CDZ clean debate on the NIST report banned

[Hollie]

it would be good form for a n00b to post a source to her rebutals & stop w/ the grade school taunts

Otherwise, go infect someone else's thread.

The board rules require attribution for cut and paste material.

Your comments are spam.

You believe that the NIST report is refuted by Twoofer News Networks. That's fine. Twoofer News finds an audience with those folks who share a personality trait that makes conspiracy theories both exciting and believable.

twoofer news is something you made up..it does not exist..these experts are well documented individuals with solid creditails and experience

I wasn't aware that anyone but those who share your propensity for conspiracy theories consider Alex Jones an expert on anything, let alone credentials in anything but delusional thinking.

David L. Griscom, PhD – Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service. Fellow of the American Physical Society. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México in Mexico City (1997). Visiting professorships of research at the Universities of Paris and Saint-Etienne, France, and Tokyo Institute of Technology (2000 - 2003). Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona (2004 - 2005). Winner of the 1993 N. F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996 Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL. Principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work which is highly cited by his peers. Officially credited with largest number of papers (5) by any author on list of 100 most cited articles authored at NRL between 1973 and 1988.

• Personal blog 1/5/07: "David Ray Griffin has web-published a splendid, highly footnoted account of The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True: This scholarly work, rich in eyewitness accounts, includes 11 separate pieces of evidence that the World Trade Center towers 1, 2 [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories], and 7 were brought down by explosives.

So where is his evidence for explosives?

Personal blogs are fine because they're not accountable to peer review.

One of the problems you conspiracy theorists face is the lack of physical evidence to support the conspiracies, but then, that's what keeps conspiracies alive for those predisposed to believe them.

If you're going to cut and paste all the same conspiracy theories involving the thermite charges conspiracy, just link to the various other threads where you have previously, repeatedly and tediously cut and pasted those conspiracy theories.

the evidence for explosives is
the symmetry of the collapse
the free fall speed of collapse
excessive temperatures and melted steel
concrete pulverised to dust
thermitic residue in the dust of wtc
multiple eyewitness accounts

All of that from Alex Jones? Who can deny the twoof?

 

[Hollie]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

 

[PredFan]

1. I wasn't talking to you.
2. A conspiracy can have the truth and facts supporting it and still be a conspiracy.
3. I don't think you understand the discussion.

OK, but it should not be in the conspiracy theory forum because the information is fact based.

Whether it's fact or not is debatable, but It is ALL about the conspiracy that the attack was something other than what we are told. Hence a conspiracy theory.

there are no conspiracies in good science

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

 

[eots]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

lol..the last time you posted one of your expert debunkers he was a musician.this is the credentials and expertise of your latest source....
About Janice Loffreda-Wren
Interested in science in general, and molecular genetics in particular. Avid reader, especially science fiction & fantasy.

 

[eots]

OK, but it should not be in the conspiracy theory forum because the information is fact based.

Whether it's fact or not is debatable, but It is ALL about the conspiracy that the attack was something other than what we are told. Hence a conspiracy theory.

there are no conspiracies in good science

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

posting the word...Irrelevant...is not refuting the facts I stated

 

[Hollie]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

lol..the last time you posted one of your expert debunkers he was a musician.this is your sources credentials and expertise of your latest source....
About Janice Loffreda-Wren
Interested in science in general, and molecular genetics in particular. Avid reader, especially science fiction & fantasy.

What you failed to address are the links to the relevant sources identified in the article.

So, tell us about the credentials you can share for Alex Jones.

 

[Hollie]

Whether it's fact or not is debatable, but It is ALL about the conspiracy that the attack was something other than what we are told. Hence a conspiracy theory.

there are no conspiracies in good science

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

posting the word...Irrelevant...is not refuting the facts I stated

The validity of Twoofer "facts" is precisely the issue.

 

[eots]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From hollies expert
“Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pan-caking’.” NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Sect 3.5.3. Pictures from Ground Zero show obviously pancaked floors.

From the NIST report

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking ...
About Disaster and Failure Studies

your expert is in contradiction with the NIST report

 

[eots]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

lol..the last time you posted one of your expert debunkers he was a musician.this is your sources credentials and expertise of your latest source....
About Janice Loffreda-Wren
Interested in science in general, and molecular genetics in particular. Avid reader, especially science fiction & fantasy.

What you failed to address are the links to the relevant sources identified in the article.

So, tell us about the credentials you can share for Alex Jones.

you have the credentials of over 2000 architects and engineers
and some of the best scientist in the nation but for some reason you repeatedly use the strawman of Alex Jones...why ?

 

[eots]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From hollies expert
“Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pan-caking’.” NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Sect 3.5.3. Pictures from Ground Zero show obviously pancaked floors.

From the NIST report

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking ...
About Disaster and Failure Studies

your expert is in contradiction with the NIST report

You should immediately email that data to Alex Jones.

you are really pathetic and have no place in any reasoned discourse

 

[Hollie]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From hollies expert
“Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pan-caking’.” NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Sect 3.5.3. Pictures from Ground Zero show obviously pancaked floors.

From the NIST report

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking ...
About Disaster and Failure Studies

your expert is in contradiction with the NIST report

You should immediately email that data to Alex Jones.

you are really pathetic and have no place in any reasoned discourse

Getting angry and emotive because others don't share your desire to join the Alex Jones cult is poor cricket, Laddie.

What you fail to address is that your conspiracy theories have been addressed for more than a decade now. Your copying and pasting from Twoofer sites only serves to damage your credibility.

 

[Hollie]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

lol..the last time you posted one of your expert debunkers he was a musician.this is your sources credentials and expertise of your latest source....
About Janice Loffreda-Wren
Interested in science in general, and molecular genetics in particular. Avid reader, especially science fiction & fantasy.

What you failed to address are the links to the relevant sources identified in the article.

So, tell us about the credentials you can share for Alex Jones.

you have the credentials of over 2000 architects and engineers
and some of the best scientist in the nation but for some reason you repeatedly use the strawman of Alex Jones...why ?

You have refutations to the claims made by the twoofers who have never provided credible evidence of the vast conspiracy you rattle on about.

You repeatedly use the strawman of Twoofer conspiracies absent evidence..... why?

 

[P F Tinmore]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From you grasping at straws link.

Argument: FDNY and other found several tons of “molten steel,” “flowing like lava” in the piles. 1400°F office fires cannot produce 2800°F molten metal. Thermite incendiaries can.

How did they know it was molten steel? Was it tested at the site? It could have just as easily been molten aluminum or some other metal with a lower melting point.​

The low melting point of metals like aluminum, tin, lead, etc. is not high enough to radiate energy in the light spectrum. No red glow is produced by these metals when melted.

 

[Dot Com]

there are no conspiracies in good science

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

posting the word...Irrelevant...is not refuting the facts I stated

The validity of Twoofer "facts" is precisely the issue.

OP has posted numerous credentialed experts. You? Not so much All you keep doing is throwing around your repetitive, secondary school-level, ad homs.

 

[Dot Com]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

lol..the last time you posted one of your expert debunkers he was a musician.this is your sources credentials and expertise of your latest source....
About Janice Loffreda-Wren
Interested in science in general, and molecular genetics in particular. Avid reader, especially science fiction & fantasy.

What you failed to address are the links to the relevant sources identified in the article.

So, tell us about the credentials you can share for Alex Jones.

you have the credentials of over 2000 architects and engineers
and some of the best scientist in the nation but for some reason you repeatedly use the strawman of Alex Jones...why ?

because it's FAILTrolling and a Big Gov't drone?

 

[Dot Com]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From hollies expert
“Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pan-caking’.” NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Sect 3.5.3. Pictures from Ground Zero show obviously pancaked floors.

From the NIST report

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking ...
About Disaster and Failure Studies

your expert is in contradiction with the NIST report

You should immediately email that data to Alex Jones.

you are really pathetic and have no place in any reasoned discourse

thats what I was trying to tell it 2-3 pages ago. It adds nothing to the discourse in this thread.

 

[Hollie]

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

posting the word...Irrelevant...is not refuting the facts I stated

The validity of Twoofer "facts" is precisely the issue.

OP has posted numerous credentialed experts. You? Not so much All you keep doing is throwing around your repetitive, secondary school-level, ad homs.

And those "experts" have failed to meet the burden of pwoof.

 

[Hollie]

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From hollies expert
“Failure of the gusset plate welded to the top of the truss chord was again almost exclusively observed regardless of location. This may be a result of overloading the lower floors as the floors above were ‘pan-caking’.” NIST NCSTAR 1-3C Sect 3.5.3. Pictures from Ground Zero show obviously pancaked floors.

From the NIST report

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking ...
About Disaster and Failure Studies

your expert is in contradiction with the NIST report

You should immediately email that data to Alex Jones.

you are really pathetic and have no place in any reasoned discourse

thats what I was trying to tell it 2-3 pages ago. It adds nothing to the discourse in this thread.

To which you have contributed nothing.

 

[Hollie]

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen

The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
Another Peer Reviewed Paper Published in Scientific Journal - Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust... - 911Truth.org

peer reviewed and in the scientific journal. Who could refute that?

Lots of people can refute your twoofs. Unfortunately, you hysterical twoofers have a desperate need and desire to believe in theses vast conspiracy theories.

Counter-Arguments to Architects and Engineers for 9 11 Truth Part 1 WTC Twin Towers

From you grasping at straws link.

Argument: FDNY and other found several tons of “molten steel,” “flowing like lava” in the piles. 1400°F office fires cannot produce 2800°F molten metal. Thermite incendiaries can.

How did they know it was molten steel? Was it tested at the site? It could have just as easily been molten aluminum or some other metal with a lower melting point.​

The low melting point of metals like aluminum, tin, lead, etc. is not high enough to radiate energy in the light spectrum. No red glow is produced by these metals when melted.

So, what conspiracy should we take away regarding the non-existent thermite explosives?

 

[PredFan]

Whether it's fact or not is debatable, but It is ALL about the conspiracy that the attack was something other than what we are told. Hence a conspiracy theory.

there are no conspiracies in good science

Look man, you asked a question in the OP, I gave you the answer. I can't help it if you don't like it. It's still the answer.

The official NIST theory of the WTC 7 collapse does not scientifically explain a single observation of the building's collapse. The controlled demolition theory explains every observable including the eight story free fall period,

Irrelevant.

posting the word...Irrelevant...is not refuting the facts I stated

The um "facts" that you stated are irrelevant to the post you responded to.