... we as layman aren't able to produce that figure, and those that do have that ability and access to accurate information are denounced as government shills. For that answer, you'll have to look at something like the NIST papers and draw your own conclusion as to whether they're making it up or not. I have to admit I don't actually care enough to do that, but I do find that the parroting of fiction in support of the conspiracy to be a little disingenuous, thus why I mustered enough interest to tear that to pieces.

Who do NIST work for again?

[imdying]

Give it a go. See if you can find any logic in the collapse of Building 7.

Only if you promise to use actual facts to support your case....

[imdying]

Who do NIST work for again?

I think that proves my point

[Katman]

I think that proves my point

How's that?

NIST are merely a government puppet.

[imdying]

How's that?

NIST are merely a government puppet.

Because you lack the technical knowledge to refute their papers, you play the man and not the ball by utilising the conspiracists war cry of "government shills!", that's how. The difference between you and them is, you cry that to mask your ignorance (or perhaps I am giving you insufficient credit and you're just lazy), and they publish their papers for peer review.

[bogan]

Now you've come up against a problem... we as layman aren't able to produce that figure, and those that do have that ability and access to accurate information are denounced as government shills. For that answer, you'll have to look at something like the NIST papers and draw your own conclusion as to whether they're making it up or not. I have to admit I don't actually care enough to do that, but I do find that the parroting of fiction in support of the conspiracy to be a little disingenuous, thus why I mustered enough interest to tear that to pieces.

Indeed, which is why I figured building 7 might be easier to look at. The conspiracy guys should be able to point out what the excuse for it falling was supposed to be, why it didn't occur, and why it had to be knocked down; as well as proof that explosives did it.

[Katman]

Because you lack the technical knowledge to refute their papers, you play the man and not the ball by utilising the conspiracists war cry of "government shills!", that's how. The difference between you and them is, you cry that to mask your ignorance (or perhaps I am giving you insufficient credit and you're just lazy), and they publish their papers for peer review.

It's not just me questioning NIST's integrity.

There are a huge number of highly qualified architects and engineers who don't accept their findings.

Are you more qualified than them?

[Kickaha]

whats the fuken story? The b777 flew in to the pentagon 3 years ago?

They obviously have time travel, fuck are you in trouble now for exposing their secret

[bogan]

It's not just me questioning NIST's integrity.

There are a huge number of highly qualified architects and engineers who don't accept their findings.

Are you more qualified than them?

Are they more qualified and more numerous than NIST and their supporters?

This is why playing the man don't work, I'd expect as much from mashy but thought you'd be better than that.