You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #165: Sorry, I did see that one. Yes, it does look like it's exploding, but. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-11 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #164
165. Sorry, I did see that one. Yes, it does look like it's exploding, but.
Edited on Thu Sep-15-11 02:27 AM by Flatulo
it looks more like it's being crushed downwards and the guts are being blown outwards. If it were exploding, I think I would expect to see all four faces blowing outwards at the same time top and bottom. This looks like there's a wave travelling downwards. Frankly, it doesn't look like anything I've ever seen before.

There's no place else for stuff to go but outwards. It can't go up or down, because there's still floors in the way above and below.

Also, I've never seen a 110 story tower fail before, so I don't know what it should look like.

Further, I don't get the significance of the narrator commenting that some of the ejecta has been clocked at 120 mph. How fast should it be ejecting if the tower was not falling in the manner in which AE911Truth claims?

This video, like all the others I've seen, have only incredulity for evidence. I've been a mechanical engineer for 35 years, and I need to see the math. Bazant did the math. NIST did the math. Where is AE911Truth's math? I can't find it. Where's their proof that bombs were placed? All I see is conjecture that elevator workers *could* have placed bombs. Or thermite. Or thermit bombs.

Do you see my problem? I need to see something more objective than just questions as to how this or that could have happened. AE911Truth doesn't provide any empirical work to support their claims. And buddy, to claim that someone murdered 3,000 people without really fucking solid proof is a dangerous thing to do. Now Bush and Cheney were really bad guys (Cheney more so) but if you want to accuse him of murder, you'll need something that you can take to a judge and a jury. Why hasn't AE911Truth done that?

But I will thank you for engaging with me in a more mature way than taunts. I respect your viewpoints.

Now I think I'll go mix some narcotics with my Scotch. Good night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -Ten Thoughts on This Tenth Anniversary spooked911  Sep-11-11 08:01 AM   #0 
  - I would prefer if this first reply  spooked911   Sep-11-11 08:04 AM   #1 
  - True -- seems to be a case of ....  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:25 AM   #269 
  - LOL  terrafirma   Sep-11-11 09:21 AM   #2 
  - yeah, hiLARious  spooked911   Sep-11-11 01:47 PM   #3 
     - What's even more hiLARious  terrafirma   Sep-11-11 02:59 PM   #5 
     - mini-nukes!!!!  zappaman   Sep-11-11 05:00 PM   #10 
     - Wow ... that is an amazing site for information --- thank you -- !!!  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:38 AM   #270 
  - number one is my favorite.  zappaman   Sep-11-11 02:16 PM   #4 
  - My favs are 9, 5, and 4  LARED   Sep-11-11 05:03 PM   #11 
  - Question  greytdemocrat   Sep-11-11 03:08 PM   #6 
  - Check with Cheney ---  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:38 AM   #271 
  - Spooked, I would have to say that you are one of the most interesting  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 03:59 PM   #7 
  - Wow, just wow. I'm speechless. nt  LARED   Sep-11-11 04:49 PM   #8 
  - I agree with most of your observations, spooked, but am going to need convincing on  Mist   Sep-11-11 04:51 PM   #9 
  - Wait... what?  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 07:21 PM   #18 
  - Thanks  spooked911   Sep-11-11 07:24 PM   #19 
     - Maybe it's because your positions on 9/11 are rather unique and  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 08:28 PM   #26 
     - I wasn't talking about people not being interested in my view of 9/11  spooked911   Sep-12-11 08:04 AM   #39 
        - Ah, I see. Well, I think we can chalk that up to the attention-defecit  Flatulo   Sep-12-11 04:38 PM   #49 
        - But you can't be the judge of that  jberryhill   Sep-12-11 06:25 PM   #53 
           - And she makes a damn fine rabbit rabbit stew. nt  Flatulo   Sep-12-11 09:59 PM   #56 
              - Well, that would account for the handy empty cages  jberryhill   Sep-12-11 10:49 PM   #57 
     - As I've said 100 times  BobbyBoring   Sep-13-11 11:08 AM   #62 
        - Hey, the Native American Indian was "surprised" over and over again ... !!!  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:48 AM   #272 
  - I don't suppose that it will surprise anyone that I agree totally with  teddy51   Sep-11-11 05:03 PM   #12 
  - I believe number 9.  LARED   Sep-11-11 05:09 PM   #13 
  - In this shitty economy, those Bushco checks really come in handy.  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 05:11 PM   #14 
  - Why is it important to convince them? People have their minds made up, just as those of us  Mist   Sep-11-11 06:23 PM   #15 
  - So true  terrafirma   Sep-11-11 06:38 PM   #16 
  - yet PM and NIST present deeply flawed analyses  spooked911   Sep-11-11 07:27 PM   #21 
     - You thoroughly debunked NIST??  terrafirma   Sep-11-11 08:11 PM   #25 
        - is there any point trying to have a discussion about this with you?  spooked911   Sep-12-11 08:23 AM   #41 
           - mini-nukes! n/t  zappaman   Sep-12-11 12:38 PM   #43 
           - Actually, I really wish you'd give up ....  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:54 AM   #275 
  - I guess I'm just doing it for sport now, and as you say we believe what we believe  teddy51   Sep-11-11 06:53 PM   #17 
  - Belief without objective proof = religion. nt  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 08:30 PM   #27 
     - Huh? WTF are talking about? n/t  teddy51   Sep-11-11 09:46 PM   #29 
     - I guess my question is, what do you consider objective proof? n/t  teddy51   Sep-11-11 10:05 PM   #30 
        - Objective proof is evidence that isn't subject to interpretation.  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 10:32 PM   #32 
        - I call bullshit! 911 was was done by insiders (Thermite most likely) and I would like you  teddy51   Sep-11-11 10:48 PM   #34 
           - Have fun in lala land. I'll be out here enjoying reality. nt  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 10:54 PM   #36 
           - LOL  zappaman   Sep-12-11 12:00 AM   #37 
           - your words: "as you say we believe what we believe"  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-12-11 05:13 AM   #38 
           - Then you disagree with the OP  jberryhill   Sep-12-11 06:28 PM   #54 
           - Please ....  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:56 AM   #276 
        - Let me hasten to add that the 9/11 Commission Report, which I've actually read,  Flatulo   Sep-11-11 10:39 PM   #33 
           - Again, Bullshit! n/t  teddy51   Sep-11-11 10:50 PM   #35 
           - It's far from unassailable  BobbyBoring   Sep-13-11 11:13 AM   #63 
           - Sorry, we're done here.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 05:59 AM   #78 
           - nice attempt at deflection  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:10 PM   #85 
              - The towers weren't blown up.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 03:13 PM   #86 
              - Tell these first responders, victims, and eyewitnesses  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:38 PM   #91 
                 - I see. And do these first responders know that explosions  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 04:40 PM   #98 
                    - And this is an old attempt at debunking....  hang a left   Sep-14-11 05:06 PM   #103 
                       - Hang. Use your common sense. Why go through all the trouble of waiting until some useful idiots flew  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 05:46 PM   #108 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-14-11 06:19 PM   #115 
                       - Treasonous? You'd better wake up and retract that, my friend.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:23 PM   #116 
                       - I cleaned it up. I don't want to get in trouble  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:30 PM   #119 
                          - Tell you what. If you feel strongly enough about it, why don't you address my points?  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:37 PM   #124 
                             - They are all masterfully answered in the video I posted  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:44 PM   #127 
                             - Not a surprising response. nt  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:48 PM   #128 
                             - Just one that you didn't want.  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:57 PM   #132 
                       - bad post, dumb video  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 06:27 PM   #117 
                       - Is that all you got??  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:31 PM   #121 
                          - you post stupid-ass links, and you want me to waste my time writing?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 08:27 PM   #134 
                       - Your failure to address my points speaks volumes. Oh well, at least  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:34 PM   #122 
                          - Who you gonna trust???  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:53 PM   #130 
                             - Oops, you forgot door #3  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 10:52 PM   #140 
                                - Empty post  hang a left   Sep-15-11 12:15 AM   #143 
                                - You mean the evidence I addressed here?  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:21 AM   #148 
                                - Old and tired.  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:38 AM   #155 
                       - assuming they wanted to take down the towers, the '93 attacks showed they couldn't simply  spooked911   Sep-15-11 06:58 AM   #173 
                          - Was '93 attack simply a practice run -- objective to get Clinton to attack Iraq ... ????  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 06:01 AM   #278 
                          - Just like D.B. building  deconstruct911   Sep-27-11 11:15 AM   #294 
                          - Too incriminating for security?  terrafirma   Sep-27-11 06:13 PM   #295 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-25-11 05:58 AM   #277 
              - The towers weren't blown up.  zappaman   Sep-14-11 03:49 PM   #92 
                 - Yes they were  hang a left   Sep-14-11 04:19 PM   #95 
                    - of all the "truthers" I have encountered  zappaman   Sep-14-11 04:53 PM   #100 
                       - That video scares the crap out of you doesn't it??  hang a left   Sep-14-11 05:02 PM   #102 
                          - LOL  zappaman   Sep-14-11 05:14 PM   #105 
                             - Chicken  hang a left   Sep-14-11 05:16 PM   #106 
           - well, no, they're far from the ultimate authorities  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 07:23 AM   #80 
           - Unassailable?? that is a good one!  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:07 PM   #84 
              - Okay, assail away. Be sure to show all your math.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 03:15 PM   #88 
                 - Assail the eyewitnesses  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:34 PM   #90 
                    - no math in that video  zappaman   Sep-14-11 03:52 PM   #93 
                    - The movement has PROVEN beyond any reasonable doubt that the  hang a left   Sep-14-11 04:22 PM   #96 
                       - than why not answer my questions?  zappaman   Sep-14-11 04:52 PM   #99 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-14-11 05:00 PM   #101 
                          - A claim is a smoking gun? Jesus, only in your mind.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 05:57 PM   #112 
                             - That is not a claim  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:41 PM   #126 
                                - yo, the videos don't show explosives bringing down the towers  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 08:35 PM   #136 
                                - I think we can leave it to the observer to figure out  hang a left   Sep-15-11 12:36 AM   #144 
                                   - Agreed. So run along and stop smearing those who disagree with you.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:28 AM   #150 
                                   - You run along  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:33 AM   #152 
                                   - Want to have a contest to see who can stay awake the longest and get the last word in?  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:35 AM   #154 
                                   - I would be willing to bet that you have others that will help  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:41 AM   #156 
                                   - Nope, I'm here all by my lonesome. I have a box of cigars  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:43 AM   #157 
                                   - OK when you come up with something interesting to talk about  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:45 AM   #158 
                                   - We could talk about the points in Gage's video that I addresed here...  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:48 AM   #159 
                                   - It is not Gage's video  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:51 AM   #160 
                                   - Show me which link you mean... all I've seen are the links to Gage's Magic Show.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:53 AM   #161 
                                   - Haven't dozed off, have you? The night is still young and my  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:58 AM   #162 
                                   - Gage is the narrator....  hang a left   Sep-15-11 02:01 AM   #164 
                                   - Sorry, I did see that one. Yes, it does look like it's exploding, but.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 02:12 AM   #165 
                                   - It looks like it is exploding because it is.  hang a left   Sep-15-11 02:24 AM   #166 
                                   - I've seen pictures of cherry red steel, which would be about 1200 degrees, but  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 02:45 AM   #167 
                                   - Here is John Gross denying any knowledge and the  hang a left   Sep-15-11 02:51 AM   #168 
                                   - Yeah, saw that one ages ago as well.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 04:11 AM   #170 
                                   - no, it looks like it is collapsing because it is  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-15-11 06:57 AM   #172 
                                   - When you start to flash NIST around as the go to authority...  hang a left   Sep-15-11 03:24 AM   #169 
                                   - When you trust only your eyes, you can be fooled by charlatans.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 04:12 AM   #171 
                                   - no, you don't think that at all  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-15-11 06:58 AM   #174 
                                - ^^^ Not a claim? I beg to differ.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 10:13 PM   #138 
                                   - The buildings are exploding...  hang a left   Sep-15-11 12:50 AM   #145 
                                      - Thanks for proving my case for me. Well done.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:05 AM   #146 
                                         - Nice try  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:13 AM   #147 
                                         - Hahahahahaha, you really are quite a piece of work, aren't you?  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:22 AM   #149 
                                         - I didn't call you a name...  hang a left   Sep-15-11 01:30 AM   #151 
                                         - You mean when you called myself and other "treasonous"?  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:34 AM   #153 
                       - The Movement has proven shit and I think you know this very well.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 05:51 PM   #110 
                          - They have proven that all 3 towers were brought down by explosives  hang a left   Sep-14-11 06:39 PM   #125 
                             - Wow, such zeal. Such blind faith.  LARED   Sep-14-11 06:52 PM   #129 
                                - Don't be tripped up by those that would try to divert your attention  hang a left   Sep-14-11 07:00 PM   #133 
                                   - It seems the answer is yes to all my questions. nt  LARED   Sep-14-11 09:24 PM   #137 
                                      - No LARED  hang a left   Sep-15-11 12:14 AM   #142 
                                         - Still accusing posters of being paid shiils? That's against the rules, you know.  Flatulo   Sep-15-11 01:59 AM   #163 
                    - Easy. They heard explosions. Explosions do not equal bombs.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 05:50 PM   #109 
                    - Hang, eyewitnesses can be wrong. There were hundreds of eyewitnesses  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:04 PM   #113 
  - I don't think it's about "convincing" anyone -- I think it's about getting information out --  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 05:52 AM   #274 
  - maybe if you tried to post something persuasive?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-11-11 07:25 PM   #20 
  - how incredibly superficial  spooked911   Sep-11-11 07:30 PM   #22 
     - ROFLMAO  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-11-11 07:43 PM   #24 
     - good for you  spooked911   Sep-12-11 08:22 AM   #40 
        - none of these arguments makes sense  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-12-11 08:56 AM   #42 
           - I'm not sure why you picked that piece, as it was just a quick summary  spooked911   Sep-12-11 12:57 PM   #45 
              - Mini-nukes! n/t  zappaman   Sep-12-11 01:00 PM   #46 
              - yep, I just cherry-picked the top 35 points  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-12-11 02:32 PM   #47 
              - do you even accept that the WTC was destroyed by demolition?  spooked911   Sep-13-11 06:55 AM   #58 
                 - of course I don't accept that  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-13-11 08:48 AM   #60 
                    - I didn't say I was unable to discuss the topic, I just said it was pointless  spooked911   Sep-13-11 12:54 PM   #65 
                       - Mini-nukes!  zappaman   Sep-13-11 02:00 PM   #66 
                       - that would depend on the quality of the evidence  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-13-11 02:52 PM   #67 
                          - come on  spooked911   Sep-13-11 09:10 PM   #73 
                             - if you want to argue demolition first, that's fine  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 04:48 AM   #76 
                                - so... just as a starting point--  spooked911   Sep-14-11 01:54 PM   #81 
                                   - Mini-nukes!  zappaman   Sep-14-11 02:58 PM   #82 
                                   - I think I'm familar with the basic points  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 08:30 PM   #135 
                                      - "Incredulity, incredulity, woo, incredulity."  spooked911   Sep-15-11 07:01 AM   #176 
                                         - the top four arguments for demolition  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-15-11 10:07 AM   #178 
                                            - Fair enough...  spooked911   Sep-16-11 06:30 AM   #183 
                                            - maybe you should choose one?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-16-11 07:24 AM   #185 
                                            - how is #7 an argument from incredulity?  spooked911   Sep-16-11 08:09 PM   #188 
                                            - you asserted, without basis, that the official accounts are impossible  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 08:30 AM   #192 
                                            - Dude  spooked911   Sep-17-11 10:52 AM   #196 
                                            - stopping at the first error  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 11:26 AM   #198 
                                            - you really need to keep going  spooked911   Sep-17-11 11:28 AM   #199 
                                            - actually not  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 11:35 AM   #200 
                                            - maybe this will convince you...  zappaman   Sep-17-11 02:27 PM   #201 
                                            - in each case, I guess I should give him credit for trying  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 02:46 PM   #203 
                                            - what exactly is wrong with her argument so that it isn't strong proof?  spooked911   Sep-17-11 02:29 PM   #202 
                                            - I can't really find the argument, actually  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 03:23 PM   #206 
                                            - Hmmm. It's like you simply don't want to even TRY  spooked911   Sep-18-11 09:43 AM   #208 
                                            - spooked, you evidently think that about many, many people  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-18-11 12:05 PM   #209 
                                            - Do you think that the upper block of floors started falling as a solid accreted mass of  spooked911   Sep-18-11 12:47 PM   #210 
                                            - your questions are confused  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-18-11 01:43 PM   #211 
                                            - but the collision involves individual floors  spooked911   Sep-18-11 03:19 PM   #212 
                                            - it involves individual molecules, in fact  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-18-11 03:56 PM   #213 
                                            - OK, we were talking about timing, and so we need to understand the basic nature of the collisions.  spooked911   Sep-18-11 04:03 PM   #214 
                                            - not really either  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-18-11 04:14 PM   #215 
                                            - why is it "much better to construe the upper block as a block than as a single floor"?  spooked911   Sep-18-11 07:36 PM   #216 
                                            - I'll try  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-18-11 08:55 PM   #217 
                                            - as a matter of fact, I have not seen someone seriously deal with this issue before  spooked911   Sep-19-11 06:58 AM   #218 
                                            - truly, it's hard to know what you would construe as relevant  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-19-11 07:37 AM   #219 
                                            - I'm not sure why you don't understand the significance of that question  spooked911   Sep-19-11 12:10 PM   #220 
                                            - it's important to get your assumptions out into the open  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-19-11 02:21 PM   #221 
                                            - please, what does a hand hitting a board have to do with two floors colliding with each other?  spooked911   Sep-19-11 08:19 PM   #222 
                                            - What makes you think  terrafirma   Sep-19-11 08:23 PM   #223 
                                            - do you seriously not know this?  spooked911   Sep-19-11 10:03 PM   #224 
                                            - Fair enough  terrafirma   Sep-19-11 11:06 PM   #225 
                                            - why do you keep saying "two floors"?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-20-11 06:38 AM   #226 
                                            - why do I keep saying "two floors"?  spooked911   Sep-20-11 04:18 PM   #227 
                                            - the upper block falls on the lower block  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-20-11 05:13 PM   #228 
                                            - wow, just fucking wow  spooked911   Sep-20-11 07:57 PM   #229 
                                            - did you not even read my post?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-20-11 08:36 PM   #230 
                                            - who is confused here?  spooked911   Sep-21-11 08:21 AM   #234 
                                            - yeah, sure, keep digging  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-21-11 09:58 AM   #235 
                                            - please enlighten me why the uper floor was so much more invincible than the lower floor  spooked911   Sep-21-11 08:02 PM   #238 
                                            - keep digging  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-11 05:15 AM   #239 
                                            - pray tell-- what physical principles have I invented?  spooked911   Sep-22-11 05:55 AM   #240 
                                            - no less irrelevant  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-11 06:15 AM   #241 
                                            - First of all, you didn't say what physical principles I have violated  spooked911   Sep-22-11 01:34 PM   #242 
                                            - an odd form of moving the goalposts  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-11 01:59 PM   #243 
                                            - Dude  spooked911   Sep-22-11 10:21 PM   #249 
                                            - "meeting across a large surface"  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-23-11 05:05 AM   #252 
                                            - No, I'm done with you, I think.  spooked911   Sep-23-11 08:40 AM   #255 
                                            - it isn't a simple assumption at all  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-23-11 04:06 PM   #259 
                                            - Tilting is a whole other ballgame and yes, I am aware of it.  spooked911   Sep-23-11 06:03 PM   #260 
                                            - say what?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-23-11 07:07 PM   #261 
                                            - "but every time I've looked at the official calculations of the "collapses", I see fatal weaknesses"  zappaman   Sep-23-11 09:43 PM   #262 
                                            - what happened to the towers is a very complex problem if you don't believe in demolition  spooked911   Sep-24-11 10:23 AM   #266 
                                            - sort of like "God did it"?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-24-11 09:30 PM   #267 
                                            - Do you agree that floor bowing due to truss failure is the start of the collapse sequence?  spooked911   Sep-25-11 08:56 PM   #286 
                                            - one could actually refer to the collapse sequence  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-26-11 06:06 AM   #287 
                                            - What?  spooked911   Sep-26-11 11:39 AM   #290 
                                            - the columns were bowing because sagging floors were pulling them in  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-26-11 12:18 PM   #291 
                                            - Semantic issue? Really?  spooked911   Sep-27-11 08:39 AM   #292 
                                            - yes, really  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-27-11 10:16 AM   #293 
                                            - my point (and I do have one)  spooked911   Sep-28-11 12:38 PM   #297 
                                            - "the official story revolves around"  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-30-11 05:49 AM   #304 
                                            - Bazant and Verdure model  spooked911   Sep-29-11 11:47 AM   #298 
                                            - this isn't the "Bazant and Verdure model"  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-29-11 12:53 PM   #299 
                                            - Gimme a break  spooked911   Sep-29-11 09:52 PM   #300 
                                            - I'm "nitpicking" because I think you are wrong  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-30-11 05:35 AM   #303 
                                            - As much "fun" as it is going back and forth with you on this,  spooked911   Sep-30-11 05:24 PM   #305 
                                            - "Mainstream engineers"....  terrafirma   Sep-30-11 05:39 PM   #306 
                                            - I go with A.  zappaman   Sep-30-11 05:42 PM   #307 
                                            - Occam's Razor  terrafirma   Sep-30-11 05:50 PM   #308 
                                            - the truth movement isn't so fringe, and more...  spooked911   Oct-01-11 11:17 AM   #309 
                                            - I'm impressed  terrafirma   Oct-01-11 12:07 PM   #310 
                                            - it's sad, really  spooked911   Oct-02-11 07:39 AM   #316 
                                            - Nice try  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 07:49 AM   #317 
                                            - and I'm sure you should have no problem using google to either find a supporting article or  spooked911   Oct-02-11 04:01 PM   #319 
                                            - So you have nothing to back your assertion up...  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 04:26 PM   #321 
                                            - Is there a book out there...  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 09:49 PM   #326 
                                            - ooh, there go the goalposts again  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-02-11 05:56 PM   #323 
                                            - Unbelievable  zappaman   Oct-01-11 12:18 PM   #311 
                                            - you have barely tried to make your points  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-01-11 10:46 PM   #312 
                                            - But...  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 06:00 AM   #313 
                                            - I have a "word argument", I'm sorry I don't have the time to put it into a "mathematical argument"  spooked911   Oct-02-11 07:23 AM   #314 
                                            - Don't have the time?  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 07:32 AM   #315 
                                            - terrafirma got it in one  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-02-11 08:01 AM   #318 
                                            - "terrafirma got it in one"-- not sure what that means  spooked911   Oct-02-11 04:06 PM   #320 
                                            - With what's at stake...  terrafirma   Oct-02-11 04:28 PM   #322 
                                            - yeah  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-02-11 08:26 PM   #325 
                                            - because there is an obvious counterargument  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-02-11 08:23 PM   #324 
                                            - Actually, I wasn't talking about the *distribution* of the downward force  spooked911   Oct-03-11 12:03 PM   #327 
                                            - indeed you weren't  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-03-11 12:32 PM   #328 
                                            - alternatives  spooked911   Oct-04-11 06:30 AM   #329 
                                            - well, yes, it probably would take you quite a while  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-04-11 10:57 AM   #330 
                                            - So--  spooked911   Oct-04-11 03:29 PM   #331 
                                            - mmmmmm  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-05-11 06:04 AM   #332 
                                            - The good news is that after 300+ posts, we are finally communicating somewhat more directly--  spooked911   Oct-05-11 07:41 AM   #333 
                                            - wow  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-05-11 08:44 AM   #334 
                                            - sorry if I misinterpreted you, but I thought you said  spooked911   Oct-05-11 02:27 PM   #335 
                                            - "some people can't seem to recognize the conflict of interest that most professional engineers have  zappaman   Oct-05-11 02:54 PM   #336 
                                            - Not bullshit  spooked911   Oct-06-11 08:00 PM   #345 
                                            - ?  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-05-11 03:59 PM   #337 
                                            - I gave the conflicts in an earlier post.  spooked911   Oct-06-11 08:02 PM   #346 
                                            - you "gave the conflicts in an earlier post"?  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-06-11 09:36 PM   #347 
                                            - the conflicts are in post 309  spooked911   Oct-07-11 06:52 AM   #353 
                                            - it was already pointed out that you didn't support your assertions  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-07-11 10:03 AM   #354 
                                            - the points are based on logic and do not need sourcing  spooked911   Oct-07-11 06:09 PM   #355 
                                            - that's a pretty loose construction of "logic"  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-07-11 06:33 PM   #359 
                                            - No I don't understand the non-demolition explanation of how WTC 7 came down at free-fall speed  spooked911   Oct-07-11 08:01 PM   #361 
                                            - I think you will just get the NIST  deconstruct911   Oct-07-11 08:14 PM   #363 
                                            - neither of them explained how the tower could go down at free-fall speed  spooked911   Oct-08-11 12:18 PM   #371 
                                            - except they didn't. Period.  zappaman   Oct-08-11 01:07 PM   #374 
                                            - I agree. They didn't explain the fre-fall of WTC7 and neither did that link.  spooked911   Oct-08-11 04:38 PM   #380 
                                            - no, you wouldn't  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 07:26 AM   #368 
                                            - for the record, it IS free-fall, once the main body starts falling  spooked911   Oct-08-11 12:17 PM   #370 
                                            - for the record--you have no idea what you are talking about....again.  zappaman   Oct-08-11 01:08 PM   #375 
                                            - well, I think we were supposedly focusing on WTC 7 right here  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 04:05 PM   #378 
                                            - wow, thanks, Joe Clueless  spooked911   Oct-08-11 04:55 PM   #383 
                                            - WTC 7 mostly didn't go down at free-fall  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 05:02 PM   #384 
                                            - the reason for giving a link that had nothing to do with WTC7?  spooked911   Oct-08-11 08:11 PM   #390 
                                            - no, he probably wasn't paying much attention  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-09-11 05:50 AM   #393 
                                            - for the record, you're flat out wrong on both points  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 04:03 PM   #377 
                                            - what are the "both points"? You conceded the facade falls approximately at free-fall speed.  spooked911   Oct-08-11 05:15 PM   #386 
                                            - bullshit  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 05:23 PM   #387 
                                            - ?????????????????  spooked911   Oct-08-11 08:14 PM   #391 
                                            - from NIST:  spooked911   Oct-08-11 08:18 PM   #392 
                                            - at least you found the FAQ, but your "fix" is broken  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-09-11 06:09 AM   #394 
                                            - I saw that quote  spooked911   Oct-09-11 04:49 PM   #396 
                                            - well, it's the same old pattern on your part  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-09-11 05:55 PM   #397 
                                            - "Pretty obvious, if you think about it."  zappaman   Oct-09-11 07:15 PM   #398 
                                            - Pretty obvious that you have some cognitive dissonance going on  spooked911   Oct-10-11 09:22 AM   #399 
                                            - actually not  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-10-11 04:25 PM   #400 
                                            - the bottom line is that WTC7 went down at the same speed or even faster than known  spooked911   Oct-10-11 08:13 PM   #415 
                                            - Speaking of precedents...  terrafirma   Oct-10-11 08:37 PM   #416 
                                            - it's sort of hilarious that you link to that, actually  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-11-11 05:06 AM   #418 
                                            - It's ALL such a mystery isn't it?  spooked911   Oct-11-11 08:58 PM   #420 
                                            - Your sarcasm is noted.  terrafirma   Oct-11-11 09:18 PM   #421 
                                            - "why does Spooked911 think such silly things?"  zappaman   Oct-11-11 09:38 PM   #422 
                                            - your response looks like a surrender to me  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-12-11 06:20 AM   #423 
                                            - It's a bit of a surrender, yes, in terms of trying to convince you  spooked911   Oct-12-11 10:04 AM   #424 
                                            - I'll await your physics, but the following is odd:  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-12-11 11:41 AM   #426 
                                            - every article or fact that spooked does not agree with is an "intel op"  zappaman   Oct-12-11 01:22 PM   #427 
                                            - depends, but in this case it is fairly clear that it is an op  spooked911   Oct-12-11 07:24 PM   #428 
                                            - Oops  zappaman   Oct-09-11 11:15 AM   #395 
                                            - bullshit  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 05:23 PM   #388 
                                            - hey, I think this is my first time with this glitch  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 06:43 PM   #389 
                                            - fwiw, this thread here has two different people saying that engineers are  spooked911   Oct-07-11 06:22 PM   #356 
                                            - Well then by your reasoning  terrafirma   Oct-07-11 07:28 PM   #360 
                                            - It's really funny how hysterically clueless you are about my argument about engineers--  spooked911   Oct-07-11 08:05 PM   #362 
                                            - It's funny you think you're argument about engineers  terrafirma   Oct-07-11 08:30 PM   #364 
                                            - are you at all familiar with what whistleblowers have to go through?  spooked911   Oct-08-11 12:14 PM   #369 
                                            - Actually, yes.  AZCat   Oct-08-11 12:58 PM   #372 
                                            - Great!  spooked911   Oct-08-11 04:44 PM   #382 
                                            - Being lectured on the "grown-up" world  terrafirma   Oct-08-11 03:46 PM   #376 
                                            - No, that's not what I am saying.  spooked911   Oct-08-11 04:40 PM   #381 
                                            - No?  terrafirma   Oct-08-11 05:11 PM   #385 
                                            - Wow - that evidence is overwhelming!  AZCat   Oct-08-11 12:59 PM   #373 
                                            - damn, this is annoying  OnTheOtherHand   Oct-08-11 04:32 PM   #379 
                                            - What conflict of interest???  terrafirma   Oct-05-11 04:28 PM   #338 
                                            - Nothing so sinister  spooked911   Oct-06-11 07:56 PM   #344 
                                            - So...  terrafirma   Oct-06-11 09:38 PM   #348 
                                            - Oh my fucking god!  AZCat   Oct-05-11 09:53 PM   #339 
                                            - Oh please,  ocpagu   Oct-06-11 01:01 PM   #340 
                                            - oh, please  zappaman   Oct-06-11 01:46 PM   #341 
                                            - So...  terrafirma   Oct-06-11 05:37 PM   #342 
                                            - I have answered his questions. For years.  AZCat   Oct-06-11 10:09 PM   #350 
                                            - Really, sorry  spooked911   Oct-06-11 07:52 PM   #343 
                                            - No, of course you can't.  AZCat   Oct-06-11 10:06 PM   #349 
                                            - as if you cared about the truth  spooked911   Oct-07-11 06:28 PM   #358 
                                            - I care more about the truth than you do (at least in my opinion).  AZCat   Oct-07-11 11:29 PM   #366 
                                            - as if you cared about the truth  zappaman   Oct-08-11 12:24 AM   #367 
                                            - you don't seem to give a shit about any facts or information  zappaman   Oct-06-11 11:28 PM   #351 
                                            - ha ha  spooked911   Oct-07-11 06:25 PM   #357 
                                            - Truly an embarassment. n/t  zappaman   Oct-07-11 10:09 PM   #365 
                                            - Don't have the time..?  KDLarsen   Oct-07-11 12:17 AM   #352 
                                            - shall we talk about your new "partial conservation of velocity" law?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-24-11 07:32 AM   #263 
                                            - your points about velocity versus momentum and increasing mass are perfectly valid  spooked911   Sep-24-11 10:13 AM   #265 
                                            - that's classy, but also confusing  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-25-11 09:33 AM   #283 
                                            - I confess that I was under undue influence from Wood  spooked911   Sep-25-11 08:53 PM   #285 
                                            - assuming what you intend to prove is just a bad idea  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-26-11 07:14 AM   #288 
                                            - It's actually very easy to poke holes in models.  spooked911   Sep-26-11 10:50 AM   #289 
                                            - I'm pretty sure the flaws in Wood's billiard ball model were pointed out here...  AZCat   Sep-27-11 08:23 PM   #296 
                                            - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-25-11 06:07 AM   #279 
                                            - Do you have a video that shows the top section of either building out surviving the lower section?  cpwm17   Sep-22-11 03:55 PM   #244 
                                            - the 30 story top of WTC2 disappeared pretty quickly  spooked911   Sep-22-11 09:20 PM   #247 
                                            - nonsense  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-11 09:42 PM   #248 
                                            - Newton's Third Law would apply in the collision of the top and bottom sections  cpwm17   Sep-20-11 09:45 PM   #231 
                                            - that seems about right  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-21-11 06:37 AM   #232 
                                            - Yes, that seems to be what he thinks  cpwm17   Sep-21-11 03:22 PM   #236 
                                            - one thing I argued with myself about wading into...  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-21-11 04:30 PM   #237 
                                            - I'm not sure of everything you mean  cpwm17   Sep-22-11 05:40 PM   #245 
                                            - ah, well...  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-11 07:06 PM   #246 
                                            - Perhaps for the fun of it, I'll study this later  cpwm17   Sep-23-11 12:49 AM   #251 
                                            - I see you have the right idea here  spooked911   Sep-22-11 10:32 PM   #250 
                                            - another, quite perverse example of moving the goalposts  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-23-11 07:00 AM   #253 
                                            - I did state them  spooked911   Sep-23-11 08:24 AM   #254 
                                            - or NOTHING you write makes any sense  zappaman   Sep-23-11 01:30 PM   #256 
                                            - that's BS  spooked911   Sep-23-11 02:15 PM   #257 
                                            - not really  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-23-11 04:01 PM   #258 
                                            - uh huh  spooked911   Sep-24-11 08:34 AM   #264 
                                            - technical discussion  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-24-11 09:34 PM   #268 
                                            - Yes, those are the general concepts, except I think it is debateable about how  spooked911   Sep-21-11 07:43 AM   #233 
              - FYI, here's a 50 ton press. It's about the size of a doorway.  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 06:04 AM   #79 
                 - thanks  spooked911   Oct-12-11 10:06 AM   #425 
     - Mini-nukes!!! n/t  zappaman   Sep-11-11 10:28 PM   #31 
  - I've seen this accusation so many times  Ohio Joe   Sep-12-11 05:02 PM   #50 
  - I thought you believed in thermite  jberryhill   Sep-13-11 10:17 AM   #61 
  - It is not the responders in this forum that are important  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:05 PM   #83 
  - +1 ---  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 06:08 AM   #280 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-25-11 05:50 AM   #273 
  - Awesome...  SidDithers   Sep-11-11 07:33 PM   #23 
  - Thanks Spooked  LARED   Sep-11-11 09:32 PM   #28 
  - +1  zappaman   Sep-12-11 12:39 PM   #44 
  - Sometimes I do not understand you Spooked  Ohio Joe   Sep-12-11 03:41 PM   #48 
  - all valid points, but...  zappaman   Sep-12-11 05:59 PM   #51 
  - I've addressed all these issues repeatedly over the years  spooked911   Sep-13-11 08:13 AM   #59 
     - Mini-nukes!  zappaman   Sep-13-11 12:30 PM   #64 
     - If you see no point in presenting your arguments, why post at all?  Ohio Joe   Sep-13-11 05:05 PM   #68 
        - Mini-nukes!  zappaman   Sep-13-11 05:07 PM   #69 
        - Just suppose --for the sake of argument-- that the 9/11 operation involved  spooked911   Sep-13-11 06:00 PM   #70 
           - OK, lets say it was...  Ohio Joe   Sep-13-11 07:38 PM   #71 
           - you are making it way too complicated  spooked911   Sep-13-11 09:07 PM   #72 
           - You are ignoring things  Ohio Joe   Sep-13-11 09:51 PM   #74 
           - Really.  spooked911   Sep-14-11 06:37 PM   #123 
              - What about the folks  terrafirma   Sep-14-11 10:23 PM   #139 
              - I already did  spooked911   Sep-15-11 06:59 AM   #175 
                 - Paid actors?  terrafirma   Sep-15-11 08:56 AM   #177 
                    - so you know some people who saw what exactly?  spooked911   Sep-15-11 08:28 PM   #181 
                       - Not really in the habit  terrafirma   Sep-15-11 08:53 PM   #182 
                          - SO typical  spooked911   Sep-16-11 06:35 AM   #184 
                             - For starters...  terrafirma   Sep-16-11 09:43 AM   #186 
                             - I wasn't expecting you to blindly give me their email addresses and names,  spooked911   Sep-16-11 08:13 PM   #189 
                                - how the hell would knowing the vantage point  zappaman   Sep-16-11 09:22 PM   #190 
                                - What other kind of communication is there?  terrafirma   Sep-17-11 05:41 AM   #191 
                                   - I missed that address, could you post in response to this, please?  spooked911   Sep-17-11 10:03 AM   #194 
                                      - Oh what an email that would be...  terrafirma   Sep-17-11 10:25 AM   #195 
                                      - who knows, maybe they would have a good sense of humor about it--  spooked911   Sep-17-11 11:13 AM   #197 
                                      - Yeah.  terrafirma   Sep-17-11 03:00 PM   #204 
                                      - the Charlie Veitch scenario  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-17-11 03:34 PM   #207 
                                      - "maybe they would have a good sense of humor about it"  zappaman   Sep-17-11 03:19 PM   #205 
                             - "Maybe I would be convinced by them."  zappaman   Sep-16-11 12:51 PM   #187 
              - people all over NYC were speaking out quite volubly about what they saw  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-15-11 10:18 AM   #179 
           - spooked, had you ever visited NYC while the Towers were there?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-14-11 05:16 AM   #77 
              - Yes, I had visited NYC when the towers were there, and I went to the top of WTC2 in the mid-80s  spooked911   Sep-14-11 06:31 PM   #120 
                 - garbage  zappaman   Sep-14-11 06:55 PM   #131 
                 - Question about the black boxes and your general stream of thought...  terrafirma   Sep-15-11 07:42 PM   #180 
                    - my reasoning is that the videos and "witnesses" "proved" planes at the WTC  spooked911   Sep-17-11 10:00 AM   #193 
                       - Spooked -- Are there any INSURANCE records on the airlines being reimbursed for the planes lost ???  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 06:12 AM   #281 
                          - AIG  deconstruct911   Sep-29-11 10:18 PM   #301 
                          - Back kind late on this -- but THANK YOU for the info ... was interested in  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 05:46 PM   #402 
                             - Yea probably the planes but maybe the industry also....  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 06:20 PM   #404 
                             - Actually it would be the planes...  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 06:29 PM   #405 
                             - How do you mean that ?  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 06:41 PM   #407 
                                - Yea I see what you mean  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 06:43 PM   #408 
                                - Right --- convenient -- if a terrorist attack the public pays so no questions really  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 06:49 PM   #409 
                                - GW is also interesting for them  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 06:54 PM   #410 
                                   - Wow -- Had no idea --- and I bet you very few taxpayers know -- !!!  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 07:04 PM   #413 
                             - Yas exactly  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 06:34 PM   #406 
                                - What's "WKJO"?  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 06:59 PM   #411 
                                   - just short for who killed john o neil. nt  deconstruct911   Oct-10-11 07:00 PM   #412 
                                      - So -- after 10 years ....  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 07:10 PM   #414 
                                         - Not really for a long time...  deconstruct911   Oct-11-11 05:17 PM   #419 
                          - Here:  deconstruct911   Sep-29-11 10:26 PM   #302 
                             - Thanks again for the info --  defendandprotect   Oct-10-11 05:55 PM   #403 
           - wow  zappaman   Sep-13-11 10:57 PM   #75 
           - I don't care where you lived  hang a left   Sep-14-11 03:14 PM   #87 
              - LOL!  zappaman   Sep-14-11 03:53 PM   #94 
              - You find the subject amusing? There were people in those buildings.  hang a left   Sep-14-11 04:34 PM   #97 
              - Thats nice  Ohio Joe   Sep-14-11 05:11 PM   #104 
                 - No, Military-grade explosives  hang a left   Sep-14-11 05:32 PM   #107 
                    - Shame on me for being a tool?  Ohio Joe   Sep-14-11 05:52 PM   #111 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-14-11 06:15 PM   #114 
                          - I am both a tool and a traitor?  Ohio Joe   Sep-14-11 06:29 PM   #118 
           - ::Head hits desk::  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 03:27 PM   #89 
  - God Bless Spooked911 And All Who Sail In Her!  jberryhill   Sep-12-11 06:18 PM   #52 
  - Ow, my back hurts when I laugh.  uppityperson   Sep-12-11 08:01 PM   #55 
  - Mea Culpa - just realized a major error...  Flatulo   Sep-14-11 11:06 PM   #141 
  - # 10 -- Since 11-22/63 -- we've had many events piled up --  defendandprotect   Sep-25-11 06:30 AM   #282 
  - same old tired bullshit  zappaman   Sep-25-11 10:43 AM   #284 
  - It not often one gets to be the 401th post.. Thanks Spooked nt  LARED   Oct-10-11 05:38 PM   #401 
  - "the only way 9/11 would have been more obvious inside job is if the official death toll were 3,333"  zappaman   Oct-10-11 09:00 PM   #417 
     - hi Zap  Larry L. Burks   Oct-14-11 11:50 AM   #429 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC