• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If you are dumb, evil, ignorant, crazy enough to believe the USGOCT, you believe in miracles![W:461]

camlok said:
It was a total evasion. I had informed you that "Your conventional wisdom, which you have yet to post, and the US government conventional wisdom simply don't stand up to scrutiny".

Instead of addressing all the voluminous evidence that shows the "conventional wisdom" is pure drivel, you thought you might just try to divert things some more.

How did USA nanothermite get into WTC?

How did Todd Beamer's phone call that was supposed to be from UA93 continue for 13 to 15 minutes after the entire plane and all its contents were supposedly vaporized?

How was the personal cell phone of Todd Beamer able to make numerous calls after that same plane, the one he was supposed to be on, and his cell phone should have been on, was "vaporized"?
Click to expand...

Well, camlok, I stopped reading at "Your conventional wisdom, which you have yet to post..." and promptly posted that conventional wisdom. I have no intention of addressing the "voluminous evidence" that allegedly proves that the conventional wisdom is "drivel." I'm an Occam's Razor person, and I am satisfied with the conventional wisdom.

What you want to do is draw me into babble about nanothermite and blah, blah, blah. Here is an example of your typical schtick: https://www.debatepolitics.com/cons...lieve-miracles-w-461-a-33.html#post1068251721

I replied to you pages ago, "I don't affirm or deny any of the above. You persist in demanding that I engage, but I'm not going to." Reread the preceding sentence and accept this.
 
Sadling said:
And what did your calculations uncover concerning the resistance capacity of the intact core structure below the impact zone? According to your careful calculations, did the upper block pass through the lower block as if it weren't there? Cuz ya know, that's some pretty messed up calculating. One mass does not pass freely through another mass of equal composition.
Click to expand...
Holy cow, a complete lack of knowledge of physics and the WTC structure, an overwhelming anti-science stand that is.

The floors are connected to the shell and core. The core holds about half the WTC weight, and the shell holds about half. Each floor of the WTC only holds up itself. A floor in the WTC fails above 29,000,000 pounds. It does not matter how much the core and shell can hold up, the floor fails because the upper section is more mass than a floor can hold. Based on simple momentum transfer, the time of collapse would be 12.08 seconds for the tower hit highest. Again, simple physics which 9/11 truth has ignored since 9/11.

The upper floors began to fall, the floor below can't stop the upper mass because the floor essentially fails instantly. The shell and core hold up the floors, the floors hold up themselves. The core can't stand without the shell for lateral support.

You don't understand the structure of the WTC, and you can't check my energy each tower had when they fell. My number stands. >100 tons of TNT released due to gravity, mass and height.

Did you add up the connects of each floor to the core and shell and find they fail above 29,000,000 pounds? NIST did, why can't 9/11 truth do simple math and physics?

What did you get for the energy of collapse due to gravity, mass and the height. How long will it take to check a number?
 
camlok said:
james james james, there is voluminous evidence that the US government lied its ass off. It's all just denied by anti-truther USGOCT conspiracy theorists. You know, the folks who can't provide one speck of evidence for their USGOCT.

What you have asked for actually happened on September 11, 2001. What planet were you off visiting? Two planes, not the ones the US government actually said but two planes flew into WTCs 1 & 2.

They performed exactly like the Skilling study predicted. Until they were blown apart by the US government nanothermite that was found in WTC dust, something that you seem to have a hard time mentioning.

Scientists, structural engineers do these studies all the time. It's called 'science'. Would you like me to retrieve the definition of 'science' for you from M-W?
Click to expand...

Again if you can actually show a nearly 200 ton plane slamming into a sky scrapper at 500 to 600 miles an hour and that sky scrapper still standing then you would have some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
 
Sadling said:
You're not answering the question regarding the physics of what was seen. Your "but a plane slammed into the building" doesn't address that. The damage to the building has nothing to do with the question of how the intact structure below the impact zone offered no resistance to speak of even though its composition was the same as the upper block. Try again.

On the video below, at either the 30 second or 1:12 mark, place a straightedge horizontally across the screen and line it up with the top of the building and then count the seconds it takes for the 360 feet of antenna to pass the marker. It will show that the upper block descends at a rate that is just forty feet shy of freefall. That means that the upper block passed through the core structure as if it weren't there. To be more precise, one structure magically passed through another structure of the exact same composition without so much as a visible jolt. So how does that happen?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
Click to expand...
As I said before its called a nearly 200 ton plane slamming into the building between 500 to 600 miles an hour. Sky scrappers are not solid structures.A plane of that size slamming into practically any sky scrapper will cause it to collapse. You are more than welcome to post videos of planes of that size and weight slamming into sky scrappers of similar size and construction and those sky scappers are still standing today as proof.
 
camlok said:
Exactly, so what. Stuff falling on a building cannot induce free fall. There is only one thing known to mankind that can cause free fall in a steel framed high rise and that is controlled demolition. Case closed, james.
Click to expand...

Its called nearly 200 ton plane slamming into the building between 500 to 600 miles an hour and those stuff landing on surrounding buildings.
 
jamesrage said:
Again if you can actually show a nearly 200 ton plane slamming into a sky scrapper at 500 to 600 miles an hour and that sky scrapper still standing then you would have some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
Click to expand...

They got on me about molten Steel and carried on about how fires can't burn that hot despite the fact that we've been melting f****** steel with fire for centuries. I think they will say and do anything to try and discredit you and to prop up their own silly little delusion.
 
Sure CLAX, you don't care anything about this. That's why you post so much, just to call me delusional. I'm flattered! :lamo

I'm not sure which party is more delusional--the one claiming out of one side of his mouth that he doesn't care anything about this, or the one who doesn't buy into the official government narrative.

You're a gas! :lol:
 
CLAX1911 said:
so the Illuminati or men from Mars planted furnaces in the buildings for reasons clearly
Click to expand...

You do know that trolling is against the rules.

The TTs and WTC7 were blown up with US proprietary nanothermite/thermate. That accounts for the molten/vaporized steel that was described by many eyewitnesses at the clean up site.

That also accounts for the 1000 individuals who were blown into such tiny particles that they were unidentifiable with DNA tests. This is the kind of evil that the USGOCT conspiracy theorists are making lame excuses for.

Lame, because they know full well that there is zero chance the USGOCT has any validity. These people are, in effect, applauding the murders of circa 2,900 of their own.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Obviously the fire was hot enough to do that. Perhaps you're wrong about how hot the fire could get.
Click to expand...

No, you, the fellow pretending to be an expert is wrong about how hot the fire could get. The structural steel of the world trade center never saw temperatures above 800C/1,472F. That is roughly 1200F below the melting point of steel.

However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C are using imprecise terminology at best." -- Eager & Musso

The molten iron/steel flowing out of WTC2 minutes before it was blown up attest to the US nanothermite that was used to demolish the TTs and WTC7.
 
nota bene said:
I'm an Occam's Razor person, and I am satisfied with the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...

Thank you, nota bene, you have just sunk the USGOCT.

Occam's razor ... "law of parsimony") is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.

That is all the US government official story does is make hundreds upon hundreds of totally unwarranted assumptions. When the 911 Commission states that it cannot find any evidence for 63 allegations made by the Zelikow cover up team, you ought to apply your Occam's razor.

When US nanothermite is found in WTC dust, you ought to listen to Occam, who is screaming at you to listen to reason, the very reason you yourself have just pretended to put forward.

When there molten/vaporized WTC structural steel but the official story cannot provide any reason for it, so they flat out LIED, saying it never existed, you ought to listen to Occam, who is screaming at you to listen to reason, the very reason you yourself have just pretended to put forward.

You should be able to figure all this out for yourself when you know full well that there is zero evidence for the USGOCT and there is only science and strong evidence followed by the 911Truth Movement.

Your Occam's razor failed you, or more accurately, you have made a huge travesty of Occam's razor.
 
CLAX1911 said:
They got on me about molten Steel and carried on about how fires can't burn that hot despite the fact that we've been melting f****** steel with fire for centuries. I think they will say and do anything to try and discredit you and to prop up their own silly little delusion.
Click to expand...

Here is NIST pointing out that you are clueless about steel and the temperatures needed to melt it or you are outright lying. Which is it, CLAX?

In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).
 
Originally Posted by camlok
Is that what you were trying to say with the following?

CLAX: they would have had to his bed that was the metal present.


CLAX1911 said:
Yes duh.
Click to expand...

I shouldn't have to inform you that it is nonsensical English. But apparently I do.
 
Sunzi said:
Holy cow, a complete lack of knowledge of physics and the WTC structure, an overwhelming anti-science stand that is.

The floors are connected to the shell and core. The core holds about half the WTC weight, and the shell holds about half. Each floor of the WTC only holds up itself. A floor in the WTC fails above 29,000,000 pounds. It does not matter how much the core and shell can hold up, the floor fails because the upper section is more mass than a floor can hold. Based on simple momentum transfer, the time of collapse would be 12.08 seconds for the tower hit highest. Again, simple physics which 9/11 truth has ignored since 9/11.

The upper floors began to fall, the floor below can't stop the upper mass because the floor essentially fails instantly. The shell and core hold up the floors, the floors hold up themselves. The core can't stand without the shell for lateral support.
Click to expand...

Holy cow, a complete refutation of Newton's Laws of Motion. The accelerating collapses of the twin towers illustrate that you are attempting a cover up, an exceedingly lame one but a cover up nonetheless.

The nanothermite found in WTC dust, a solely US government explosive, puts the lie to your obvious attempts at a cover up. The free fall of WTC 7 means that the entire USGOCT is a cover up, and you seek to add your lame cover up for reasons that rational people cannot understand.

Asymmetric damage cannot induce symmetrical collapse. Look at the falling WTC1 block of floors, they are blown up before they ever make contact with the much much much stronger damaged section below. The antenna moves before the top of the building moves. That can only happen if the main core columns have been severed. The instantaneous severing of the core columns can only occur with the use of explosives, aka controlled demolition, which is proven by the US government nanothermite found in WTC dust along with the molten/vaporized WTC structural steel.
 
jamesrage said:
Again if you can actually show a nearly 200 ton plane slamming into a sky scrapper at 500 to 600 miles an hour and that sky scrapper still standing then you would have some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
Click to expand...

You have been given the evidence that the original designers of the twin towers planned for that scenario exactly.

Why are you trolling?
 
jamesrage said:
Its called nearly 200 ton plane slamming into the building between 500 to 600 miles an hour and those stuff landing on surrounding buildings.
Click to expand...

You know full well that no plane hit WTC7, so again, why are you being so dishonest?
 
camlok said:
You know full well that no plane hit WTC7, so again, why are you being so dishonest?
Click to expand...
I never claimed a plane slammed into WTC7. What is claimed is that some of the debris from the trade towers fell on WTC7.
 
camlok said:
You have been given the evidence that the original designers of the twin towers planned for that scenario exactly.

Why are you trolling?
Click to expand...

What you have given is conspiracy loon crap. If you can post videos of skyscrappers being slammed by a nearly 200 ton planes at 500 to 600 miles and hour and still standing to this day then that would be some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
 
jamesrage said:
I never claimed a plane slammed into WTC7. What is claimed is that some of the debris from the trade towers fell on WTC7.
Click to expand...

Post #556 shows that you are lying. I wrote,

Originally Posted by camlok
Exactly, so what. Stuff falling on a building cannot induce free fall. There is only one thing known to mankind that can cause free fall in a steel framed high rise and that is controlled demolition. Case closed, james.

We were discussing WTC7. To which you replied,

jamesrage: Its called nearly 200 ton plane slamming into the building between 500 to 600 miles an hour and those stuff landing on surrounding buildings.
 
jamesrage said:
What you have given is conspiracy loon crap. If you can post videos of skyscrappers being slammed by a nearly 200 ton planes at 500 to 600 miles and hour and still standing to this day then that would be some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
Click to expand...

Still trolling I see.

Why are you ignoring the US proprietary nanothermite that was found in WTC dust?

Why are you ignoring the by products of that US proprietary nanothermite that was found in WTC dust?

Why are you ignoring the molten/vaporized WTC structural steel that came from WTCs 1, 2 & 7 that was caused by the US proprietary nanothermite when the three towers were blown up?
 
jamesrage said:
What you have given is conspiracy loon crap.
Click to expand...

Now that is clearly USGOCT conspiracy loon crap. Are you suggesting that we take your uninformed posts about the plane strikes as evidence that is better, more informed, more knowledgeable than the original designers of the twin towers?

If you can post videos of skyscrappers[sic] being slammed by a nearly 200 ton planes[sic] at 500 to 600 miles and[sic] hour and still standing to this day then that would be some sort of evidence that the government is lying.
Click to expand...

A little hint. Simply repeating something over and over and over doesn't help to make it true. That is not how evidence works.

Many planes have hit buildings that WERE NOT specifically designed for such an event and they are still standing.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Sure CLAX, you don't care anything about this. That's why you post so much, just to call me delusional. I'm flattered! :lamo
Click to expand...
no I don't really care about your delusion I find it fascinating that you are diluted into believing you have some special truth and that your paranoid fantasies are real.

I'm not sure which party is more delusional--the one claiming out of one side of his mouth that he doesn't care anything about this, or the one who doesn't buy into the official government narrative.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I didn't care about anything I said I don't care about your delusion I don't care to hear how you justify it made up little things you come up with to support it. I do care about the reality.
 
CLAX1911 said:
that isn't trolling it's mocking.
Click to expand...

Trolling is a diversionary tactic of those who “deliberately exploit tendencies of human nature or of an online community to upset people” or those “who post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages” to disrupt normal on-topic discussions. [Wikipedia].

You know that you have lied, are lying about the melted WTC structural steel. You know full well that it exists. You dishonestly discuss things that you pretend you are an expert on; "to disrupt normal on-topic discussions". That is trolling.

You know full well that US nanothermite exists, that this same US proprietary nanothermite was found in WTC dust.

All your diversions and distractions are meant "to disrupt normal on-topic discussions". That is trolling.
 
Thoreau72 said:
... Some of us have studied the facts in the past 16 years, and know that the story told by known liars cannot withstand even the most superficial scrutiny.
Click to expand...
Same claim by flat earth believers. Claim to study facts, end up with evidence free fantasy.

Thoreau72 said:
... believe stories with no facts to support them, told by men who routinely lie? Probably not, but the question is raised. Perhaps not delusional, but certainly as gullible as they come.
Click to expand...
Fact, 19 terrorists with IDs boarded 4 planes. Fact - FBI studied passengers on the aircraft 11, 175, 77, and 93; they found 19 who had a motive to crash planes and murder Americans. You can't provide evidence for who did your 9/11 fantasy. Facts, crew, FAA, FBI, identify the 19 failed humans who murdered Americans. Don't fly if you commit crime in the air, they have your name on official FAA manifest.

If UBL associates were not suspects the moment the second plane hits the WTC, you had no knowledge who the threat might be, no facts.

9/11 truth's fantasy version, stuff googled, coupled with an inability to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Is it the complex plot which fools 9/11 truth?
1. Take planes
2. Crash planes

Example: fake facts believed by 9/11 truth followers.
9/11 truth "experts" claim Flight 77 did a fantastic maneuver to hit the Pentagon. The fantastic maneuver is a sloopy less than standard rate turn, taking more time, a turn with terrible bank control. 9/11 truth followers believe lies without checking.

Thoreau72 said:
... the government had absolutely no idea that this was going to happen, ... Even the next morning, we are told, nobody had a clue about it. And then by 5PM on that fateful day, the government knew the entire story, or so we are told.
Click to expand...
Do you believe in mind readers and such; are these your facts, people can know what is going to happen. Are you able to predict the future? BTW, the FBI had thousand of agents working the passengers manifest and found 19 which had motive. Your fact is bogus, anti-logic.

Thoreau72 said:
Neither you nor NIST or the 911 Commission can or could prove any single element of the official narrative. ...
Click to expand...
NIST does not do crime, FBI investigates crime. You ignore facts from the largest FBI investigations in history. You can't debunk the official story, 19 terrorists did 9/11, and fires caused the damage to the WTC complex.

Neither you, nor 9/11 truth "experts" can debunk a single fact of the official narrative.

Damage on 9/11 fools 9/11 truth followers to think explosives were needed. 9/11 truth CD believers ignore the vast energy in each tower due to gravity, which is >100 tons of TNT in each tower collapse due to gravity.

9/11 truth CD believers can't do the physics to see the energy of collapse is greater than 100 tons of TNT. >423,000,000,000 joules, why does 9/11 truth ignore facts? Ignore facts to deny 19 terrorists did 9/11 with four planes. Can't even check my energy calculation. 9/11 truth can't do physics?

Zero damage to WTC steel from explosives, or thermite. 9/11 truth has to ignore to keep CD fantasy.

No symmetrical collapses, look up the meaning of symmetrical. 9/11 truth experts say "symmetrical collapse", 9/11 truth followers repeat like a religious chant. Why repeat silly lies.

Zero evidence for thermite being used on 9/11. Fake study by Jones, no proof they found thermite. Take a look at the study, they claim the Al is part of the thermite, but they show Al bonded to form clay particles; they published photos which debunk thermite. The DSC does not match thermite, and the energy of the dust does not match thermite. The paper was in a vanity journal, real journals did not accept bad science. Peer review was bogus, done by 9/11 truth experts who can't do chemistry.

No vaporized steel, it was corroded in fire. Facts ignored. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-8452/403_apc.pdf
Facts ignored to keep fantasy of thermite and vaporized steel. Most anti-science. FEMA appendix C is filled with chemical engineering jargon, but it shows the steel was not vaporized, it was corroded in fire at 800-1000 C, colder than thermite damage.

9/11 truth thinks steel was vaporized, is my battery box in our vintage Mustang vaporized, or our 914 batter box, vaporized? lol, someone vaporized the battery box in our old cars, was it thermite. Think "rust" is vaporized steel, very anti-science.

9/11 truth ignores, fires in the WTC. Office fires had more Heat Energy than 2,700 tons of thermite. Fires which caused the towers to fail had more heat energy than 2,700 tons of Thermite, ignored by 9/11 truth.

lol, paper, more heat energy than thermite. Truth, is ignored by 9/11 truth; much irony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom