| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How" |
| Date: |
06 Apr 2006 09:22:04 PM |
| Object: |
Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7
were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that there
never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as tall as the
Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of control as long as
the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas. It
dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor shafts
as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the officed were
pussed into a big pile by the impact of the planes. In the dense,
low oxygen conditios, they would burn very hot (like a wood stove
does when you close the damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame temperatures
are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch, are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor beams
to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the combined
stress of holding extra load from the damaged building, the flooe
beams warping under the own weight due to the heat, and the fact
the bolts holding the floor giders to the exterior walls were too
smallin diameter to take the extra stress of heat/weight transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained the
main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in sheet rock to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih with out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to the
fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and electricals
burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged furnature pushed
into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic chemistry
and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately
prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the trembling
produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it. That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be put out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage - nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires were
likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the use of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based on
nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in applications
requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation munitions,
pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit from super-
thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
--
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
07 Apr 2006 07:13:57 AM |
|
|
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
Nah. The System is too strong. It's now a living Being. Viruses are
nothing to it, like HIV is nothing to its host. Please see
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/SUPORGLI.html
Have a nice day.
Do nothing inappropriate.
Wear your rubbers.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
07 Apr 2006 01:05:34 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7
were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that there
never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as tall as the
Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of control as long as
the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas. It
dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor shafts
as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the officed were
pussed into a big pile by the impact of the planes. In the dense,
low oxygen conditios, they would burn very hot (like a wood stove
does when you close the damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame temperatures
are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch, are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor beams
to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the combined
stress of holding extra load from the damaged building, the flooe
beams warping under the own weight due to the heat, and the fact
the bolts holding the floor giders to the exterior walls were too
smallin diameter to take the extra stress of heat/weight transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained the
main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in sheet rock to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih with out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to the
fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and electricals
burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged furnature pushed
into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic chemistry
and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately
prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the trembling
produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it. That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be put out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage - nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires were
likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the use of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based on
nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in applications
requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation munitions,
pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit from super-
thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it say
anything about extended burning times? You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and again,
and again.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large target
flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and kookpages.
You're a joke, and a sad one.
BDK
.
|
|
|
| User: "Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
07 Apr 2006 01:37:13 PM |
|
|
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7
were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that there
never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as tall as the
Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of control as long as
the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas. It
dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor shafts
as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the officed were
pussed into a big pile by the impact of the planes. In the dense,
low oxygen conditios, they would burn very hot (like a wood stove
does when you close the damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame temperatures
are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch, are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor beams
to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the combined
stress of holding extra load from the damaged building, the flooe
beams warping under the own weight due to the heat, and the fact
the bolts holding the floor giders to the exterior walls were too
smallin diameter to take the extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained the
main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to the
fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and electricals
burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged furnature pushed
into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic chemistry
and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately
prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the trembling
produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires were
likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based on
nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in applications
requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation munitions,
pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit from super-
thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it say
anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and again,
and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is such
a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for taking down the
towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large target
flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
--
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Animal Nomailfor me@com,com" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
08 Apr 2006 10:27:48 AM |
|
|
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
<> wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7
were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that there
never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as tall as the
Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of control as long as
the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas. It
dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor shafts
as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the officed were
pussed into a big pile by the impact of the planes. In the dense,
low oxygen conditios, they would burn very hot (like a wood stove
does when you close the damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame temperatures
are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch, are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor beams
to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the combined
stress of holding extra load from the damaged building, the flooe
beams warping under the own weight due to the heat, and the fact
the bolts holding the floor giders to the exterior walls were too
smallin diameter to take the extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained the
main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to the
fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and electricals
burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged furnature pushed
into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic chemistry
and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately
prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the trembling
produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires were
likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based on
nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in applications
requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation munitions,
pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit from super-
thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it say
anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and again,
and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is such
a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for taking down the
towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large target
flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make oyu an
expert in every field of study.
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
--
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
08 Apr 2006 10:54:36 AM |
|
|
"Animal" <Nomailfor me@com,com> wrote in
news:123flje63728591@corp.supernews.com:
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
<jasonzc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
jasonzc@yahoo.com says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in
building 7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel
girders, bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge
and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to
the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted
areas. It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and
evelavtor shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper
in the officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of
the planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would
burn very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the
damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due
to the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor giders
to the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that
sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of
it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the
ground further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could
not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for
munitions because of this material's pressure sensitivity and
extremely fast ignition time. The performance of super-thermite
reactions based on nanosized powders is leading to significant
advances in applications requiring heat-releasing reactions.
Next-generation munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers
stand to benefit from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
Easy to say. Now prove me wrong.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for
taking down the towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
If you think you can get them to post to Usenet, please do so.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large
target flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and
kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make
oyu an
expert in every field of study.
But it does make you subject to scrutiny. So why haven't their findings
been challenged by academia?
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
You sucked ***** in the 6th grade?
--
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Animal Nomailfor me@com,com" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
09 Apr 2006 12:35:24 PM |
|
|
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
<jasonzc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns979F6EF9BED6212345666@207.14.113.17...
"Animal" <Nomailfor me@com,com> wrote in
news:123flje63728591@corp.supernews.com:
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
<jasonzc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
jasonzc@yahoo.com says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in
building 7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel
girders, bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge
and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to
the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted
areas. It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and
evelavtor shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper
in the officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of
the planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would
burn very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the
damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due
to the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor giders
to the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that
sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of
it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the
ground further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could
not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for
munitions because of this material's pressure sensitivity and
extremely fast ignition time. The performance of super-thermite
reactions based on nanosized powders is leading to significant
advances in applications requiring heat-releasing reactions.
Next-generation munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers
stand to benefit from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
Easy to say. Now prove me wrong.
The burden is on you to prove yourself correct.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for
taking down the towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
If you think you can get them to post to Usenet, please do so.
THe burden of proof is on you.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large
target flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and
kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make
oyu an
expert in every field of study.
But it does make you subject to scrutiny. So why haven't their findings
been challenged by academia?
Simple answer, waste of time, sort of like not challenging someone's
assertions that the moon is made of green cheese.
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
You sucked ***** in the 6th grade?
<YAWN>
--
Hi! I'm the .sig virus that will destroy Usenet. Please add me to your
sig. - END USENET NOW http://www.bedoper.com/usenet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
09 Apr 2006 12:19:12 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns979F6EF9BED6212345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
"Animal" <Nomailfor me@com,com> wrote in
news:123flje63728591@corp.supernews.com:
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
< > wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in
building 7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel
girders, bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge
and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to
the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted
areas. It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and
evelavtor shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper
in the officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of
the planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would
burn very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the
damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due
to the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor giders
to the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that
sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of
it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the
ground further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could
not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for
munitions because of this material's pressure sensitivity and
extremely fast ignition time. The performance of super-thermite
reactions based on nanosized powders is leading to significant
advances in applications requiring heat-releasing reactions.
Next-generation munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers
stand to benefit from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
Easy to say. Now prove me wrong.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for
taking down the towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
If you think you can get them to post to Usenet, please do so.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large
target flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and
kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make
oyu an
expert in every field of study.
But it does make you subject to scrutiny. So why haven't their findings
been challenged by academia?
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
You sucked ***** in the 6th grade?
Hey, you're the guy who brought it up. I'll give you some credit and
say, oh, eighth grade..
BDK
.
|
|
|
| User: "Animal Nomailfor me@com,com" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
09 Apr 2006 12:31:36 PM |
|
|
"BDK" <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ea30c1cccdd6830989eb8@news.buckeye-express.com...
In article <Xns979F6EF9BED6212345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
"Animal" <Nomailfor me@com,com> wrote in
news:123flje63728591@corp.supernews.com:
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
< > wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in
building 7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel
girders, bearings, ans other steel componates used in
bridge
and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to
the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted
areas. It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and
evelavtor shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper
in the officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of
the planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would
burn very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the
damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a
blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due
to the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor
giders
to the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih
contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that
sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of
it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the
ground further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could
not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough
to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for
weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of
the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on
end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for
munitions because of this material's pressure sensitivity and
extremely fast ignition time. The performance of super-thermite
reactions based on nanosized powders is leading to significant
advances in applications requiring heat-releasing reactions.
Next-generation munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers
stand to benefit from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does
it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated,
can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
Easy to say. Now prove me wrong.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there
is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for
taking down the towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
If you think you can get them to post to Usenet, please do so.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large
target flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out
what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and
kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11
truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make
oyu an
expert in every field of study.
But it does make you subject to scrutiny. So why haven't their findings
been challenged by academia?
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
You sucked ***** in the 6th grade?
Hey, you're the guy who brought it up. I'll give you some credit and
say, oh, eighth grade..
By the eighth grade, he was probably taking it up the backside,
considering the experience he has shown here getting his ***** reamed. :-)
BDK
.
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
09 Apr 2006 08:03:53 PM |
|
|
In article <123ih7q2fl3auf6@corp.supernews.com>, "Animal" <Nomailfor
me@com,com> says...
"BDK" <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ea30c1cccdd6830989eb8@news.buckeye-express.com...
In article <Xns979F6EF9BED6212345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
"Animal" <Nomailfor me@com,com> wrote in
news:123flje63728591@corp.supernews.com:
"Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How"
< > wrote in message
news:Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in
building 7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel
girders, bearings, ans other steel componates used in
bridge
and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to
the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted
areas. It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and
evelavtor shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper
in the officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of
the planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would
burn very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the
damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a
blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due
to the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor
giders
to the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih
contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that
sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of
it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the
ground further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could
not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough
to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for
weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of
the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on
end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for
munitions because of this material's pressure sensitivity and
extremely fast ignition time. The performance of super-thermite
reactions based on nanosized powders is leading to significant
advances in applications requiring heat-releasing reactions.
Next-generation munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers
stand to benefit from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does
it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated,
can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
Were you born cluless, or have you just always been that way?
Easy to say. Now prove me wrong.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there
is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for
taking down the towers.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
i.e. "I don't want to be publicly made a fool of.
If you think you can get them to post to Usenet, please do so.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large
target flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out
what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and
kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11
truth
movement. Why is that?
Free hint to the clueless, have PhD after your name doesn't make
oyu an
expert in every field of study.
But it does make you subject to scrutiny. So why haven't their findings
been challenged by academia?
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Haven't seen such a witty comback like that since the 6th grade.
You sucked ***** in the 6th grade?
Hey, you're the guy who brought it up. I'll give you some credit and
say, oh, eighth grade..
By the eighth grade, he was probably taking it up the backside,
considering the experience he has shown here getting his ***** reamed. :-)
BDK
Well, you've got to go with your strengths, right?
BDK
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BDK" |
|
| Title: Re: This summer - it's 9/11, the movie |
08 Apr 2006 09:20:53 AM |
|
|
In article <Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7
were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that there
never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as tall as the
Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of control as long as
the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas. It
dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor shafts
as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the officed were
pussed into a big pile by the impact of the planes. In the dense,
low oxygen conditios, they would burn very hot (like a wood stove
does when you close the damper) and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame temperatures
are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch, are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor beams
to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the combined
stress of holding extra load from the damaged building, the flooe
beams warping under the own weight due to the heat, and the fact
the bolts holding the floor giders to the exterior walls were too
smallin diameter to take the extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained the
main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to the
fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and electricals
burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged furnature pushed
into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic chemistry
and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately
prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the trembling
produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires were
likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based on
nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in applications
requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation munitions,
pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit from super-
thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it say
anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
And how would "pools of molten metal" be insulated to stay molten? Since
there's no radiation involved, what's the heat source? Please don't make
a fool out of yourself and claim it's thermite. You might as well claim
Kingsford charcoal briquets.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and again,
and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is such
a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for taking down the
towers.
Hardly perfect, not even close.
Why don't you talk to an engineer about the WTC collapses..
Have a few email me, if you want.
Why is it my job to find them for you? Get out the phone book and look
them up. Pay them the cash, and LEARN.
Why not talk to a chemist about thermite and "super-thermite"?
Why?
Why?? Because you don't know what you are talking about!
Why not talk to a pilot about how difficult it is to hit a large target
flying a jetliner? (WTC 1&2)
Why?
Why?? Because you don't know what you are talking about!
We make suggestions like talking to a REAL expert to find out what
really happens, and you guys post ***** from non-experts and kookpages.
You ignore the many PhDs and high-level officials in the 9/11 truth
movement. Why is that?
My damn brother in law is a PhD. Whoopie. I have to tell him how to hook
up his stereo and VCR every time they move.
You have a few "odd" (and odd is the important part of the description)
people claiming this and that, but yet you won't contact anyone who
isn't trying to get hits on a page, or publicity for a kookbook, since
they will shoot you down instantly.
You're a <slap>
Shut the ***** up, you filthy *****.
Best you can come up with, huh?
Like I said where you snipped, you're a joke, and a sad one too.
BDK
.
|
|
|
| User: "Your ISP Hosts Child Porn, Warez, Movies - Ask Me How" |
|
| Title: Killfile Candidate BDK Won't Stop Whining |
08 Apr 2006 10:39:34 AM |
|
|
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea190cf27388128989ea4@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979E8A8D1811A12345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1ea073fca031d918989e98@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <Xns979DD95C59A5612345666@207.14.113.17>,
says...
BDK <kingratay@buckeye-express.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1e9f92cfc8d5565f989e96@news.buckeye-express.com:
In article <RJgZf.6354$tT.1856@news01.roc.ny>,
vandar69@yahoo.com says...
Freedom Fighter wrote:
"Rev. Richard Skull" <mshotz@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1144282313.873335.165630@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<<No steel frame building has EVER
collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building
7 were limited, not extensive.>.
I'm sure the fact that th North Tower fell on top of #7 had
nothing
to do with it.
It did NOT, liar.
Some of it most certainly did.
There have been several instances of steel structured being
damaged
by fires. I work for a company that fabricates steel girders,
bearings, ans other steel componates used in bridge and
buildings.
The heat from the fire weakings the steel. There have been
several
fires that have damaged steel bridges (and structures) to the
point
that the buildings/bridges had to be condemed. Just that
there never has been a fire in a steel fromed building as
tall as the Twin towers or that was allowed to burn out of
control as long as the fires.
It did not burn for long at all - the jet fuel was consumed
within
a few minutes.
Steel frame buildings may have been condemned, but DID NOT
COLLAPSE
from fires.
Untrue
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
And the jet fuel did not just burn around the impacted areas.
It dripped down the stairwells, untility shafts and evelavtor
shafts as it was burning. The furnature and paper in the
officed were pussed into a big pile by the impact of the
planes. In the dense, low oxygen conditios, they would burn
very hot (like a wood stove does when you close the damper)
and slow.
You're showing your ignorance here. Low oxygen flame
temperatures are LOW; high oxygen flames, as in a blowtorch,
are much hotter.
The North Tower fell becuase teh bolts connecting the floor
beams to the interior and exterior girts failed due to the
combined stress of holding extra load from the damaged
building, the flooe beams warping under the own weight due to
the heat, and the fact the bolts holding the floor giders to
the exterior walls were too smallin diameter to take the
extra stress of heat/weight
transfer.
And you know all this how?
The South Tower fell due to the center well 9whcih contained
the main elevator shafts and stairwells) was enclosed in
sheet rock
to
save weight. The impact of teh plane litterly made that sheet
rock
disintergraete. The jet fuel flowed down the shaft, whcih
with
out
its fire protction acted like a chimney and feed oxygen to
the fire, whcih got hot enough to make the sheet rock and
electricals burn. Also like in teh North Tower, the damaged
furnature pushed into a pile burned hot & slow.
You need to learn to spell, as well as learn some basic
chemistry and physics.
<<Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge
bursts
of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers
immediately prior to their collapse. >>
The "spikes" were teh Towers falling dumbass!
The seismographs show the spikes occuring BEFORE the
trembling produced by the buiulding collapses, *****!
Buidling #7 had the top of the North Tower fall on top of it.
That
is why damaged the structure. The sprading fire on the ground
further weakened the structure of #7. The fire could not be
put
out
becuase most of th ewater mains were broken.
The towers fell straight down
Wrong
http://www.pire.org/prc/ssg/images/groundzero.gif
- watch the videos, or are you blind as well
as deaf and very dumb? Building 7 sustained little damage -
nothing
even nearly sufficient to cause it to collapse. The fires
were likewise almost insignificant.
Now you're just lying, hoping that someone is stupid enough to
actually buy your ***** without doing a little research
themselves.
Also don't forget the ruins of both toweres burned for weeks
afyer
9/11.
Yes, and the molten steel below then is good evidence of the
use
of
thermite explosives!
Horseshit! Thermite does not burn for weeks.
But Vandar, it's SUPER thermite! Able to burn for weeks on end!
BDK
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=3045
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
ignition time. The performance of super-thermite reactions based
on nanosized powders is leading to significant advances in
applications requiring heat-releasing reactions. Next-generation
munitions, pyrotechnics, detonators, and primers stand to benefit
from super- thermites and other nanomaterials.
Dumbass...
And you still don't know what you are talking about. Where does it
say anything about extended burning times?
Where did I?
Metals heated to a high enough temperature, properly insulated, can
remain molten for quite some time. Particularly if coupled with
radioactivity. See the core of the earth for an example.
And how would "pools of molten metal" be insulated to stay molten?
Since there's no radiation involved, what's the heat source? Please
don't make a fool out of yourself and claim it's thermite. You might
as well claim Kingsford charcoal briquets.
Dr. Keith Eaton toured Ground Zero and stated in The Structural Engineer,
‘They showed us many fascinating slides’ [Eaton] continued, ‘ranging from
molten metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch
thick steel plates sheared and bent in the disaster’. (Structural
Engineer, September 3, 2002, p. 6; emphasis added.)
I guess you should take it up with the doctor, and Structural Engineer.
Also, Johns Hopkins Public Health. PhDs, strutural engineers vs. some
dork shill on Usnet.
Hmmm. Who are we to believe?
The observation of molten metal at Ground Zero was emphasized publicly by
Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer responsible for the design of
the World Trade Center Towers, who reported that “As of 21 days after the
attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.”
(Williams, 2001, p. 3; emphasis added.)
Sarah Atlas was part of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and
Rescue and was one of the first on the scene at Ground Zero with her
canine partner Anna. She reported in Penn Arts and Sciences, summer
2002,
‘Nobody's going to be alive.' Fires burned and molten steel flowed in
the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet. (Penn, 2002; emphasis
added.)
Notice that the molten metal was flowing down in the rubble pile early
on; so it is not the case that the molten metal pools formed due to
subterranean fires after the collapses. Dr. Allison Geyh was one of a
team of public health investigators from Johns Hopkins who visited the
WTC site after 9-11. She reported in the Late Fall 2001 issue of Magazine
of Johns Hopkins Public Health, "In some pockets now being uncovered they
are finding molten steel.”
A video clip provides eye-witness evidence regarding this
metal at ground zero: http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%
20archive/red_hot_ground_zero_low_quality.wmv . The observer notes that
the observed surface of this metal is still reddish-orange some six weeks
after 9-11. This implies a large quantity of a metal with fairly low
heat conductivity and a relatively large heat capacity (e.g., iron is
more likely than aluminum) even in an underground location. Like magma
in a volcanic cone, such metal might remain hot and molten for a long
time -- once the metal is sufficiently hot to melt in large quantities
and then kept in a fairly-well insulated underground location. Moreover,
as hypothesized below, thermite reactions may have resulted in
substantial quantities (observed in pools) of molten iron at very high
temperatures – initially above 2,000 °C (3,632 °F). At these
temperatures, aluminum materials from the buildings should continue to
undergo exothermic oxidation reactions with materials also entrained in
the molten metal pools including metal oxides, which will then keep the
pools molten and even growing for weeks despite radiative and conductive
losses.
I guess we can't expect a shill to understand science, or think.
You keep shooting this BS out
your holes and all you do is prove yourself ignorant. Again, and
again, and again.
What BS? You joked about super thermite, and I showed that there is
such a thing. A relatively new munition, in fact. Perfect for taking
down the towers.
Hardly perfect, not even close.
Wrong again, idiot. The applications of normal thermite are already well-
known.
The properties of super-thermites are ideally suited for munitions
because of this material's pressure sensitivity and extremely fast
igniti | | | | |
