bdd1

wow a link !

__________________
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

This is Khan he's tough and ruthless!
This is Quan he's rough and toothless.
(a fist full of yen)

bdd1

taught by the master duvi!

__________________
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

This is Khan he's tough and ruthless!
This is Quan he's rough and toothless.
(a fist full of yen)

Duvidoo

Collage, eh? They'd likely have had to go to art college to pick up any expertise in that field. Sounds like you're on some of Brian's drugs. Be careful. That shit can kill you (seems like it's already starting to scramble your egghead).

PS oh bdd1 ... the Mapplethorpe B-Devils don't have a Canadian contingent so your expertise in fisting had nothing whatsoever to do with Master Duvi. More likely you picked it up from that Master Bates chap. Be careful.

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

Ptech

Denie

What does the motivation of the pilots have to do with any potential accident? Nothing at all. Rather sounds like the rationale behind "hate crimes" to me.

Most of the fuel went up in the fireball, even according to the official version. The remaining fuel was but an appetizer for the huge heat sink that was the structure itself. Or do you want me to believe that for all these years those doing CD could simply have poured a certain amount of jetfuel on the upper floors of any structure and light it off, with what looks like CD happening shortly thereafter? Nonsense.

As to missing documents, I'm totally with you. How could so many be missing? Beats hell out of me, but it lends some measure of credence to those who theorize that the mechanism for destruction of the towers was incorporated at its construction. Who knows? I don't.

But all that doesn't change the simple fact that the buildings performed as designed--they absorbed the energy of the strike and remained standing. For some bizarre reason, the second tower struck(way off center) was the first to collapse. Go figger.

Architects & Engineers have published proof establishing the validity of the CD scenario. That it has not been published in the MSM is simply more testimony as to the magnificent coverup conducted by the government.

Denie

Leave it to Duv to point out a typo, while completely ignoring the entire post. A sure sign of a mindless dolt.

As for the rest of the rambling blather in your post, I'm not sure what the hell you're talking about.

Denie

Not sure what pilots you're referring too.
If you're referring to my statement regarding 'accidental crash vs intentional crash', as I had stated, the buildings were not engineered for a intentional, high speed, fully fueled crash.

Heat sink? Care to provide some calculations on this heat sink theory that shows it even existed at all? Are we to believe that the contents in the building were all non-flammable?

Funny how try to completely discount the structural damage by the airplanes with the nonsense about CDing a build with only jet fuel. This goes to show what little knowledge of physic you posses.

Lends credence to nothing. Lack of evidence of one thing does not lend credence as to proof of another. Not in the world of science, that is.

Gee..go 'figger'...the corners of the buildings carried way more of the structural strength than the spaces between the corners. But hell, why let silly thing like structural engineering get in the way a a good CT, right?

No, they have not. The have tried to circumnavigate the process in which all credible scientist or engineering professional are required to follow.

If their CD paper had any scientific merit at all, they would have submitted it via the proper channels for peer review.

What they are doing is the same thing the Young Earth Scientist try. Publish your own paper to seem to be credible. Only a mindless dolt would believe the YES BS that man a Dinos lived hand in hand a mere few thousand years ago. They too claim to have "published peer reviewed papers" that show this is true.
Problem is, they publish in their own created journal...not an established related field journal...very big difference.

Same MO, different subject.

So, I'm still waiting for an answer as to why, after all these years, not one of the experts from A&E have a REAL peer reviewed paper?

Better yet, why have not one of the experts from A&E not published a paper in refute of a collapse theory peer reviewed paper? Certainly if the papers that have been published in established, credible engineering journals contained falsehoods or incorrect calculations, the A&E experts would have no problem in getting a refute paper published in the very same journal!!
But, as it is, they have not. My guess is they never will.

Ptech

Denie

Find me something somewhere that says the engineers designed for anything regarding intentional or accidental.

What you are trying to say is that the speed of the aircraft had been calculated at a lower number, on approach in the fog or something.

And the difference is very small indeed, insignificant in the big picture.

Steel is a pretty good conductor of heat. The black smoke fire that burned was not that hot. What little heat was generated to the steel was transfered down the line. That's what heat sinks do--absorb heat by transfer.

No sir. What you are suggesting to me is that the jet fuel in the building caused the steel to buckle, which led to the collapse of the buildings as they did.

And I am suggesting to you that if that is the case, then a new method for the same effect as CD was just demonstrated, apparently solely by means of burning jetfuel.

Can't have it both ways Denie.

Publish a paper? You missed the other point Denie--the system is rigged to support the government story. Get it?

DanS.

Good god thank you...that's what all of this boils down to. They point to a lack of complete evidence as evidence of their own theory that has nothing to back it up. Just like the people who believe in creationism....since evolution can't be proven 100% that means that creationism(something with ZERO evidence) is the truth.

Denie

Well, for starter, You made this claim a few posts back. If you did not think this was so, why would you state it?

Correct.

Sorry, but your take here on mass, inertia and energy here is laughable. It makes a very LARGE difference. By your 'logic' here, in a collision, a person/vehicle traveling at 25 mph would sustain very little more injury/damage if traveling at 100 mph...Sure thing.
Steel is a very poor conductor of heat. This is why it retains heat so long after heated. Maybe go back a study 7th grade science.Another myth. Black smoke indicates a fuel rich fire, period. It indicates nothing of the internal temperature. First off, steel is a poor heat conductor (Thermal Conductivity of 26 to 36 BTU/ hr-ft . And this in a range of 8 to 247 for metals). Second, heat sinks are made with cooling fins (and other metals than steel)...not beam or rods. And third, did you ever take a science class?

Me and the scientific/engineering community as a whole...

Sorry, but correlation does not equal causation.

But I can understand metallurgy and physics...unlike yourself.

Sure it is...All the engineering journals are now "rigged". They developed the peer review decades ago just so they could discredit Steve Jones and his followers.

Get back to me when you can get a basic understanding of science.

Denie

Exactly. Lack of proof in one theory does not give proof to an opposing theory. Basic science. Anyone claiming otherwise has zero scientific knowledge.