Electron microscope analysis of steel spheres from WTC site

[MelchyBeau]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that this thread is meant to point out the futility of arguing with someone about anything after they've rejected the key evidence. Well done.

Person A: Gravity exits.

Person B: Not everywhere.

Person A: What?

Person B: Not on Pluto.

Person A: What the hell are you talking about?

Person B: Have you ever been to Pluto? I didn't think so! We have no idea if there's gravity there or not.

Person A: Well, it still orbits the sun.

Person B: You haven't even seen Pluto.

Person A: Well, it's pretty obvious that we have gravity here.

Person B: Who cares if we experience some local phenomenon? They don't have it in Antarctica.

Person A: You gotta be [censored] me.

Person B: How else do you explain penguins?

Person A: What the hell do they have to do with gravity?

Person B: That's exactly the question that I'm raising with the Pluto example!

Person A: So you're trying to use penguins as another Pluto. I've seen penguins, and they obey gravity.

Person B: Please provide me with a mechanism for showing why a penguin that you've seen has anything to do with a penguin in Antarctica.

Person A: Ok. Now you're just being retarded. Why are you so smug?

Person B: Why shouldn't I be? You're the one who can't back up your unscientific beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

so what you are saying is penguins are to blame for gravity? Or that pluto caused 9/11?

[FNG]

My apologies if this has been mentioned already, but:
[ QUOTE ]
Jones clearly documents the fact that liquid aluminum is silver and not orange

[/ QUOTE ]
black body radiation FTW

Can you afford to take someone who makes such patently idiotic statements about seriously about anything?

[arahant]

See...this is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my persistence of belief thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Nielso: I'm SURE you've already read the entire report, and probably just missed the section on the collapse mechanics. I understand...It's 1000's of pages of very technical material, and it probably took you a long time to read. By the time you got to the 4th volume, you may have been dozing off.

But here. You can probably start reading around page 300 or 310, and get what you want.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
See...this is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my persistence of belief thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Nielso: I'm SURE you've already read the entire report, and probably just missed the section on the collapse mechanics. I understand...It's 1000's of pages of very technical material, and it probably took you a long time to read. By the time you got to the 4th volume, you may have been dozing off.

But here. You can probably start reading around page 300 or 310, and get what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]


I just read through Chapter 5 and it does not describe a sequential mechanism of the *collapses* (as I call for a number times in this thread).

[Ron Paul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See...this is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my persistence of belief thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Nielso: I'm SURE you've already read the entire report, and probably just missed the section on the collapse mechanics. I understand...It's 1000's of pages of very technical material, and it probably took you a long time to read. By the time you got to the 4th volume, you may have been dozing off.

But here. You can probably start reading around page 300 or 310, and get what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]


I just read through Chapter 5 and it does not describe a sequential mechanism of the *collapses* (as I call for a number times in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

OMFG dude.

This report contains detailed time dependent finite element models of both tower collapses. It provides what you have been asking for, and you skim it in a few minutes and dismiss it out of hand? Page 179, pdf page 243, the bloody details are in the Appendix.

Let it go.

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See...this is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my persistence of belief thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Nielso: I'm SURE you've already read the entire report, and probably just missed the section on the collapse mechanics. I understand...It's 1000's of pages of very technical material, and it probably took you a long time to read. By the time you got to the 4th volume, you may have been dozing off.

But here. You can probably start reading around page 300 or 310, and get what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]


I just read through Chapter 5 and it does not describe a sequential mechanism of the *collapses* (as I call for a number times in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry...You want us to believe that you read over 400 pages of highly technical material in the 17 minutes between my post and yours? STFU and go away.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See...this is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my persistence of belief thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Nielso: I'm SURE you've already read the entire report, and probably just missed the section on the collapse mechanics. I understand...It's 1000's of pages of very technical material, and it probably took you a long time to read. By the time you got to the 4th volume, you may have been dozing off.

But here. You can probably start reading around page 300 or 310, and get what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]


I just read through Chapter 5 and it does not describe a sequential mechanism of the *collapses* (as I call for a number times in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry...You want us to believe that you read over 400 pages of highly technical material in the 17 minutes between my post and yours? STFU and go away.

[/ QUOTE ]


I say "I read through chapter 5", then you say that I claim that I read over 400 pages, and then you tell me to STFU and go away. Chapter 5 is 20 pages with lots of white space and diagrams.


Maybe you can read a little more carefully next time before you start yelling.

[tomdemaine]

Neilso this is a serious question I'm not trying to be snarky here. What do you think would change in the world if tomorrow it was proven 100% certain that the American government blew up the twin towers on 9/11? A mood shift? Something ethereal? A revolution? Nothing?

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
Neilso this is a serious question I'm not trying to be snarky here. What do you think would change in the world if tomorrow it was proven 100% certain that the American government blew up the twin towers on 9/11? A mood shift? Something ethereal? A revolution? Nothing?

[/ QUOTE ]


The importance of 9/11 in relation to freedom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG7MFjsaS0k

Enjoy!

[Ron Paul]

Nice tuque.

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]