BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 12:07 AM

"One of them has decided to tell the truth"? What am I missing here? The link you give is word for word the paragraph you posted.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 12:16 AM

No, Ebbie, the times are off. There was a lot of confusion on that day, so the "authorities" have gotten away with a lot due to the chaos. And the false WTC7 timeline is one of the lies they put out. According to what I just posted, the men were trapped in the bldg due to the collapsing towers, etc. That's been the story for years. But look at the gap in time...they went up into the bldg sometime before 10 and were trapped at 10:28. Those aren't stupid men. They could see the place was evacuated. They should have evacuated too. But they remained for more than half an hour?

That timeline has always seemed odd. Now the truth comes out. They picked up a phone and called to ask where everyone was, and they were told to get out quick. On the way down, the 6th floor landing was blown out. And this was BEFORE EITHER OF THE TOWERS FELL. Before plane #2 hit, even. Hence, a bomb went off.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 01:30 AM

But look at the gap in time...they went up into the bldg sometime before 10 and were trapped at 10:28. ...they remained for more than half an hour?

I don't see a time gap. If you're asking what they did during that thirty minutes, you're forgetting that elevators are always turned OFF in emergencies. I don't know about you, but it would probably take me the better part of thirty minutes just to climb 23 flights of stairs.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 02:00 AM

Let me be more clear.

The official story says these men were trapped inside WTC7 at 10:28, when the north tower fell. But the witness says the bomb went off before either tower fell. And, he says the bomb in WTC7 went off before plane #2 hit.

Plane #1 hit at 8:45 a.m.
Plane #2 hit at 9:03 a.m.

So these guys were in the building much earlier than was earlier reported. And WTC7 was not damaged by any "falling debris" at that point.

So, sometime between 8:45 and 9:03, a bomb blew out the 6th floor landing they were on. Then the second plane struck, then the towers fell.

That's the biggest timeline discrepancy. Why was there an explosion in WTC7 between 8:45 and 9:03?

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 10:05 AM

Sooo sweet,

why do you change your name with each new thread you start about the same theme? Do you think they will not be able to get at you this way?? You're wrong. They are already on your trail.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Becca72
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 10:28 AM

Wolfgang, they'll never find him/her....he/she has the tinfoil hat on.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 01:21 PM

I thought I requested no more smartass tinfoil hat jokes. And that applies to "little green men" too. Please.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 01:35 PM

Couldn't care less if "they" find me, Wolfgang. You from Germany? Would you have wanted to live under Hitler? Fuck the fascists. I'm ready to deal with them anytime, anywhere. More Germans should have adopted that attitude, rather than fleeing the country. Americans have freedom of speech, but a freedom not used doesn't exist.

So what about the time discrepancies, folks? Official version is these men were caught in the building at 10:28 a.m. But now it comes out they were in the building much earlier and saw/heard/felt/were injured by a bomb blast inside WTC7.

Since 9/11, the U.S. govt has shown itself to be gangster-controlled. The gangsters have announced pre-emptive nuclear strikes as an international policy, and at home they've said we have no more Bill of Rights or habeas corpus, and we can be disappeared at any time for "suspected" terrorism (terrorism is defined by the PATRIOT Act as the breaking of any federal or state law), and once you're disappeared you can be legally tortured to death. That's what Bush and the Democrats have put in place in America. Because it's a "post 9/11 world." I protested my taxes this year, and in some states that would have put me on the terrorist watch list.

9/11 is the pivotal event. I listened to 5 minutes of facist talk show host Sean Hannity yesterday, and he was talking about immigration "reform" which will "make the country safe." One of his (or someone's) schemes is to turn over all immigrant-status checks to Visa/Mastercard/American Express. Let them thumbscan to determine identity. Hannity said the govt should be doing this, then he snorted and said, "but you know how the government is." So, his alternative is to turn over governmental responsibilities to private business. That's raw, unapologetic fascism--the merging of business and government. The gangsters who control the U.S. and other western nations created the "event," and they've been backing us towards concentration camps ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 02:04 PM

Sooo sweet,

why then do you change your name with each new thread you start about the same theme?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 02:08 PM

Because S/HE is not afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 02:16 PM

LH,

"And that applies to "little green men" too."

1. They are reddish brown, not green.

2. They have as much ( no more OR less) right to be here as Chongo does.

3. The point is, if the POSSIBLE is to be considered, regardless of LIKELIHOOD, than the "aliens did it" is JUST as valid as the conspiracy theories with no proof. All most are asking for here is PROOF, not "it could have happeened, so that must be what happened."
What has been offered has been looked at, and found wanting, IMHO.

Can I PROVE that it was NOT a conspiracy? NO.
Can YOU PROVE that it was NOT aliens? Again, NO.

But both are in the highly unlikely catagory until SOME real evidence is presented.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 03:40 PM

As I've told you, BB, you really need to get a job with CNN. Or Fox. Or NBC. You're not getting paid nearly enough for the efforts you put in here on a daily basis, keeping us all informed.

I object to the term "little green men", because it is a standard expression used by those who wish to ridicule people with whom they do not agree about a certain subject. I similarly object to the terms "conspiracy theory" and "tinfoil hat", as they are used the same way. People who regularly use those terms to ridicule others should be made to walk naked through the raspberry bushes, whilst being pelted with fresh goose shit (in my opinion).

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 03:45 PM

You are certainly entitiled to your opinion.

I object to the term "BuShite", because it is a standard expression used by those who wish to ridicule people with whom they do not agree about a certain subject.


I also object to being told WHAT I think, when the person making the accusation has not even read what I have stated in the past, much less asked what I thought about whatever the topic is.

IMO, those people should be forced to listen to a listing of their faults until they run screaming from the thread. But I do not care to inflict that on the other people here.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Ythanside
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 03:51 PM

Little Hawk, I'm upset. What have little green men done to piss you off?

Signed: Little Green Man

:-D

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 03:55 PM

I agree with you about the term "BuShite", BB. It's another great example of the kind of thing I was objecting to. All those kind of terms are used to instantly dismiss and stigmatize other people. The terms "racist" and "sexist" are often used that way too...as cheap shots, and there is no effective way of defending oneself against being accused of being a racist or a sexist...or a BuShite.

"those people should be forced to listen to a listing of their faults until they run screaming from the thread"

Hey, that's what we have our "significant others" and close relatives for, isn't it? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 04:02 PM

Nothing, Ythanside. Nothing at all. I would be pleased, though, if any little green men who are out there would visit the people who keep bringing them up as a way of ridiculing serious UFO researchers...and subject those people to a series of unpleasant and demeaning examination procedures...and then drop them off in the middle of downtown Schenectady, stark naked. It would help even the playing field some.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Jun 07 - 05:32 PM

9/11 could be inside job?

Does Cheney shit in the woods?


I don't know.

if i did i probably would not be here.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Jun 07 - 02:42 AM

Peter T, you are an astute fellow.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Jun 07 - 04:59 PM

For once I find myself agreeing with bearded bruce in that last post of his. Discussions, however heated, should always involve responding to what people have actually said, and what is actually implied by that, not setting up Aunt Sallies we can easily knock down.

Our aim shouldn't be to "win an argument", but to explore and understand differences, and sometimes discover unexpected points where we actually agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 10 Jul 07 - 10:22 PM

Welcome to Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth!

As seen in this revealing photo the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:

1. Extremely rapid onset of "collapse"

2. Sounds of explosions at plane impact zone — a full second prior to collapse (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)

3. Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)

4. Squibs, or "mistimed" explosions, 40 floors below the "collapsing" building seen in all the videos

5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves

8. Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance

9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint

10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away

11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 - 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet

12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure.

13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (no other possible source other than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)

14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.

15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings

http://ae911truth.org/

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jul 07 - 09:31 PM

"no other possible source" etc

All this 'Secret Squirrel Conspiracy' nonsense has been debunked endlessly, here and elsewhere, before Mr Scientificly Ignorant Nutter.

Please go away to the appropriate forums - if you want to stay here - then please write witty songs about your areas of concern.

... la la la ...

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 11 Jul 07 - 10:39 PM

Thank you for attacking me. Construction steel has an extremely high melting point of about 2,800°. Open-air jet fuel fires might reach 1000° or so, so where did the heat needed to create the pools of molten steal come from?

----

An article in The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah describing an speaking appearance by Leslie Robertson (structural engineer responsible for the design of the World Trade Center) contains this passage:

As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running. 8   

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 11:19 AM

"so where did the heat needed to create the pools of molten steal come from?"

Your ignorance only makes you look stupid.

I also did black smithing - and when steel oxidises (burns) it gets hotter and hotter ... :-) called 'exothermic reaction'... :-) and there were other common chemicals present that catalysed and promoted the oxidising the reaction - and you saw the fire... and buried at the bottom of a pile of junk, it was pretty well insulated... (hint - dry wall among other things)...

If you don't know any Science, then don't make Conspiracy theories out of whole cloth using your ignorance.

All this 'Secret Squirrel Conspiracy' nonsense has been debunked endlessly, here and elsewhere" on the web...

Please go away - you are just embarrassing ...

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 11:23 AM

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july20


video of Moore blasting CNN

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 11:30 AM

What is the minimum temperature steel needs to reach in order to begin oxidizing, Foolestroup?

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 01:30 PM

Your statement is inane, foolstroupe. I'm a welder, among other things, so I've worked with metal too. No way an hour's worth of dispersed, burning jet fuel triggered such a reaction. The massive amounts of steel in the WTC towers were huge heat sinks. The steel absorbs heat (even the heat of an oxy-acetylene torch flame), and that heat is dissipated outwards. The thicker the steel, the deeper the heat sink. So, an hour's worth of unfocused heat on 3-4 inch thick steel columns ten feet around (47 columns in each building), would do NOTHING to affect the steel.

You are shown Kennedy being shot from the front while the narrator says "Then Oswald's final bullet finishes the job." You are shown controlled demolitions while the narrator says "Then the heat of the fires triggered the collapse."

Nothing but incendiary devices could have caused the pools of molten steel still in evidence weeks later.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 01:30 PM

The Thermite residue at ground zero is merely coincidental just like Marvin Bush being in charge of security contrators for the WTC is coincidental.

Exploring the behavior and use of Thermate is very interesting all the same. The radiation load from WTC after 9-11 is still very high. Granted the DU that is used in the wing tips of commercial airplanes is not enough to account for the radiation readings after 9-11.

Sometimes I wonder if the 1/2 billion dollars of gold bars recovered from ground zero is now radioactive. By the way thank Rudy for making the gold recovery the #1 priority after search and rescue operations were suspended.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 03:36 PM

Professor Steven E. Jones writes:

"...On the other hand, falling buildings (absent explosives) have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal. The government reports admit that the building fires were insufficient to melt steel beams — then where did the molten metal come from?"

http://www.physics911.net/stevenjones

So the government's own reports admit that there was not enough heat to melt steel and cause foolstroupe's "exothermic reaction."

Another problem with the "heat caused the collapses" theory is that the second building struck fell first. And the strike was a glancing blow. Why did both buildings fall in EXACTLY the same way, and why did the one the burned the shortest period of time fall first? Hammer that one out, foolstroupe.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 07:17 PM

Goodness, Foolestroupe. Such utter assurance on your part. ;-) What if you yourself are guilty of exactly what you accuse others of doing? Maybe you're just believing what you want to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: bobad
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 07:34 PM

"Another example was Physics911.net (originally Physics911.org) also rolled out in late 2003, with the ostensible goal of providing a Scientific Panel for the Investigation of Nine-Eleven (SPINE). Both 911Review.org and Physics911.net promoted hoaxes like the Pod-Plane and pushed implausible science fiction scenarios like Operation Pearl.

Numerous other sites serving to discredit serious analysis of 9/11/01 lack the sophistication of 911review.org and Physics911.net. Some, such as letsroll911.org, are almost entirely devoted to amplifying the idea, supported by no evidence, that missiles were used in the attack on the Twin Towers. OilEmpire.us was the first site to provide a complete rundown on such sites in mid-2004 -- a time when several new such sites sprang up. "

http://www.911review.com/disinfo/sites.html

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 07:40 PM

You see, Foolestroupe, no matter what the subject of debate is, everyone eventually makes up their mind what they believe about it...and from then on until they die or the world ends...THAT's what they want to go on believing about it. Why? Because they have an emotional investment to defend. Their sense of personal identity is at stake. It's like the old "Vietnam" syndrome ("We can't pull out now. That would mean all those men died in vain! It might even mean (gasp!)...that we were...wrong... Naw...not worth considering, right?")

I think you are just as credible and subjective in that respect as the rest of us are. And just as stubborn. And just as likely to be wrong. ;-) (And I bet you don't, do you?)

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,soo\
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 07:45 PM

That's interesting, bobad, but how exactly does it make steel melt below 2800 degrees?

The Bush/Pelosi government is still telling us that the Cavemen of Tora Bora directed 19 men with boxcutters as they somehow got NORAD to stand down. Please clarify how that occurred, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 09:27 PM

NORAD was not standing down, rather they were performing an exercise that coincidently involved passenger planes ramming buildings like the Pentagon. When they were told that this was not a drill it was already too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 12 Jul 07 - 10:00 PM

Actually, NORAD was involved with multiple exercises that day. More simultaneous exercises than ever before. Then, the Secretary of Transportation heard Dick Cheney give an override order. The exercises were supposed to provide all the cover the Bush junta would need in order to claim "confusion and incompetence," but at the last moment Cheney had to do a bit of tweaking. And it was witnessed by the Secretary of Transportation. Others have talked about stand down orders too:

"Then we (at CENTCOM) see the other plane come in and hit it and at that point everybody is standing up. The air force had commanders in contact with NORAD. The plane, or whatever, hit the Pentagon and then we were like 'Why aren't they scrambling jets?' We were asking, there was eight or nine people... Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels asking the Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the air force 'why isn't NORAD scrambling jets? and he said 'we received an order to stand down''. And that just perplexed everybody."

http://infowars.net/articles/September2006/260906Chavez.htm

Here's a page of links to sites that talk about the stand down, or whatever you want to call it:

http://www.911myths.com/html/stand_down_links.html

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 01:45 AM

"the second building struck fell first"

... and how far up was each building struck? I predicted at home while watching that the second one would fall before the first, and when it did go, I was surprised that the other one held up so long.

The mere fact that you can even seriously ask this question reveals that you know absolutely nothing about materials behaviour and physics ... :-)

Me?, I'm just a GPI Stack Browser...

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 02:06 AM

"And the strike was a glancing blow."

Glancing blow? Bullshit! Did it bounce off? NO! It penetrated the building and smashed down weight (force) carrying support structures.

Monocoque style construction (where all the stress is distributed thru all the much lighter construction mass) is incredibly weak once you break even a single load carrying beam. Stress other nearby integrally joined force carrying structures via heat weakening and KaBoom! You don;t even need 'red heat' - the expansion of a few will push others out of place , then let it cool and it won't go back to where it is supposed to (but it will then be in tension, where previoulsy it was designed to be in compression), but be even weaker...

Glancing blow!!! - Bullshit! you clearly are a lunatic manipulating delusions.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 02:56 AM

"What is the minimum temperature steel needs to reach in order to begin oxidizing, Foolestroup?"

Steel oxidizes at room temperature. That's why they put paint on cars and bridges...

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 04:36 AM

"Demolition squib blasts zippering down the sides of the towers"

Other minds who too experienced to know everything only saw a force wave rippling down the tower - caused by the bloody heavy multi-tons of the stories above as a solid block slamming into the floors below, one at a time - crunch, crumch, crunch... - this force exceeded the design strength of the structure - the weak bits let go one at a time... do the maths...

There's a few items in the list of 16 or so above to which I have no answers - but the rest only demonstrate ignorance.

I am prepared to believe that there are conspiracies afoot - but when the technically ignorant try to misrepresent scientific and engineering knowledge, and present science fiction as pseudo science babble, they lose their credibility.

If there IS something going on behind the scenes, the misleading misrepresented garbage spouted about fictional conspiracies serves only ONE PURPOSE - to distract those like me from observing the REAL CONSPIRACIES!

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 10:49 AM

Please reconcile these two statements, Foolestroupe...

when steel oxidises (burns) it gets hotter and hotter

Steel oxidizes at room temperature. That's why they put paint on cars and bridges

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 10:53 AM

CarolC

The process of oxidation produces heat: When something rusts ( which it can even below freezing) it produces heat. One can demonstrate this fact by taking iron powder, and mixing it with water. If one measures the temperature at the time it is mixed, and then some time later, it will be hotter at the later time.


But the whole discussion is pointless: I already explained how the aliens did the whole thing, and you are ALL covering it up per our... I mean THEIR plan.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:12 AM

Or. if one looks at aluminum powder, the reaction is what causes thermite to work: Aluminum is very reactive, and will oxidize almost instantly: Only the fact that the surface oxidising prevents oxygen from getting to the rest of the metal slows it down. Powder aluminum, and it will oxidize rapidly, with the release of a great deal of heat....

Gee, I wonder what they made those airliners out of?

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:13 AM

So how does this statement...

when steel oxidises (burns) it gets hotter and hotter

Answer this question...

"so where did the heat needed to create the pools of molten steal come from?"

If we follow the line of reasoning that Foolestroup seems to be pursuing, we should all expect our cars to melt into puddles of molten metal.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:19 AM

Carol

Oxidation is always occurring, but at a slow rate ( rust). In the presence of heat and oxygen, it will proceed at a more rapid rate. In the case of a fire, once started, if the heat is held in ( insulated) the temperature can get much higher than the temperature of the same substances in the open: ie, if a kerosine flame is at ( made up number) 500 degrees, then it can heat up a furnace ( such as a kiln) to 1000 degrees, since the heat is contained- insulated- by the wall of the kiln ( which are usually gypsum, the material in wallboard)

Basic chemistry, which is why the aliens had to use special devices just to pull this off so you would think it was an inside job.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:20 AM

beardedbruce, if that was how it happened, it seems that all of the steel would have melted, rather than having the steel conveniently cut up into regular sized sections. Or, perhaps even more likely, all of the steel closest to the part of the building where the planes hit would have melted, but all of the steel in areas not close to where the planes hit would have remained intact (including all of building 7, which didn't get hit by any plane). Don't you think?

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:21 AM

My last post is in reference to your 13 Jul 07 - 11:12 AM post, beardedbruce.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:26 AM

1. " having the steel conveniently cut up into regular sized sections."

It was broken into pieces depending on the structural use- beams are MADE certain lengths, and all of them in the same place in the collapsing structure are LIKELY to break at the same point.

2. Only the steel which was in places that were insulated would melt- not all had sufficient heat.

3. You do not take into account any of the heat produce by exploding transformers ( when the loads are shorted by arircaft slicing through, or floors collapsing) or any other source.

Like the famous "bumblebees can't fly" proof, the proof is VALID ( as opposed to true) since the movement of the wings was not taken into account. A dead bumblebee CAN'T fly.

You are making the mistake of looking at a single item ( temperature of burning fuel) and NOT at the entire situation. It is not burning in isolation: why should it act as if it was?

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:51 AM

3. You do not take into account any of the heat produce by exploding transformers ( when the loads are shorted by arircaft slicing through, or floors collapsing) or any other source.

Not at all. I'm just seeing some problems with your hypothesis that aluminum power from the airplanes could have explained all of the heat related damage that was done to structural steel in all three buildings. Unless that wasn't what you were saying, in which case, I stand corrected.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:55 AM

"your hypothesis that aluminum power from the airplanes could have explained all of the heat related damage "

You have missed my point.

The TOTAL heat produced is from ALL the sources- steel, aluminum, and other metals burning, jet fuel, electric energy ( resistance in wires) , exploding transformers, burning people and office material. A little from the energy released by the collapse, as well. The LOCAL heat can be much higher than any single source, because of the "kiln" effect of insulation.

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:59 AM

"The LOCAL heat can be much higher than any single source, because of the "kiln" effect of insulation. "

Should be

"The LOCAL temperature can be much higher than any single source, because of the "kiln" effect of insulation. "

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:02 PM

Well guys - this is proof that we DO have pretty good free speech in the West. Just ask yourselves if you could get away with anti-Islamist propaganda in Iran & you'll get the point!