Where? is the argument? show me... I am done communicating with your troggs.

nick do yourself a favor and seek professional help you my friend have a drug problem
everything you've posted has been an argument that the govt was covering up the whole thing. or did every one else here just mis understand what you were getting at if so why didn't you clear it up.

i just think you talked yourself right into a corner and have absolutly no way out so your throwing up your hands and trying to tell us you were never argueing.

almost worked dude but you spewed so much crap that i just dont believe you now.

see pret this is what happens when you show a con sper nut the truth they cant take it
and admiting there wrong is out of the question so they run.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

jackalope wrote:nick do yourself a favor and seek professional help you my friend have a drug problem
everything you've posted has been an argument that the govt was covering up the whole thing. or did every one else here just mis understand what you were getting at if so why didn't you clear it up.

i just think you talked yourself right into a corner and have absolutly no way out so your throwing up your hands and trying to tell us you were never argueing.

almost worked dude but you spewed so much crap that i just dont believe you now.

see pret this is what happens when you show a con sper nut the truth they cant take it
and admiting there wrong is out of the question so they run.

If "everything" I have posted has been an argument that the govt was covering up the whole thing it should be easy for you to give me ONE example.

um ok. your bunker buster nuke.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

jackalope wrote:um ok. your bunker buster nuke.

What does me schooling you on a weapon that you know nothing about have to do with the immaginary argument that you think I was having with you?

i'm not argueing with you dude i was simply showing you the error of your ways.
and if you wonder why i think the way i do just re-read some of your own posts.
there way too long to quote so i'll give them to you numaricly. your 1st post, your 2nd
post, your 5th post, your 6th post, your 7th post, your 10th post, most of your 12th post,
your 13th post, and i believe it was on your 14th post you realized you had dug yourself a grave and started to back peddle.

now if i'm wrong about your posts and you please tell me and i will apoligize i dont want any hard feelings from anyone.

but dude put yourself in mine and prets shoes and read what you wrote in the above mentioned posts and you tell me what you would think.

like i said if i misunderstood your intire list of posts above then i'm sorry i name called
but man it sure looks like your a con sper nut from here.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Again, My early posts were just copys of articles I found online that wete on topic, I never stated my opinion on way or the other.

and your last post sums it up, you yourself state that you are not argueing with me, so we all agree then, we are not argueing?

im not sure if your nuts or what but o.k.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

So because there were no plane parts found it was a missile? That makes no sense, aircraft are made out of aluminum, a very light weight flexible metal, the Pentagon is made out of steel and concrete, hmm that makes you think.


What did you say? Stock? Wow I need one of those!

my god, i cant believe americans are so blind. Take hitler before world war II, he set fire to the riechstag and blamed it on the communist, thus abolishing the chancelory and becoming furror. Take Nero, He set fire to rome and played the fiddle while it burned because the christian movement was taking over roman catholics. Take the OK city bombing, if the bomb was on the outside of the building why did it blow out? why did they find 2 more bombs inside the building? I guess your also going to tell me that Oswald shot JFK. further more there are first hand visual accounts that were played once on tv and then removed, why havent any of the "proof" videos been released by the FBI, if they are inoccent why not let us see the videos. Now to the towers, NEVER in history has a building constructed of steel been brought down by fire, there was a building in spain recently that burned for 18 hours at temps hotter than that of the twin towers and didnt not fall, EVEN the man who made the towers, a japanese man said that it was impossible for the towers to be brougt down by fire, those buildings were designed to take multiple hits from plains. IF the fire was so hot at the towers how are there people standing in the gaping hole in the side of the building? second of all, buildings do not pulverise like that without help, those buildings were brought down, by who we may never know, Also building seven had just finished haveing one florr renovated the city of newyork spent 1.5 million dollars to reinforce one floor of building seven, bullet proof glass, its own air supply, its own water supply. building seven was also "pulled" they have an accoutn of the fire chief saying it in national television, pulling a building takes weeks of planning and c4 placement. but yet it came down just like the towers and it wasnt even hit by a plain OR falling debre from the towers. Also, why did they ship everything off and bury it like they did the OKC bombings, they took the entire building and buried it. hmmmmm. getting rid of evidence, all i have to say is please wake up from your slumber of this pittifle country we call home, its a huge joke and you should be ashamed to live here no matter how "free" you think you are it all an illusion, cumfortably numb is a good way to say it. IF you need more i got plenty, i ahev done my research. www.infowars.com

please excuse the spelling errors, my brain gets ahead of my fingers.

LMAO did you miss the plane flying into the tower? I think your fingers got in front of your common sense. You can't actually believe a web site from a guy that just screams attention whore. I mean look at him. All he does is instigate. He raises points and blows them out of proportion. If you believe everything he says then your as far out as he is.

I am no were close to being ashamed to live here. If you feel that way then move over to another country and tell me if you will be happy there. I know I would'nt.

yea there were 2 plains, i also stated that the builder and designer of the buildings said it was impossible for those buildings to have come down from a plain, i will state once again the buildings were design to take MULTIPLE hits from a large aircraft and not fall. and you seemed to only bring one thing up, no more retorts for the rest of it? the proof is there it is your job to deduce what occured, you can be a blind little sheepy or you can take the red pill and see how far the rabbit hole really goes.

" EVEN the man who made the towers, a japanese man said that it was impossible for the towers to be brougt down by fire, those buildings were designed to take multiple hits from plains"

Really do people come back from the dead and say things now, Minoru Yamasaki ( if you would have bothered to Goggle to find the guys name) died in 1986.

Secondly he said they could take a hit from an aircraft. The key bonehead was the 20,000 gallons of jet fuel that they couldnt take.




- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new

lol, actually, The assumption that the specific heats are constant over the temperature range 25° - T° C, is a good approximation if T turns out to be relatively small (as it does). For larger values of T this assumption once again leads to a higher maximum temperature (as the specific heat for these substances increases with temperature). We have assumed the initial temperature of the surroundings to be 25° C. The quantity, (T - 25)° C, is the temperature rise.

So the amount of energy needed to raise one floor to the temperature T° C is

= (39,857 x 1,690 + 97,429 x 845 + 349,680 x 1,038 + 500,000 x 450 + 1,400,000 x 3,300) x (T - 25)
= (67,358,300 + 82,327,500 + 362,968,000 + 225,000,000 + 4,620,000,000) x (T - 25) Joules
= 5,357,650,000 x (T - 25) Joules.

Since the amount of energy available to heat this floor is 1,364,000,000,000 Joules, we have that

5,357,650,000 x (T - 25) = 1,364,000,000,000
5,357,650,000 x T - 133,941,000,000 = 1,364,000,000,000

Therefore T = (1,364,000,000,000 + 133,941,000,000)/5,357,650,000 = 280° C (536° F).

So, if we assume a typical office fire at the WTC, then the jet fuel could have only added 280 - 25 = 255° C (at the very most) to the temperature of the fire.

Summarizing:

We have assumed that the entire quantity of jet fuel from the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction.

We have found that it is impossible the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor beyond 280° C (536° F).

Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.

It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500° C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."

no way it mealted steel, people were standing in the hoel the plain made, could they withstand jet fuel burning, the answer is no. NEXT!

I did'nt see anyone standing in the opening. They were jumping. Second your test proves nothing. In the 1900's they didnt have building as tall as the world trade center with such strains and 3rd the test didnt have the airplane flying into it. LMAO you will believe anything anyone tells you.

Also the towers were not made to withstand a hit of a plane that size flying into it. They were made to withstand the hits of small aircraft.

[quote=©leve® One]lol, actually, The assumption that the specific heats are constant over the temperature range 25° - T° C, is a good approximation if T turns out to be relatively small (as it does). For larger values of T this assumption once again leads to a higher maximum temperature (as the specific heat for these substances increases with temperature). We have assumed the initial temperature of the surroundings to be 25° C. The quantity, (T - 25)° C, is the temperature rise.

So the amount of energy needed to raise one floor to the temperature T° C is

= (39,857 x 1,690 + 97,429 x 845 + 349,680 x 1,038 + 500,000 x 450 + 1,400,000 x 3,300) x (T - 25)
= (67,358,300 + 82,327,500 + 362,968,000 + 225,000,000 + 4,620,000,000) x (T - 25) Joules
= 5,357,650,000 x (T - 25) Joules.

Since the amount of energy available to heat this floor is 1,364,000,000,000 Joules, we have that

5,357,650,000 x (T - 25) = 1,364,000,000,000
5,357,650,000 x T - 133,941,000,000 = 1,364,000,000,000

Therefore T = (1,364,000,000,000 + 133,941,000,000)/5,357,650,000 = 280° C (536° F).

So, if we assume a typical office fire at the WTC, then the jet fuel could have only added 280 - 25 = 255° C (at the very most) to the temperature of the fire.

Summarizing:

We have assumed that the entire quantity of jet fuel from the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction.

We have found that it is impossible the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor beyond 280° C (536° F).

Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.

It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500° C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."

no way it mealted steel, people were standing in the hoel the plain made, could they withstand jet fuel burning, the answer is no. NEXT!

Since you seem to be so interested on the buildings falling. i would really like you to look at this site and read it all

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html


- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new

vary good reading, i am impresse

do you believe in science and physics?
http://thepowerhour.com/911_analysis/laws-of-physics.htm

yes steel melts at blah blah blah and jet fuel burns at blah blah blah. are you forgeting the weight of the building itself? buildings are heavy. the jet fuel along with the initial impact damaged the steel interior to the point that it couldn't sustain its own weight
then the top floors collapsed on those below and just like dominos fell strieght down on itself. all you have to do is watch the footage and you can figure this out. and please check out the link that was provided on the pentagon it will help explain why it
didnt just crumble when it was hit. and i would like to see just one reconstruction of
the strike on the pentagon where the plane would leave a perfect cut out of itself in the steel and kevlar reinforced concret walls. this is the real world not bugs bunny running
thru a wooden fence leaving the type of cut out that you nuckle heads are looking for.
again .... real life no cut out,..... bugs bunny hitting wall while running from elmer fudd
a cut out is left. please let me know if i need to clearify any of this for those with the aluminium hats on.





Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.