RRC Archives

Of all the thousands of fantastic claims that the truthers make, including many that are mutually exclusive, I asked truthmiracle to prove that just one of his claims was true, just one. He chose to provide a link to an article about nanothermite that made demonstrably false statements in it's very first sentence.

EricDorsey asked him to provide just one unassailable piece of evidence that supported his position. Truthmiracle trotted out a piece of nonsense about how it was impossible for the "gravity driven" collapse of the buildings to have been responsible for the presence of human bone fragments on the roof of at least one other building in the area. A building who's roof was some 800 feet lower than the twin towers.

I must say, truthmiracle, a very weak performance.

truthmiracle wrote: WIDELY UNREPORTED in the mainstream media, the lateral ejection of VERY many multi ton steel members of the twin towers. How does a gravity driven, natural collapse send very many multi-ton pieces of steel 600 ft. (Two football fields, end to end) sideways? (70-100+ mph clocked- sideways or lateral movement. Gravity pulls straight down... I thought we were all climbers here...)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHnLlwqiu0A 3:31

Just for grins

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavk ... 82383CCA91 5:32

"What do you see?"

Have you ever stomped your foot into mud? What happens? Everything around your foot gets push up and outward at high speed. You might even be able to hit someone far away with mud. The WTC was built as an exoskeleton type building. The outer shell did all the work holding up the building. The shell acted like a huge piston shaft. All of the collapsed building above the plane impact drove down the piston shaft so to speak generating a lot of pressure in the building below blowing out windows because of the air blast that is in front of the falling floors acting as the piston. There is debris on the outside clearly ahead of every blast. On the inside I'd imagine a column being pile driven (have you ever seen a pile driver) ahead of the collapsing floors inside the building to produce the blast several floors ahead of the main falling mass. Maybe the driven pile (column) impacted a closed room and popped it like a balloon. There are logical answers for all of this.

That's right TradMike. It's interesting that these videos are supposedly proof of controlled demolition, when in fact they pretty well prove that the "official theory" of the collapse of the towers is right on. Of course truthmiracle is too far gone to get any of this, but I only participated in the demolition of his argument for the possible benefit of others. I've got the dirt bike loaded up and I'm headed to Idaho for the weekend. Have a good one, my friends.

My only take is that during the Clinton administration there was a 60 Minutes episode with an AL Qaeda spokeman who explained the groups desire to use commercial aircraft to commit terror attacks. Initially the aim was to hi-jack around twelve aircraft and blow them up over the Pacific Ocean. The cause for 9/11 is hatred, the reason it happened was a failure in intelligence agencies working together. The flights were reconnoitered, the pilots trained on flight simulators openly expressing no need to learn to land, the suicide videos were made. The lack of cooperation among intelligence agencies was the fatal flaw in our defenses not the metallurgy of the buildings. Just as obama told the country he planned to radically change it, hence the debt crisis, businesses' left with nothing but uncertainty, unending and expanding wars, the erosion of the dollar, overregulation of business, the radical overhaul of health care, the criminal lack of oversight on the borders, the attorney general's use of race and class to define justice, etc etc etc, al qaeda told us what they planned to do and we allowed it to happen just as we have allowed obama to pursue his criminal ventures.

LK Day wrote:Caribe, My statement about building 7 " when thousands of tons of debris from the WTC came crashing into it" is not credible? Well, I guess you're right. I have no idea how many tons of debris hit it.

Actually, I was talking about the second tower so I was the one talking about non-related stuff. Sorry I'll put an editorial comment in the previous post.

truthmiracle wrote:

EricDorsey wrote:Truthmiracle-

WIDELY UNREPORTED in the mainstream media, the lateral ejection of VERY many multi ton steel members of the twin towers. How does a gravity driven, natural collapse send very many multi-ton pieces of steel 600 ft. (Two football fields, end to end) sideways? (70-100+ mph clocked- sideways or lateral movement. Gravity pulls straight down... I thought we were all climbers here...)

Well, since we're all climbers here... by your logic, a belayer is completely impervious to rock fall as long as he is not standing directly underneath the climber. And here we've been wearing these stupid helmets the whole time!

Your knowledge of physics is infantile. It seems to be based on the belief that anything that releases stored energy is, by definition, a bomb. Do you understand how much stored energy is contained in a free standing structure that weighs half a million tons? If it is released (translation: building falls down), all kinds of craziness is going to ensue. People are going to experience shaking and what feel like "explosions". Girders and other big heavy things are going to be forced in directions other than STRAIGHT DOWN. Yes, they will move horizontally, hundreds of feet.

You want a real government conspiracy to masturbate to? Look up MKULTRA. Stop wasting time with this bullshit.

ted wrote:dude.....you have been waiting along time for the oppurtunity to bring this up havn't you! bahahaha.......thats me horse laughing.

No. Actually, I've strenuously avoided bringing it up here for a very long time now. I think it should be pretty clear why, if you're following this thread. I much prefer to do this in person. I find the results are much better and the process is infinitely more pleasant. The internet is very tempting to use, because it's so easy to present evidence, but it's rife with government agents and the whole "F-you" attitude that many people have on the web is unhealthy and unenjoyable. The impersonal nature of the medium just seems to bring out the worst in people, and I've had way more than enough of that.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/18/r ... al-people/

note: "Manufacturing Consent" is a good read, by Noam Chomsky, on how the mass media manipulates public opinion. It's carefully researched and thoroughly referenced.

Some of my friends are really into the online debates. I never have been. I just see it as a duty I have to relay the evidence. A friend who is against this sort of activism told me that arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics- even if you win, you're still retarded. LOL. (I've been a special educator and advocate for those with disabilities, so I'm far from insensitive to their plight. But, I can still appreciate a well intended joke.)

LK Day wrote:OK, so that's it? Nanothermite? Your one great truth? Really?

The very first line of your linked article reads:

"In the last few years, a series of peer-reviewed scientific articles has been published that establish the presence of thermitic material at the World Trade Center (WTC). (A-D)."

That's interesting, until one discovers that the listed "peer reviewed journals" in question are open source online publications, not something that any scientist, engineer or academic would call a peer-reviewed journal. What a joke. Well, not really. truthmiracle's linked article attempts to deceive in it's very first sentence. Now that all the truther's original claims have been thoroughly debunked - "Not one Jew died at the World Trade Centers on 9/11", "Those were not civilian airliners that struck the twin towers and the Pentagon", they've moved on to more technical arguments and minutia -in the hope that we will be wowed by their "scientific" case. Still it's the same old crap. Oh, and the principal promoter of the nanothermite tall tale? Steven Earl Jones, recognize that name? He's one of the "cold fusion" guys and a hard-core truther from Brigham Young university where he ended up losing his job over his bullshit science. Nice try.

A peer reviewer of the nanothermite paper has identified himself- info below. "open" does not mean wide open, it means available to all without a subscription. Here's a brief excerpt from the statement of the peer reviewer when he identified himself. I encourage everyone to read his entire statement- link below

II. The 2009 publication in The Open Chemical Physics Journal (TOCPJ) of a fabulous paper by Harrit et al. entitled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”

Some disparagers of the 9/11 Truth movement have alleged that TOCPJ is a place on the web where anybody can buy a publication without peer review.

Absolutely false!

I know this because I was one of the referees of the Harrit et al. paper. The editors asked for my opinion. And after about two weeks of studying what the authors had written, checking relevant references, and gathering my thoughts, I finally provided my advice to authors in 12 single-spaced pages, together with my recommendation to the Editors that they publish the paper after the authors had considered my suggestions.

Still, some skeptical readers may ask how anyone can rate a scientific paper as “fabulous.” Well, I am the principal author of 109 papers (and a co-author of an additional 81) in peer-review journals. And have refereed a least 600, and possibly as many as 1000, manuscripts. So you would be right in calling me an aficionado of articles published in scientific journals. And I found absolutely nothing to criticize in the final version of the Harrit et al. paper! Apropos, twelve of my own publications have appeared in the American Institute of Physics’ Journal of Chemical Physics (an old fashioned paper journal), so it is accurate to say that chemical physics (of inorganic materials) is my main specialty.

http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/2010 ... getic.html

LK Day wrote:Caribe,
My statement about building 7 " when thousands of tons of debris from the WTC came crashing into it" is not credible? Well, I guess you're right. I have no idea how many tons of debris hit it. But it certainly was struck and severely damaged by debris from the collapse of the towers.

Again, my article on WTC buildings 3, 4, 5 and 6. Compare their damage, and failure to fall, to the damage done to WTC 7 and the way it came down.

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-secti ... words.html

LK Day wrote:Of all the thousands of fantastic claims that the truthers make, including many that are mutually exclusive, I asked truthmiracle to prove that just one of his claims was true, just one. He chose to provide a link to an article about nanothermite that made demonstrably false statements in it's very first sentence.

EricDorsey asked him to provide just one unassailable piece of evidence that supported his position. Truthmiracle trotted out a piece of nonsense about how it was impossible for the "gravity driven" collapse of the buildings to have been responsible for the presence of human bone fragments on the roof of at least one other building in the area. A building who's roof was some 800 feet lower than the twin towers.

I must say, truthmiracle, a very weak performance.

Sorry, time is short, and so am I. Given the time, all of your complaints can be adequately addressed. After awhile though, this gets very tiresome, because it should be so obvious what actually happened on 9/11, from very many standpoints.

In a gravity driven collapse, with no explosions, it would be reasonable to assume that the vast majority of victims would be trapped in the debris, correct? Why is it that zero remains, not even enough to identify by DNA- which doesn't take much at all- were found for the majority of the victims? Why is it that firefighter Joe Casaliggi has said, "You're talking 2 110 story office buildings... you don't find a desk, you don't find a chair, you don't find a computer, a telephone... the biggest piece of a telephone I found was about half the key pad, and it was about this big" (Holds up fingers indicating 2-3 inches. (at 6:21)

7:21 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZ ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQLCYR9iROs