|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
![]() |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 05:31 PM Original message |
Can a jet fuel/hydrocarbon fire collapse a steel structure? An experiment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrSammo1
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 05:38 PM Response to Original message |
1. keep adding |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 06:41 PM Response to Original message |
2. Can a non-jet fuel/hydrocarbon fire collapse a steel structure? Reality. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 10:41 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. The WTC was not a "lightweight steel bar joist building" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:42 AM Response to Reply #4 |
10. Was it a chicken wire building? ( n/t ) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:42 PM Response to Reply #10 |
24. Of course not-- all the more reason why it would resist collapse. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 03:40 AM Response to Reply #24 |
33. So your original objection, to my posted real world examples,... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 01:37 PM Response to Reply #33 |
39. the construction method was different. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:18 PM Response to Reply #39 |
48. Spooked's experiments DID test the strength of vertical columns in a fire. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:40 PM Response to Reply #48 |
53. LOL! ( n/t ) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:51 PM Response to Reply #39 |
55. Let me see if I understand this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 09:27 AM Response to Reply #55 |
70. Do you think heat will affect vertical and horizontal steel |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 10:21 AM Response to Reply #70 |
73. If it is the same type of steel and is raised to the same temperature... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 10:59 AM Response to Reply #4 |
16. McCormick Place officially opened in 1960. The fire was in 1967. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:38 PM Response to Reply #16 |
22. I can't find the link right now, but someone on this board had a post |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kevin Fenton
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:51 PM Response to Reply #22 |
25. L'Enfant Plaza |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 03:10 AM Response to Reply #22 |
32. Do they have exhibits in convention centers still under construction? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrSammo1
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 03:48 AM Response to Reply #2 |
34. Steel |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrSammo1
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 03:55 AM Response to Reply #2 |
35. Can a non-jet fuel/hydrocarbon fire collapse |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 10:33 PM Response to Original message |
3. Well, I"M convinced... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 10:41 PM Response to Reply #3 |
5. I assume you can show us how the fires caused the collapse then? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Wed Oct-05-05 10:46 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. No, obviously you can't either... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 12:51 AM Response to Reply #6 |
7. "an aluminum can and some kerosene" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 01:21 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. You don't think a hi-rise building is a little more complex than some |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:40 AM Response to Reply #8 |
9. You don't think a hi-rise building is a little more complex |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 03:17 AM Response to Reply #9 |
11. Then go ahead and calculate it... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 01:45 PM Response to Reply #11 |
18. I'm asking YOU or LARED or someone who supports the official story |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 10:22 PM Response to Reply #18 |
29. I'm not accusing you of manipulating the results. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 04:36 PM Response to Reply #29 |
110. Had spooked's cage failed, we could have criticized his study |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Totallybushed
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 03:15 PM Response to Reply #18 |
107. Actually, it is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 10:51 AM Response to Reply #11 |
259. There's no point in calculating it. The model is too crude |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 01:41 PM Response to Reply #9 |
17. Thank you, exactly my point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 05:03 AM Response to Reply #7 |
12. The behavior of steel under load in a fire |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 12:06 AM Response to Reply #12 |
30. I have checked out what NIST "thinks" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 09:28 AM Response to Reply #30 |
71. Exactly!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WoodrowFan
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 06:13 AM Response to Original message |
13. I'm just surprised |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 06:42 AM Response to Original message |
14. If you want to improve your model |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 01:54 PM Response to Reply #14 |
19. How about YOU try it, since you believe the official story? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:26 PM Response to Reply #19 |
21. Because |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:40 PM Response to Reply #21 |
23. where is their model of the collapse, please? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 08:35 PM Response to Reply #23 |
27. Good Lord man, it's here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 09:56 PM Response to Reply #27 |
28. No, I don't want that. I want their model of how fire |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 09:34 AM Response to Reply #28 |
72. Where is the detailed NIST model of the collapse? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sinti
![]() |
Mon Jun-26-06 10:09 AM Response to Reply #72 |
99. Actually, the NIST is still trying to duplicate what happened on 9/11 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 11:50 AM Response to Reply #99 |
121. According to Kevin Ryan, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 06:07 AM Response to Reply #121 |
145. NIST's fudged models |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:34 AM Response to Reply #145 |
154. Every single lightweight web truss could have failed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:09 PM Response to Reply #154 |
181. Are you sure about these beams? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:07 AM Response to Reply #181 |
187. Yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:38 AM Response to Reply #187 |
216. Link, please. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:45 AM Response to Reply #216 |
217. File an FOIA request. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:04 AM Response to Reply #217 |
219. So, you can point out these beams even though you have never seen any |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:10 AM Response to Reply #219 |
220. Yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:30 AM Response to Reply #220 |
221. And your evidence that they existed is????? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:46 AM Response to Reply #221 |
222. Find a framing plan and I'll explain it to you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:50 AM Response to Reply #222 |
223. Can't answer the question, I see. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:53 AM Response to Reply #223 |
224. I believe I've answered it four times. Good night. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:54 AM Response to Reply #224 |
225. No, you haven't even answered it once. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 05:41 AM Response to Reply #181 |
226. It seems apparent that she can't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 09:46 AM Response to Reply #226 |
227. I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make it think. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:53 AM Response to Reply #227 |
239. Lol. Talk about non-sequiturs.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:54 AM Response to Reply #227 |
240. I prefer the Dorothy Parker version |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:01 AM Response to Reply #240 |
242. Oh, and you think that's clever, I'll bet. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:07 AM Response to Reply #242 |
244. Why is it when I post to you it's a "weird fixation" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:13 AM Response to Reply #244 |
245. I've never made any "personal attacks" on you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 10:09 AM Response to Reply #245 |
282. So what was on all those deleted posts? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:50 AM Response to Reply #244 |
246. And |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 04:17 AM Response to Reply #246 |
247. Stop stalking me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 04:31 AM Response to Reply #247 |
248. Deleted message |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 04:43 AM Response to Reply #247 |
250. delete dupe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 09:10 AM Response to Reply #247 |
255. Deleted message |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:19 AM Response to Reply #255 |
261. Sing....sing a song... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 12:15 PM Response to Reply #255 |
268. Buddy, Rewind and replay "Bush supporters" "neocons" "paid shills" ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 10:05 AM Response to Reply #268 |
281. Funny , I didn't see him say ANY of those words. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 04:36 AM Response to Reply #227 |
249. Do no truss conspiracy sites about trusses. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 06:14 AM Response to Reply #249 |
251. Trusses and beams. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Wed Jul-12-06 10:37 PM Response to Reply #249 |
292. You should try reading the NIST report . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 04:10 AM Response to Reply #292 |
295. Any evidence for these joist girders? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 05:16 AM Response to Reply #295 |
296. I said you should read it, not believe it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 04:38 PM Response to Reply #296 |
302. Where did you hear about these mystery girders? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 06:07 PM Response to Reply #302 |
303. What tipped me off |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 01:04 PM Response to Reply #145 |
160. Welcome to DU! Please provide links to support your assertions. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 10:42 PM Response to Reply #160 |
180. Here is some support... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 02:12 PM Response to Reply #14 |
40. No, a realistic similulation would have the fencing at about 0.7" high, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 09:23 PM Response to Reply #40 |
45. Actually, no. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 09:56 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. It would also have 60 columns per side instead of 20. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:13 PM Response to Reply #46 |
47. Absolute B.S. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:20 PM Response to Reply #47 |
49. Tell it to the engineers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:26 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. Yes, but engineers scale their experiments to real buildings... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:39 PM Response to Reply #50 |
52. Let's start with the width-height ratio. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 11:49 PM Response to Reply #52 |
58. You're kidding, right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 12:13 AM Response to Reply #58 |
60. Evidently you haven't been paying attention. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 12:28 AM Response to Reply #60 |
61. Evidently, your criteria are much more lenient than mine... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 12:56 AM Response to Reply #61 |
63. Already covered, but here's a make-up session: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 01:02 AM Response to Reply #63 |
64. Actually, it's not been "covered". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 01:09 AM Response to Reply #64 |
65. If you want to believe Home Depot uses better steel |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 01:46 AM Response to Reply #65 |
66. You're still choosing not to answer my questions. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 04:47 AM Response to Reply #66 |
67. Asking an obvious question repeatedly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Sun Oct-09-05 01:42 AM Response to Reply #67 |
76. Pretty much what I expected. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Macadian
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 03:57 PM Response to Reply #76 |
109. A valiant attempt MercutioATC.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Martensitic Madness
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 12:38 PM Response to Reply #109 |
157. Consider this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 12:58 PM Response to Reply #157 |
159. Your premise that the bolts failed is of the Zipper-Pancake epoch |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Macadian
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 01:31 PM Response to Reply #159 |
162. So you're going to stick with... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 02:41 PM Response to Reply #162 |
166. Hey Mac, one PhD says the flimsy truss clips unzipped, the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:27 PM Response to Reply #49 |
51. Perhaps you should read up on wind tunnel testing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:41 PM Response to Reply #51 |
54. Thanks for the suggestion. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 11:00 PM Response to Reply #54 |
56. You are welcome. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 06:52 AM Response to Reply #54 |
68. A simple example for structural scaling. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
atomic-fly
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 08:26 AM Response to Original message |
15. While this model is not an acurate representation.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Old and In the Way
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:23 PM Response to Original message |
20. Interesting experiment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 12:13 AM Response to Reply #20 |
31. An issue NIST (I think I remember this) raises is that differential heat |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Thu Oct-06-05 02:52 PM Response to Original message |
26. Experimental confirmation of what I've long suspected: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thewormman
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 05:24 AM Response to Original message |
36. Good try, but... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thewormman
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 05:26 AM Response to Original message |
37. Good try, but... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frederik
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 10:33 AM Response to Original message |
38. You should see the National Geographic documentary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 02:19 PM Response to Reply #38 |
41. That's show biz. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frederik
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 03:04 PM Response to Reply #41 |
42. Oh please |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pox americana
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 07:04 PM Response to Reply #42 |
43. I think I'd be equally critical of both |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frederik
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 02:57 PM Response to Reply #43 |
74. The documentary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
StrafingMoose
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 03:03 PM Response to Reply #43 |
75. Logically, I'd want to get... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Macadian
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 03:54 PM Response to Reply #41 |
108. When did spooked get into the engineering business??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 04:39 PM Response to Reply #108 |
111. A valid point, but we should hold History and National Geographic |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Macadian
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 07:57 AM Response to Reply #111 |
117. Well, yes & no.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 11:53 AM Response to Reply #117 |
122. "Spooked has not met even the low standards" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Macadian
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:53 PM Response to Reply #122 |
130. Backyard science is fine and dandy.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bouvet_Island
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 08:09 PM Response to Original message |
44. the problem |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Fri Oct-07-05 11:01 PM Response to Reply #44 |
57. The analyis he posted on another thead is more convincing to me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kevinam
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 12:06 AM Response to Original message |
59. couple of questions about your experiment... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 12:32 AM Response to Reply #59 |
62. None of that matters. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sat Oct-08-05 09:26 AM Response to Reply #59 |
69. Good points. But one by one-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 11:36 AM Response to Original message |
77. Third expt with a similar set-up: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 05:03 PM Response to Reply #77 |
78. Bravo, Spooked. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 05:49 PM Response to Reply #78 |
80. Thanks! I've thought about doing what you say, actually, but haven't had |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 05:34 PM Response to Reply #77 |
79. This proves it then. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 05:52 PM Response to Reply #79 |
81. Sorry, I didn't write that up properly. The fire was strong for about |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MercutioATC
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 09:19 PM Response to Reply #77 |
82. Jesus! Why not try modeling your "experiment" after the actual buildings? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-13-05 09:15 PM Response to Reply #82 |
84. You're more than welcome to do your own experiment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mike923
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 11:28 AM Response to Reply #84 |
120. No need, i'm conviced. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lithos
![]() |
Wed Oct-12-05 10:08 PM Response to Original message |
83. Couple of points |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Thu Oct-13-05 09:32 PM Response to Reply #83 |
85. It's NOT chicken wire, it is garden fencing meant to keep out rabbits. And |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat
![]() |
Thu Oct-13-05 09:38 PM Response to Reply #85 |
86. I think it's the unsupported length of the column... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jun-24-06 01:17 AM Response to Original message |
87. Kick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:09 AM Response to Reply #87 |
88. I never saw this before. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:24 AM Response to Reply #88 |
89. Bunnies |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:37 AM Response to Reply #89 |
90. Sources tell me that spooked is a scientist. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:42 AM Response to Reply #90 |
91. Sources tell me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:50 AM Response to Reply #91 |
92. How do we prove that we're friendly to the honest ones? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:54 AM Response to Reply #92 |
93. Same as always, by words and actions. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 12:58 AM Response to Reply #93 |
94. Take care of your goodness. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 01:01 AM Response to Reply #94 |
95. Always. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 07:28 PM Response to Reply #94 |
176. That ought to be easy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 01:18 AM Response to Reply #176 |
184. Ohhhhh, you so totally dissed me! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 10:57 AM Response to Reply #90 |
97. If you would bother to look at spooked's blog and take a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Thu Jun-29-06 10:17 PM Response to Reply #97 |
102. Thanks for your input. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 10:51 AM Response to Reply #89 |
96. Ah, there's those prize-winning emoticons again. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jun-25-06 03:15 PM Response to Reply #89 |
98. Sorry, you lose. My emoticons are bigger than yours. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Thu Jun-29-06 10:21 PM Response to Reply #98 |
103. Thanks again x2 for your input. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 08:28 PM Response to Reply #98 |
178. OMG, bwahaha. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 01:17 AM Response to Reply #178 |
183. Thanks for your observation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jeroen
![]() |
Wed Jun-28-06 10:03 AM Response to Original message |
100. Suggestion for 2 new experiments: WTC 7 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobby911
![]() |
Thu Jun-29-06 06:03 AM Response to Reply #100 |
101. yep...scaling is the problem |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lcwilson
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 12:31 PM Response to Original message |
104. WTC test |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 12:44 PM Response to Reply #104 |
105. Welcome to DU! :) nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 01:30 PM Response to Original message |
106. Deleted message |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 04:44 PM Response to Reply #106 |
112. Welcome to DU ryams! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ryams27
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 08:43 AM Response to Reply #112 |
118. Thanks... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:04 PM Response to Reply #118 |
123. That's circular reasoning. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:25 PM Response to Reply #123 |
128. Psst, they've been banned. Thanks for rolling out the red carpet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 01:04 PM Response to Reply #128 |
132. That wasn't just a RW troll! That was Jonah his own self! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 01:13 PM Response to Reply #132 |
134. You might be correct, but I'm not convinced. ;) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Wed Jul-05-06 10:20 PM Response to Reply #106 |
113. Lookee here... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 05:33 AM Response to Reply #113 |
114. Nice job. :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 08:45 AM Response to Reply #113 |
119. Deleted message |
NoiseLTD
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 06:48 AM Response to Original message |
115. Please tell me you're joking. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 07:20 AM Response to Reply #115 |
116. Welcome to DU, however |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:06 PM Response to Reply #116 |
124. Do you have any specific criticisms, or any constructive |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:17 PM Response to Reply #124 |
125. You said "spooked's experiment proves nothing". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NoiseLTD
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:21 PM Response to Reply #124 |
127. See Fair Enough... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NoiseLTD
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:18 PM Response to Reply #116 |
126. Fair enough... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 12:37 PM Response to Reply #126 |
129. Yep, I pretty much agree with all of that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NoiseLTD
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 01:03 PM Response to Reply #129 |
131. links? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 01:07 PM Response to Reply #131 |
133. Here ya go: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 02:38 PM Response to Reply #126 |
135. "You have someone positing a conspiracy based on..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 03:19 PM Response to Reply #135 |
136. well said amigo |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
enough already
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 04:41 PM Response to Original message |
137. This confirms what I've suspected all along |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Codeine
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 04:52 PM Response to Reply #137 |
138. This confirms nothing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 05:04 PM Response to Reply #138 |
139. Yes, far too many DUers waste time because of so much... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 05:18 PM Response to Reply #139 |
140. Don't you know any other tunes, Buddy? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 07:16 PM Response to Reply #140 |
143. C'mon boloboffin, that one's getting old. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 10:09 PM Response to Reply #143 |
144. You're telling me. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 09:49 AM Response to Reply #144 |
149. I've already told you, and so have plenty of other people. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:27 AM Response to Reply #149 |
153. You do know two songs! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 12:50 PM Response to Reply #153 |
158. Three: You forgot about "I Can See Thru OCT'er BS Clearly Now". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
carlvs
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 10:18 AM Response to Reply #144 |
150. They don't need a songbook, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grytpype
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 05:52 PM Response to Original message |
141. :rofl: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Night Owl
![]() |
Thu Jul-06-06 06:12 PM Response to Original message |
142. Great work! Now try a scientific experiment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 07:56 AM Response to Original message |
146. wtf? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 09:47 AM Response to Reply #146 |
148. Consider it a joke at your own risk |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sighkobabl
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 04:36 PM Response to Reply #146 |
171. Serious Stuff! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 09:46 AM Response to Original message |
147. I'm glad the bunny got away |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshbetts
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:02 AM Response to Original message |
151. Structural engineering |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 12:21 PM Response to Reply #151 |
156. what's your take on the molten steel/iron dripping out the.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshbetts
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 01:23 PM Response to Reply #156 |
161. what's your take on the molten steel/iron dripping out the.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 01:42 PM Response to Reply #161 |
163. serious? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshbetts
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 02:14 PM Response to Reply #163 |
164. serious? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 02:59 PM Response to Reply #164 |
167. the laws of physic aren't up for debate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshbetts
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 03:13 PM Response to Reply #167 |
168. BrokenBeyondRepair, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 03:31 PM Response to Reply #168 |
169. obviously, there is reasonable doubt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 07:10 PM Response to Reply #164 |
174. It is disingenuous to require proof of a proposition when you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshlbetts
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:31 PM Response to Reply #174 |
234. I'm not being disingenuous. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 11:47 PM Response to Reply #234 |
236. Which link contains structural drawings for the WTC? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshlbetts
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:15 AM Response to Reply #236 |
260. dailykoff, Here are some copies of the actual drawings and calculations. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 12:44 AM Response to Reply #260 |
276. Thanks, that's helpful. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 06:53 PM Response to Reply #163 |
172. The burning drips look a lot like burning molten plastic. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 07:07 PM Response to Reply #172 |
173. It appears to be giving off light. In my experience burning |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 08:05 PM Response to Reply #172 |
177. this is the only image of melting plastic i could.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 10:05 PM Response to Reply #177 |
179. Just put a plastic bag on a stick and stick over a small fire. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:30 AM Response to Reply #179 |
191. Sounds like an easily-tested hypothesis. Please provide |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 07:25 AM Response to Reply #191 |
253. I hate to break this to you, but pictures on the internet is not science. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 10:42 AM Response to Reply #253 |
257. It proves my point. The material in the firefall at WTC2 was incandescent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:45 PM Response to Reply #257 |
269. sorry, I don't think you don't understand what you're seeing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:08 PM Response to Reply #269 |
270. I understand what I'm seeing just fine. Maybe my diction is off. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:27 AM Response to Reply #177 |
189. "can never be proven beyond doubt" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:40 AM Response to Reply #189 |
194. there will always be those that doubt or.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:46 AM Response to Reply #194 |
197. It looks like molten steel to me, and no alternate explanation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:51 AM Response to Reply #197 |
200. Then take your own suggestion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:03 AM Response to Reply #200 |
204. I don't need to. I already have, I've melted plastic, steel, and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:09 AM Response to Reply #204 |
209. So post your images as you've asked others to. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:55 AM Response to Reply #204 |
218. Oh, and that reminds me.... epistemology |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:50 AM Response to Reply #189 |
198. Melt steel, melt aluminum, melt plastic, pour them off a fifty foot drop.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:52 AM Response to Reply #198 |
201. The ball's in your court. Everyone knows plastic make flames, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:58 AM Response to Reply #201 |
203. No, it isn't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:05 AM Response to Reply #203 |
205. So take my suggestion. Let's build a bad model that endures, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:08 AM Response to Reply #205 |
208. According to your suggestion (which you've now changed), it is so |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:19 PM Response to Reply #208 |
231. Sorry, I got this experiment mixed up with another one I |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Wed Jul-12-06 01:59 AM Response to Reply #231 |
291. "I'd had a few bottles of wine." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 02:38 AM Response to Reply #231 |
294. Have you recovered sufficiently from those "few bottles of wine" yet to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 11:03 AM Response to Reply #294 |
300. Nope, nor have a got photos showing rain is wet and sun is dry. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 09:48 PM Response to Reply #300 |
307. I'm not surprised that you haven't backed up what you said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 01:29 AM Response to Reply #172 |
185. Couldn't it be aluminum from the airplane that was burnt up inside the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrokenBeyondRepair
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:29 AM Response to Reply #185 |
190. unlikely.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:45 AM Response to Reply #190 |
196. That's not convincing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:50 AM Response to Reply #196 |
199. Aluminium melts at 600 degrees, at which point it is silvery, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:57 AM Response to Reply #199 |
202. Sorry, but I'm not convinced by your say so that it could not have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:07 AM Response to Reply #202 |
206. Pffft. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:11 AM Response to Reply #206 |
210. I didn't expect you to be able to respond meaningfully. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:12 AM Response to Reply #210 |
212. Pfft. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:16 AM Response to Reply #212 |
213. Pfft is right! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:31 AM Response to Reply #212 |
215. Oh, an edit which I should respond to, I see. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:41 AM Response to Reply #199 |
238. Pearls at Swine, PG...nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:56 AM Response to Reply #238 |
241. LOL. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
capt havermeyer
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:17 AM Response to Original message |
152. This is pretty funny |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheRealSwede
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 12:05 PM Response to Reply #152 |
155. Science Experiment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JudgeSmails
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 02:16 PM Response to Original message |
165. Fantastic |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
what the
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 03:54 PM Response to Original message |
170. Test Explosive Demolition Hypothesis |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 07:11 PM Response to Reply #170 |
175. Now that's funny! Let's try the thermate hypothesis instead, ok? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
what the
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 04:25 PM Response to Reply #175 |
287. Blacksmith's forge |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 01:30 AM Response to Reply #287 |
293. Charcoal forges have forced air. They also have.... charcoal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
what the
![]() |
Fri Jul-14-06 08:31 PM Response to Reply #293 |
309. Heat conduction etc. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Sat Jul-15-06 12:46 AM Response to Reply #309 |
310. You stole those words from my mouth... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 01:39 AM Response to Reply #170 |
186. LOL ~ good one! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
allfathersgodi
![]() |
Fri Jul-07-06 11:19 PM Response to Original message |
182. You guys are nuts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:22 AM Response to Original message |
188. Sorry, doesn't prove a thing either way. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:35 AM Response to Reply #188 |
192. Ahhhh, you're getting to the synthesis. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:38 AM Response to Reply #192 |
193. Not just any model |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:43 AM Response to Reply #193 |
195. Not necessarily. Building bad models can be helpful to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:08 AM Response to Reply #195 |
207. What's a good model, how do you know it's good? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:11 AM Response to Reply #207 |
211. "I doubt that any of us has the means" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:31 AM Response to Reply #211 |
214. We can't go on unverifiable information |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 02:27 PM Response to Reply #214 |
232. We don't have the means to model it accurately. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 02:29 AM Response to Reply #232 |
237. it'd not be a known error because we have no reference, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 10:46 AM Response to Reply #237 |
258. I didn't mean a "known error" as in a "measured" or |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:24 PM Response to Reply #258 |
271. np. However, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 11:01 AM Response to Reply #271 |
299. We can't know how large the error is until we experiment and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Sat Jul-15-06 01:52 AM Response to Reply #299 |
311. Fine procedure for challenging the Titanic hoax. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Sat Jul-15-06 10:42 AM Response to Reply #311 |
312. New kid in town, posting like the old OCT'ers in town. Imagine that! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Sat Jul-15-06 10:50 AM Response to Reply #312 |
313. Glass houses, Mr. June 26th. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Sun Jul-16-06 09:20 PM Response to Reply #313 |
315. See post #314 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
salvorhardin
![]() |
Sun Jul-16-06 08:28 PM Response to Reply #312 |
314. You know... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carefulplease
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 12:38 PM Response to Reply #195 |
229. The press might be interested... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
allfathersgodi
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 12:21 PM Response to Original message |
228. The Stupidity of the Left |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 01:04 PM Response to Reply #228 |
230. Good point, but I'd like to think some Democrats and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 03:02 AM Response to Reply #228 |
243. Actually quite a few GOP have come out |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omenapoint
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 03:18 PM Response to Original message |
233. is this a joke? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
demfool
![]() |
Sat Jul-08-06 04:40 PM Response to Original message |
235. You are an idiot |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:27 AM Response to Reply #235 |
264. See how easy it is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:27 PM Response to Reply #264 |
272. And who would suspect that anyone with a screen name |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:36 PM Response to Reply #272 |
273. Surely, just another one of those totally unexpected COINCIDENCES. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:44 PM Response to Reply #272 |
274. Are you saying that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:50 PM Response to Reply #274 |
275. Incredible and unprecedented as it may seem, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 10:09 AM Response to Reply #275 |
283. I'm shocked.nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Stella_Artois
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 06:53 AM Response to Original message |
252. You are famous |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 08:54 AM Response to Reply #252 |
254. So I'e heard. Although I'm not really clear why what I did is so |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DrDebug
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:21 AM Response to Reply #254 |
262. Those people don't talk for all of us |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Old and In the Way
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:28 AM Response to Reply #254 |
265. I agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:29 AM Response to Reply #254 |
266. What is the saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:39 AM Response to Reply #266 |
267. what's funny to me is how they point to this experiment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
emMingo
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 09:30 AM Response to Reply #267 |
277. Because those of us living in NYC |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 09:58 AM Response to Reply #277 |
279. uh-huh, sure you did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 09:50 AM Response to Reply #267 |
278. Different reasons, depending on where one is coming from |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 09:59 AM Response to Reply #267 |
280. They NEVER post on the threads |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuddyYoung
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 01:29 PM Response to Reply #280 |
285. I hadn't noticed that, but you are certainly right. A jazz bump, then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Tue Jul-11-06 02:30 AM Response to Reply #280 |
289. Lol ~ that must be it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 11:48 AM Response to Reply #267 |
284. Once they saw these pictures, there was no need to look for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jazz2006
![]() |
Tue Jul-11-06 02:25 AM Response to Reply #267 |
288. It's could be the footwear. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Generarth
![]() |
Fri Jul-14-06 08:25 AM Response to Reply #254 |
308. I think you did it with the full knowledge of the results |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 11:23 AM Response to Reply #252 |
263. Those who say that about DU are going to say it anyway |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Stella_Artois
![]() |
Mon Jul-10-06 03:03 PM Response to Reply #263 |
286. Who knows |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 10:53 AM Response to Reply #286 |
298. Spooked is not claiming the rabbit cage experiment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun Jul-09-06 09:15 AM Response to Original message |
256. Deleted message |
Freedom_Aflaim
![]() |
Tue Jul-11-06 11:09 AM Response to Original message |
290. LMAO...Can you say "not to scale" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 10:51 AM Response to Reply #290 |
297. Not to scale is right. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
boolean
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 02:53 PM Response to Reply #297 |
301. How?! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 06:31 PM Response to Reply #301 |
304. Welcome to DU, Boolean |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
boolean
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 07:26 PM Response to Reply #304 |
305. Now it's my turn |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Jul-13-06 07:55 PM Response to Reply #305 |
306. Ok |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Redstone
![]() |
Sun Jul-16-06 09:23 PM Response to Original message |
316. You REALLY need to find a different hobby. Just friendly advice. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lithos
![]() |
Sun Jul-16-06 09:32 PM Response to Original message |
317. Locking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Mon Jun 16th 2025, 04:23 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
![]() |
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