MirageMemories: Care to discuss?

[jaydeehess]

1200 degrees F ain't gonna do it, bend them that is,

seems that most of the steel industry and the fire engineering industry would disagree with you there Dan.

 

[eeyore1954]

I don't think a fire pit in someones back yard is as big as several floors of the WTC center don't you see what a nonsensical comparison you are making. Or don't you care. Because if you really believe your comparison means anything you lack reasoning ability.

...the towers stood about an hour or so after the aircraft impact, then they exploded...the towers handled the impact, and jet fuel and office supplies will not melt steel (start a fire in your burn pit in the back yard and see how long you have to heat a piece of heavier angle iron to get it to even bend) or pulverize concrete to fine dust...for those towers to come down as they did, completely demolished, something had to occur at the base, otherwise a large portion of the towers (below the impacts) would have remained somewhat intact, messed up but not made into a pile of rubble

...

 

[eeyore1954]

ISn't there some dispute about how quickly the Vice President was escorted out of the white house? Or is there a definite time.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

...thanks for the welcome...I like to read alot on here (and other places)...
...as far as what I believe, I believe what I seen, the towers were completely destroyed from top to bottom...and it wasn't from the impacts...
...and you really don't need to be a scientist or have 'credentials' to know how steel (heavy steel beams and plates) react to heat (I did work the rolling mills a few years in the late '70's tho) and 1200 degrees F ain't gonna do it, bend them that is, if those temps were even reached in that hour before the collapse
...as far as counseling goes, I am sure alot of people need counseling, maybe I could get counseling to help me be part of the gang, one of the 'big boys' HA...

Are you even vaguely familiar with the concept of a "thread topic"?

 

[Minadin]

1200 degrees F ain't gonna do it, bend them that is,

If you take 36KSI steel and heat it up to about 1100 F, it loses about half of its strength. That doesn't mean you can bend it with your own physical strength, though, unless it's a really small section. Reason being: 36KSI is 36 kips per square inch. A kip is a structural unit of force equal to 1,000 lbs. So, even at half strength, that steel can take 18,000 lbs of force per square inch of section.

 

[HeyLeroy]

If you wish to interrogate me,

'Interrogation' infers that you're compelled to reply, which you aren't. Word games.

I intend to ask the occasional question myself. If that's not kewl with you don't confiscate my posts from LC

Sorry. Here, take 'em back, I'd have washed 'em but they're really quite threadbare...

and demand replies in JREF!

Where have I heard the phrase "ask questions, demand answers" before?

You could have asked me these questions where you originally read them instead of seeking the sanctuary of JREF and your guaranteed gang of supporters.

Had I not been banned at LC, you mean...

My original post was clearly stated as a speculative piece.

The other Conspiracy Fantasists certainly jumped on it as though it was an undiscovered Bible Testament, though, eh? Quite the guaranteed gang of supporters you have there!

Regarding bogus tenants, I merely postulated that it was possible to gain access to the WTC by leasing space under the guise of legitimacy, but with the actual intention of performing CD preparation. This would be a bogus tenancy. If you think this is impossible, you can go ahead and prove it.

I've provided you with links to tenant lists of the three buildings that collapsed that day. Please speculate on who were the bogus tenants.

Your second comment wasn't a question but an assumption on your part. Make all the assumptions you wish as long as it's clear that they are your assumptions, not mine.

Back to waffling on the involvement of security?

Who would finance? Obviously if I'm endorsing the belief that the collapses of the WTC 1,2 & 7 were controlled demolitions, then I'm compelled to believe that it was financed by people with substantial resources. Since I am not one of the participants and since it's not necessary to name names in a 'how to' speculation,

Correction: 'how to' fantasy....

I have no intention of guessing. For the sake of an example though, the CIA would certainly have the required assets.

Anyone else? Or just the BIG BAD CIA? If you're not afraid to speculate on the involvement of the CIA, why are you so afraid to speculate on anyone else?

Or is this your way of weaseling out of the question, dropping the name of the CIA without actually accusing them?

How much time? A question I answered, again in the context of my original post. You keep wanting to hold me accountable for saying "what was done" when I clearly only speculated as to "how it could have been possible". I never claimed to know what was done and am not obliged to provide evidence backing up a non-claim.

There was only a window of days between the withdrawal of bomb-sniffing dogs and the attacks, yet you speculate that all the preparation took place within that window?

I'm fully convinced that it wasn't done by 19 radical Islamists because I don't find the NIST Report provides a credible explanation for why the towers collapsed.

Have you read the complete NIST report? A simple yes or no will suffice.

In the interest of open-mindedness, it's conceivable that there were additional Islamic terrorists 'on the ground', that were responsible for assuring the total collapse of the towers. While I don't find that scenario very credible, it is within the realm of possibility.

So you discount the involvement of a relatively simple conspiracy (19 fanatical Islamists and a small group of Islamist support conspirators) and choose to believe in a conspiracy fantasy that would likely consist of hundreds, if not thousands of members or ex-members of the US military, government, police and firefighters, in a direct attempt to murder upwards of 20,000 US citizens in cold blood?

What would be your price to

a) participate, and
b) keep your mouth shut?

Like I said, the number of people involved, outside of the actual organizers, would be totally dependent on which plan was chosen. The more powerfull the explosives, the fewer people likely to be involved in the preparation. The more lead time, the fewer people required.

The more powerful the explosives, the bigger the bang. Unless they had these:

They would have, realistically, had to set thousands of separate charges and wire them together with, literally, miles of det-cord in the time between the bomb-sniffing dogs' removal and the attacks. On the outsides of the towers, because that's where the majority of the structural steel was located. They would've had to pre-cut these beams with torches, or they would've needed much, much larger demo charges.

They would've had to accomplish all this work on the outsides of the towers completely unobserved, in a matter of days.

How?

You finish your reply with typical JREF 'play-to-the-crowd-of-admirers' abusive crap about space launching golf balls with elastic bands while in effect, criticizing me for bothering to answer you.

I can speculate on how to string enough elastic bands together to launch a golf ball into space.

You can speculate 'til the cows come home. It doesn't do any good. It doesn't provide any real answers, does it?

MerrieMelodies, if you consider that to be 'abusive', you're a thin-skinned drama-queen. Go back to the LC forum and see how perfectly polite non-CFists get treated before being banned.

Hypocrite.

You asked me to talk about a speculation post from another site and then you make your dismissal summation about how pointless it all supposedly is.

Because it's fantasy.

Well if speculation was pointless it wouldn't get used by scientists, detectives, investigators of all stripes, and courtroom attorneys. It's a part of the reasoning process that we all use so if your going to mock me then your mocking yourself in the process.

So, so wrong. "(S)cientists, detectives, investigators of all stripes, and courtroom attorneys" don't just sit around all day pulling speculations out of their butts.

Evidence is required to prove and convict.

So get on finding some evidence already.

It is not required to speculate, research, investigate and compare observations.
MM

Here's a link to a tool you may find useful in extracting any further speculations.

 

[A W Smith]

MM, like all the truthers, have a world vision where all professionals are spineless corruptable men and women, whose opinion is up for sale to the highest bidder or biggest stick wielder...regardless of the issue, its magnitude/importance.

TAM

Well can you blame them? After all thats the type of character troofers see every morning when they look in the mirror.

 

[Miragememories]

Where was the threat?

There was no IMMIADIATE threat, he was in a secure building, surrounded by Secret Service personnel, so where the hell was the threat?

Are you now accusing the UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE as well as the President of the USA of being involved in mass murder of 3000 US citizens, Is there nobody you will not accuse to fore fill your paranoid delusions.

Now stopping talking crap and start listing facts.

WHAT PROTOCALS DID THE US SECRET SERVICE BREAK ON 911?

Hmm..with your logic stateofgrace, a few of the United States SS sprinkled around the WTC towers would have thwarted those attacks.

MM

 

[twinstead]

Hmm..with your logic stateofgrace, a few of the United States SS sprinkled around the WTC towers would have thwarted those attacks.

MM

Hmmm. Interesting post for somebody who was asked a question...

 

[DarkMagician]

Hmm..with your logic stateofgrace, a few of the United States SS sprinkled around the WTC towers would have thwarted those attacks.

MM

The school was a shallow building among other buildings, thus not such a good target for planes-as-missiles. The towers were the tallest buildings around, thus good targets for planes-as-missiles. The SS can handle much more mundane attempts. Do you read for comprehension, or just recognize words?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

The school was a shallow building among other buildings. The towers were the tallest buildings around. Do you read for comprehension, or just recognize words?

It's like conversing with a poorly scripted chat-bot. It just recognizes key words, and regurgitates unthinking responses. P'haps we should test MM the same way you can test a turing machine? Hey MM, "What's better, an orange?"

 

[HeyLeroy]

Dodging questions, MerrieMelodies?

 

[Miragememories]

MM,
9/11 came and went. POTUS is still alive. The SS did their job.
All of your Dr. Seuss logic (wasn't that an early title, "If I Ran the SS") is meaningless. Period. The SS, like everyone else, was trying to analyze(se) the situation. They, like you and me, didn't know what was really going on. Were there trucks with bombs heading for other areas; ten more planes already in the air, bombs already placed at other facilities, etc.... Those first hours were mass confusion. The extract from Clarke pretty well sums up what was going on - they were reacting to an ongoing and volatile situaiton.(Damn that Mike W coming in here with FACTS!)

You write rather well, and you're a clever bit of work, but ultimately, you're Russell with an attitude. If everything comes down to "Well, I read the evidence, but it just doesn't seem to me that that's how the SS should behave", then there's no convincing you, is there?
This is the Russell Pickering (whom I've affectionately dubbed Politeness Man) approach, and it's why Russell's act wore thin, as will yours. If those are your debating rules, and no amount of evidence or documentation is going to convince you that your particular world-view is not the best filter for judging physics, biology, mathematics, engineering, construction or demolition, then all you leave us is the pleasure of smacking you around a little bit.

We have loads of threads here where opinion counts. I have a long-running and good-natured tiff going on whether MacArthur Park is the worst song since cavemen first bonked two rocks together or merely the worst of the twentieth century. If you want to discuss the Dickens v Chaucer or Fellini v Kubrick, no one's going to demand you give evidence to support matters of "taste" or "opinion". But if you choose to opine that things we saw and which have been documented and studied by experts and professionas DID NOT HAPPEN, then those opinions are worthless speculation and you will be metaphorically shot down in flames for them.

As long as your response to "Is that your final answer?", is "Well, it's how it looks to me....", then you're not here for a debate, you're here to troll.

It's true. My spiders say so.

I agree Foolmewunz!

MacArthur Park is a contender for worst song!

I am not Russell, but I learned a bit watching him struggle alone against a mountain of abuse from people that only wanted to see that which they wished to see.

You come across as one of the more thoughtful people here. Sort of a lull before the storm.

I guess my biggest issue with posting concise arguments here is that I see so little hope that the 'rank 'n file' can be trusted to engage in dialogue. Most of folks here just line up and take cheap shots.

Say what you will about the LC Forums, I've never seen any where near the level of abuse handed out there, as I see regularly here.

If discussions here are strictly bound to courtroom rules of evidence, then I expect to have few meaningful discussions.

MM

 

[Dog Town]

Say what you will about the LC Forums, I've never seen any where near the level of abuse handed out there, as I see regularly here.

Errrumm... that's because they erase theads, and ban like a duck to water!
The "cheap shots" you claim, are snipes at stupidity. Bit different.

 

[beachnut]

I agree Foolmewunz!

MacArthur Park is a contender for worst song!

I am not Russell, but I learned a bit watching him struggle alone against a mountain of abuse from people that only wanted to see that which they wished to see.

You come across as one of the more thoughtful people here. Sort of a lull before the storm.

I guess my biggest issue with posting concise arguments here is that I see so little hope that the 'rank 'n file' can be trusted to engage in dialogue. Most of folks here just line up and take cheap shots.

Say what you will about the LC Forums, I've never seen any where near the level of abuse handed out there, as I see regularly here.

If discussions here are strictly bound to courtroom rules of evidence, then I expect to have few meaningful discussions.

MM

What could be more disrespectful to make up lies about 9/11?

You even claim to have no facts just opinion. Even more disrespectful to everyone who died on 9/11.

You just make up stuff. Name one person in the truth movement who has a fact. No one does. You state things and when some call you a liar you prove them correct. What is you problem? You say dumb stuff and are told it is dumb. You tell them you have no facts and they call you a person with no facts.

You have become the easiest CTer to debunk; you tell us you have no facts and you are making it up. Face it you are not a great CTer.

What is your best lie about 9/11?

 

[beachnut]

I guess my biggest issue with posting concise arguments here is that I see so little hope that the 'rank 'n file' can be trusted to engage in dialogue. Most of folks here just line up and take cheap shots.

How can anyone have a dialogue with an argument over a lie you tell us is a lie MM?

 

[Miragememories]

MM:

I think all the time...my career requires it. I make life and death decisions every day. My use of the word moron, tonight is twofold. First, for you, it was to get your attention, as you had been ignoring all comments and questions I had been posting. Secondly, I am in a grumpy mood wrt the truthers the last day or two, call it "Debate/Discussion" fatigue if you will.
You are exhibiting classical truther debating/discussion tactics, so it rubbed me the wrong way, on the wrong night.

As for speculation, I am not saying it is complete nonsense, but when you use it to accuse someone of something it is juvenile, slanderous, and just ignorant. It is part of the toolbox one uses to deduct and reason, yes, but it is one of many tools, that help us to sift through evidence. It is not to be used as the foundation for a lynching of innocents til proven guilty.

I agree, that Cheney is likely the "real" mind behind the presidency, but regardless, it does not change the fact that the SS made a decision, and in my mind, the mind of most here at JREF, and likely in the minds of most americans, it was the proper move. The president was in a previously secured area, surrounded by children. This 9/11 attack was not planned a day or two before 9/11, so your assumption that the knowledge of his placement in Florida would have made any difference in jet attacks a thousand miles north east of his location is not practical or logical.

TAM

Well T.A.M. I don't purposely avoid answering most responders but I am but one person and everytime I respond I get swarmed. There are only so many hours in the day and it takes time to reply in a thoughtful manner. It takes little time to reply in an inconsiderate manner. I do hope you understand.

I don't have the time or the desire to get into a long explanation as to why I disagree with you about my speculations being slanderous.

The SS could not be expected to have rapidly reached the conclusion that the still developing 9/11 attacks were all part of a long range plan, and therefore 4 days advance knowledge of the presidential whereabouts would be insufficient time for suicidal terrorists to mount a plan of attack.

MM

 

[beachnut]

Why do CTer avoid what happen on 9/11? Why not start with what happen and decide why it could happen?

Instead we have people who make up stuff like fake tenants at the WTC with explosives. And then they ignore all other reality issues.

MM you make up stuff so much harder to happen than just 19 dumb terrorist flying planes into buildings. So simple and easy; they just did it.

Why do CTers fail to study hijacking before 9/11? Just that one topic could go a long way to help them understand how hijackers on 9/11 were able to do 9/11.

Things MM and other CTers could use a lot of education or experience to cure their terminally stupidity on 9/11. Yes MM there is a cure!
Study the following: hijacking, physics, CD, math, ---the list is long use your CT imagination to make up more topics to study---

 

[aggle-rithm]

The SS could not be expected to have rapidly reached the conclusion that the still developing 9/11 attacks were all part of a long range plan, and therefore 4 days advance knowledge of the presidential whereabouts would be insufficient time for suicidal terrorists to mount a plan of attack.

MM

MM,

Think of this from the Secret Service's viewpoint. What was the first hint that may have alerted them that the terrorist attacks were NATIONAL in scope, rather than limited to the World Trade Center in New York?

Can you think of any reason why they would have made such an assumption before then?

 

[stateofgrace]

I agree Foolmewunz!

MacArthur Park is a contender for worst song!

I am not Russell, but I learned a bit watching him struggle alone against a mountain of abuse from people that only wanted to see that which they wished to see.

You come across as one of the more thoughtful people here. Sort of a lull before the storm.

I guess my biggest issue with posting concise arguments here is that I see so little hope that the 'rank 'n file' can be trusted to engage in dialogue. Most of folks here just line up and take cheap shots.

Say what you will about the LC Forums, I've never seen any where near the level of abuse handed out there, as I see regularly here.

If discussions here are strictly bound to courtroom rules of evidence, then I expect to have few meaningful discussions.

MM

I will gladly engage in civil debate with you, please stop belittling mine or anybody else question’s

what protocols did the Secret service break on 911?

I will be civil, I will be polite, I will even say please, so please answer the question.

Please answer civilly, please post links and factual evidence.