What the hell happened Truthers?

[eots]

The system features include:

SURBS has a capacity up to 2400 i-kon™ detonators, using 12 loggers.
Uses coded radio signals on an assigned frequency.

Complete 2-way communication, including verification of delay time programming and confirmation of full functionality for detonators.
Design operating range (line-of-sight) is 2500 metres.
Rugged water and shock resistant cases. Operational temperature range -20 to +60ºC.
Multiple levels of safety and security are designed into the system including:

The Surface Remote Blasting Box writes unique one-time digital code to a Smart Dongle
The Smart Dongle is carried to the safe blasting point and inserted into Blaster 2400R to activate communications with Surface Remote Blasting Box
All radio signals are encrypted with the one-time code and specific address of the Surface Remote Blasting Box
Protection against stray signals of RF interference
If severe continuing interference occurs, SURBS goes into standby mode to allow a safe restart

SURBS also has a test mode which allows pre-checking of the strength and quality of the radio signal from potential firing locations

Prior to the hardware being provided for use on a mining lease, the mine must obtain licensing for a particular frequency that will be dedicated to the SURBS unit.

SURBS

 

[SFC Ollie]

The system features include:

SURBS has a capacity up to 2400 i-kon™ detonators, using 12 loggers.
Uses coded radio signals on an assigned frequency.

Complete 2-way communication, including verification of delay time programming and confirmation of full functionality for detonators.
Design operating range (line-of-sight) is 2500 metres.
Rugged water and shock resistant cases. Operational temperature range -20 to +60ºC.
Multiple levels of safety and security are designed into the system including:

The Surface Remote Blasting Box writes unique one-time digital code to a Smart Dongle
The Smart Dongle is carried to the safe blasting point and inserted into Blaster 2400R to activate communications with Surface Remote Blasting Box
All radio signals are encrypted with the one-time code and specific address of the Surface Remote Blasting Box
Protection against stray signals of RF interference
If severe continuing interference occurs, SURBS goes into standby mode to allow a safe restart

SURBS also has a test mode which allows pre-checking of the strength and quality of the radio signal from potential firing locations

Prior to the hardware being provided for use on a mining lease, the mine must obtain licensing for a particular frequency that will be dedicated to the SURBS unit.

SURBS

We can all cut and paste.

Now can you show us the Frequency approval?

Or how about the request for frequencies?

Didn't think so, more BS opinion and still no proof of explosives..........

 

[eots]

The system features include:

SURBS has a capacity up to 2400 i-kon™ detonators, using 12 loggers.
Uses coded radio signals on an assigned frequency.

Complete 2-way communication, including verification of delay time programming and confirmation of full functionality for detonators.
Design operating range (line-of-sight) is 2500 metres.
Rugged water and shock resistant cases. Operational temperature range -20 to +60ºC.
Multiple levels of safety and security are designed into the system including:

The Surface Remote Blasting Box writes unique one-time digital code to a Smart Dongle
The Smart Dongle is carried to the safe blasting point and inserted into Blaster 2400R to activate communications with Surface Remote Blasting Box
All radio signals are encrypted with the one-time code and specific address of the Surface Remote Blasting Box
Protection against stray signals of RF interference
If severe continuing interference occurs, SURBS goes into standby mode to allow a safe restart

SURBS also has a test mode which allows pre-checking of the strength and quality of the radio signal from potential firing locations

Prior to the hardware being provided for use on a mining lease, the mine must obtain licensing for a particular frequency that will be dedicated to the SURBS unit.

SURBS

We can all cut and paste.

Now can you show us the Frequency approval?

Or how about the request for frequencies?

Didn't think so, more BS opinion and still no proof of explosives..........

wtf are you rambling about ??? this is a completely nonsensical response I simply provided proof that your assertion random radio signals will set of remote detonators is inaccurate...so it would seem the bullshit opinion is once again ...yours

 

[SFC Ollie]

The system features include:

SURBS has a capacity up to 2400 i-kon™ detonators, using 12 loggers.
Uses coded radio signals on an assigned frequency.

Complete 2-way communication, including verification of delay time programming and confirmation of full functionality for detonators.
Design operating range (line-of-sight) is 2500 metres.
Rugged water and shock resistant cases. Operational temperature range -20 to +60ºC.
Multiple levels of safety and security are designed into the system including:

The Surface Remote Blasting Box writes unique one-time digital code to a Smart Dongle
The Smart Dongle is carried to the safe blasting point and inserted into Blaster 2400R to activate communications with Surface Remote Blasting Box
All radio signals are encrypted with the one-time code and specific address of the Surface Remote Blasting Box
Protection against stray signals of RF interference
If severe continuing interference occurs, SURBS goes into standby mode to allow a safe restart

SURBS also has a test mode which allows pre-checking of the strength and quality of the radio signal from potential firing locations

Prior to the hardware being provided for use on a mining lease, the mine must obtain licensing for a particular frequency that will be dedicated to the SURBS unit.

SURBS

We can all cut and paste.

Now can you show us the Frequency approval?

Or how about the request for frequencies?

Didn't think so, more BS opinion and still no proof of explosives..........

wtf are you rambling about ??? this is a completely nonsensical response I simply provided proof that your assertion random radio signals will set of remote detonators is inaccurate...so it would seem the bullshit opinion is once again ...yours

So you aren't implying that this type of system was used on 9-11-01? That's good because it could have left a paper trail, and we wouldn't want that. And we are still waiting for the truthers full version of what happened that morning. Other than 911 nutjobs versions which we all know are about as likely as 7's fake plane.

 

[daws101]

dating ??? fuck are you weird...I have used remote detonators at events where thousand of people where present and all safety adhered to and there was without question cell phones and random radio signals do you really think they shut off all radios and cell phones at a pyrotechnics display ?

that's bullshit! rat in the hat already outed you on your false claim of working for a demo company!

so anything you say about your experience with demolition is false!

I never claimed to work for a demolition company you lying sack of shit ..I worked as a commercial diver and and set charges for the demolition of bridges and for u/w propeller removal one of the divers had a blasting tickets and pyrotechnics tickets,He also did fireworks and pyrotechnics at rodeos and sporting events and in film and I assisted

once again you knew a guy......

 

[Obamerican]

that's bullshit! rat in the hat already outed you on your false claim of working for a demo company!

so anything you say about your experience with demolition is false!

I never claimed to work for a demolition company you lying sack of shit ..I worked as a commercial diver and and set charges for the demolition of bridges and for u/w propeller removal one of the divers had a blasting tickets and pyrotechnics tickets,He also did fireworks and pyrotechnics at rodeos and sporting events and in film and I assisted

once again you knew a guy......

 

[eots]

that's bullshit! rat in the hat already outed you on your false claim of working for a demo company!

so anything you say about your experience with demolition is false!

I never claimed to work for a demolition company you lying sack of shit ..I worked as a commercial diver and and set charges for the demolition of bridges and for u/w propeller removal one of the divers had a blasting tickets and pyrotechnics tickets,He also did fireworks and pyrotechnics at rodeos and sporting events and in film and I assisted

once again you knew a guy......

no I worked along side a explosives expert in my career as a commercial diver
and witnessed remote detonators in use

 

[eots]

We can all cut and paste.

Now can you show us the Frequency approval?

Or how about the request for frequencies?

Didn't think so, more BS opinion and still no proof of explosives..........

wtf are you rambling about ??? this is a completely nonsensical response I simply provided proof that your assertion random radio signals will set of remote detonators is inaccurate...so it would seem the bullshit opinion is once again ...yours

So you aren't implying that this type of system was used on 9-11-01? That's good because it could have left a paper trail, and we wouldn't want that. And we are still waiting for the truthers full version of what happened that morning. Other than 911 nutjobs versions which we all know are about as likely as 7's fake plane.

paper trial ??...lol... I pretty sure there are elements within the government could set there own codes for a remote detonator without leaving a "paper trial'

 

[SFC Ollie]

wtf are you rambling about ??? this is a completely nonsensical response I simply provided proof that your assertion random radio signals will set of remote detonators is inaccurate...so it would seem the bullshit opinion is once again ...yours

So you aren't implying that this type of system was used on 9-11-01? That's good because it could have left a paper trail, and we wouldn't want that. And we are still waiting for the truthers full version of what happened that morning. Other than 911 nutjobs versions which we all know are about as likely as 7's fake plane.

paper trial ??...lol... I pretty sure there are elements within the government could set there own codes for a remote detonator without leaving a "paper trial'

So then we're right back to zero evidence of any controlled demolition. You failed again......

 

[eots]

So you aren't implying that this type of system was used on 9-11-01? That's good because it could have left a paper trail, and we wouldn't want that. And we are still waiting for the truthers full version of what happened that morning. Other than 911 nutjobs versions which we all know are about as likely as 7's fake plane.

paper trial ??...lol... I pretty sure there are elements within the government could set there own codes for a remote detonator without leaving a "paper trial'

So then we're right back to zero evidence of any controlled demolition. You failed again......

what because you made ridiculous assertions about how radios would set off remote detonators so that was ruled out ?or the even more flailing attempt...hey would leave a paper trail...it seems like you who has failed

 

[SFC Ollie]

paper trial ??...lol... I pretty sure there are elements within the government could set there own codes for a remote detonator without leaving a "paper trial'

So then we're right back to zero evidence of any controlled demolition. You failed again......

what because you made ridiculous assertions about how radios would set off remote detonators so that was ruled out ?or the even more flailing attempt...hey would leave a paper trail...it seems like you who has failed

Any evidence yet? Fail..... It's quite simple. You have not one shred of evidence that there were any explosives, wired or remote. And remote demolitions is not very common. Even if you want people to believe they are.

 

[daws101]

I never claimed to work for a demolition company you lying sack of shit ..I worked as a commercial diver and and set charges for the demolition of bridges and for u/w propeller removal one of the divers had a blasting tickets and pyrotechnics tickets,He also did fireworks and pyrotechnics at rodeos and sporting events and in film and I assisted

once again you knew a guy......

no I worked along side a explosives expert in my career as a commercial diver
and witnessed remote detonators in use

you knew a guy

 

[eots]

So then we're right back to zero evidence of any controlled demolition. You failed again......

what because you made ridiculous assertions about how radios would set off remote detonators so that was ruled out ?or the even more flailing attempt...hey would leave a paper trail...it seems like you who has failed

Any evidence yet? Fail..... It's quite simple. You have not one shred of evidence that there were any explosives, wired or remote. And remote demolitions is not very common. Even if you want people to believe they are.

thAts not true...but what is true is you have no evidence the failure of a single column due to fire cause the collapse of wtc 7...in fact you don't even believe it yourself...you are of one of those wackos that believes this hodge podge of national geo-. popular mechanics and screw loose change inaccuracy's and catch phrases often in direct contradiction to NIST

 

[eots]

so then we're right back to zero evidence of any controlled demolition. You failed again......

what because you made ridiculous assertions about how radios would set off remote detonators so that was ruled out ?or the even more flailing attempt...hey would leave a paper trail...it seems like you who has failed

any evidence yet? Fail..... It's quite simple. You have not one shred of evidence that there were any explosives, wired or remote. And remote demolitions is not very common. Even if you want people to believe they are.

when did i say it was common ???...just admit it radio boy ...you where. Wrong once again.. Dinosaur

 

[SFC Ollie]

what because you made ridiculous assertions about how radios would set off remote detonators so that was ruled out ?or the even more flailing attempt...hey would leave a paper trail...it seems like you who has failed

any evidence yet? Fail..... It's quite simple. You have not one shred of evidence that there were any explosives, wired or remote. And remote demolitions is not very common. Even if you want people to believe they are.

when did i say it was common ???...just admit it radio boy ...you where. Wrong once again.. Dinosaur

I can be wrong, I am human. But I am not wrong all the time like the truthers. I don't have to have evidence to prove the official investigations, you need evidence to prove that there were explosives. And you simply do not have it. And there is still no answer to the question; do they still put up warning signs for radios and cell phones in Blasting areas?

Yes I can disagree with the findings of the NIST in one respect, that they did not give enough credence to the damages done to the building. That doesn't make me or them wrong or right. It does take away even more from your controlled demo theories though. 25% of the rear of the building scooped out. Damn, how many of your charges must have been lost in that damage?

 

[eots]

any evidence yet? Fail..... It's quite simple. You have not one shred of evidence that there were any explosives, wired or remote. And remote demolitions is not very common. Even if you want people to believe they are.

when did i say it was common ???...just admit it radio boy ...you where. Wrong once again.. Dinosaur

I can be wrong, I am human. But I am not wrong all the time like the truthers. I don't have to have evidence to prove the official investigations, you need evidence to prove that there were explosives. And you simply do not have it. And there is still no answer to the question; do they still put up warning signs for radios and cell phones in Blasting areas?

Yes I can disagree with the findings of the NIST in one respect, that they did not give enough credence to the damages done to the building. That doesn't make me or them wrong or right. It does take away even more from your controlled demo theories though. 25% of the rear of the building scooped out. Damn, how many of your charges must have been lost in that damage?

yes, I afraid it does..the NIST conclusion is a single column ..number 79 failed due to fire and caused the collapse and the failure of that column under any circumstances would have initiated the collapse...regardless of any damage