Thawing Permafrost Holds Vast Carbon Pool, Science Daily, Sept 7,
2008:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080903134309.htm
http://tinyurl.com/5acch6
This is just the permafrost issue. It doesn't include the ocean
stored methane hydrate problem.
We are in a canoe bobbing around
On Sep 7, 2008, at 5:51 PM, Rick Monteverde wrote:
Nick -
you simply cannot keep stating what you have said previously and
retain
any credibility.
With you, perhaps, and that doesn't concern me a bit. The position
I take is
based on my and others' interpretation of the facts, and I'll
Jones Beene wrote:
No one has suggested arson per se in this discussion.
By arson I meant the use of thermite or any other deliberate,
controlled demolition materials installed in the building beforehand.
Anything of this nature would be obvious to a trained fire inspector
at the NYPD or
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
You mean NIST and the NYFD and every other fire department and safety
agency on earth has chosen to ignore that. No doubt they are all part
of a grand conspiracy. Get used to it.
Huh? Every other fire department on earth? Get real - better yet
Charlie,
Why are you using the SMS7621 type diodes?
It seems to me that 7630 series diodes would be more effective.
The 7630 series is optimized as a zero bias detector which
seems more appropriate.
George
George Holz
Varitronics Systems
- Original Message -
From: Charles M. Brown
I hate to get involved in this cat fight, but when thermite is used,
it melts only a very local region which is blown away from the area by
the reaction. A molten pool of iron would not be produced. I suspect,
as others have suggested, that the huge energy of the collapse would
melt the
Rick wrote
The position I take is based on my and others' interpretation of the
facts, and I'll stand on that. Lindzen is entitled to his opinion, as are
you to yours.
Your position would only be acceptable if the various opinions were of
equal weight. They are not. Lindzen's opinion
Ed -
You could be right - but the bottom line on it is that all we need, all we have
ever needed, is simply a thorough investigation which addresses all the issues.
Why were we not afforded that for the millions already spent?
If you have the time ... Please comment on the following criticism
Err guys, don't get carried away with the conspiracy - try to consider how long
a pool of molten metal would stay molten...
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in the
clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television interviews in the weeks
following 9/11 as
on 7/9/08 9:19 pm, Stephen A. Lawrence at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone here attempted to answer the following three questions? The
first two would involve a little tedious research but are otherwise
straightforward, but the most important -- #3 -- seems hard.
1) How much energy is
Nick
You must be reading my mind ;-)
That is why this subject could be directly On Topic
Seriously, though - WTC7 was a large repository for precious metals. Check out
this image:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html
... not sure how much of it was palladium, however g
I wonder how much molten steel was produced by cutting tourches etc. during
the clean up.
Harry
On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Ed -
You could be right - but the bottom line on it is that all we need,
all we have ever needed, is simply a thorough investigation which
addresses all the issues.
Why were we not afforded that for the millions already spent?
I suspect
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's close our eyes, relax, and pretend there is no
problem.
Just as well since, if the cause is CO2, this will be a rapid positive
feedback system which is severly underdamped.
Terry
Thank you, Harry!
Haven't gone over those numbers with a calculator and CRC yet but it
looks good at first glance -- and it provides a great place to start
even if I end up disagreeing!
Harry Veeder wrote:
A calculation can be found here near the end of the page:
On Sep 8, 2008, at 8:45 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Horace Heffner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's close our eyes, relax, and pretend there is no
problem.
Just as well since, if the cause is CO2, this will be a rapid positive
feedback system which is severly
Jones,
Metal fatigue can cause an airplane to crash but this wasn't fully
appreciated by the aircraft industry until the Comet disaster.
Is it so inconceivable that thermal expansion in conjunction with the design
of tower 7 caused the collapse?
Harry
Horace Heffner wrote:
The immediate problem is passing the tipping point where the methane is
released. Methane is 20 times more effective than CO2 at the greenhouse
effect, and is lighter than air. It eventually oxidizes into CO2, but
at high altitude. High altitude water vapor is a very
(typo: 2009 in last heading)
Good points Horace, but note Rick doesn't deny global warming, he only
disputes the anthropogenic explanation for some reason (maybe he owns oil
fields or something?)
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Vortex-L
Jones Beene wrote:
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in
the clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television
interviews in the weeks following 9/11 as seeing molten steel in the
bottoms of elevator shafts three, four, and five weeks after the attack.
I do
Harry
As it is no-doubt obvious to all, I have no expertise in the specialized area
of disaster analysis or hi-rise engineering, and have only witnessed
demolitions on TV, therefore, I can only pass-on what I have read and studied.
Sure, I have a high level of interest and have read
Considering that I use thermite to MAKE molten pools of metal, as part
of a glass sculpture technique, that would be incorrect. The reaction
in large amounts doesnt blow things away. Thats standard aluminum /
iron (II) oxide thermite.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Edmund Storms [EMAIL
Nick -
Nick You claim to have interpreted the facts but your postings reveal
that you are not looking at facts, you are looking at what the deniers tell
you are the facts - these people are lying to you - frequently,
relentlessly, blatantly. /Nick
Where the heck are you getting that from my
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
As far as I know Mark Loizeaux has not claimed that any of the
buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition with materials
implanted before the attack. I am sure that he would recognize it
instantly if that were the case.
If you were
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Jones Beene wrote:
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in the
clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television interviews in
the weeks following 9/11 as seeing molten steel in the bottoms of
elevator shafts three, four, and five weeks
Of course it would be incorrect if the demolition company wanted to
make molten iron. However, they generally try to use as little of the
expensive thermite as possible to get the job done. When a person
hears an explosion, as people claimed to do, this means that things
were blown away.
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
If there's something more concrete, which pins the temperature and the date a
little better, I'd love to see it.
Well, there was, but I am having trouble finding it now. Maybe you can help.
I remember seeing an image in the days (maybe
Jones Beene wrote:
If you were charged with doing a thorough investigation, would not
you at least interview him - hopefully with a grant of immunity from
future prosecution ?
I do not understand this comment. Why would he need a grant of
immunity?!? This makes no sense. He is not accused
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
I do not understand this comment. Why would he need a grant of
immunity?!? This makes no sense. He is not accused of bringing down
the buildings, is he?
Not that I am aware of - but that is FAR from his only problem.
... in case you are
Jones Beene wrote:
... in case you are unaware of it, it can be a serious crime in
itself to have evidence of another's serious crime EVEN IF YOUR ARE
NOT INVOLVED - and to fail to make some effort to report it. Does
accessory after the fact ring a bell?
Of course, he and many others who
Thermite isn't expensive, isnt an explosive, and the BY PRODUCTS OF
ITS USE, just when burnt on its own, is aluminum oxide and MOLTEN
iron. The use i mentions is, we use a few ceramic potters together,
with a thin sheet of aluminum between two, plugging the shared hole.
This is placed on top of a
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
You are saying he is committing a crime by not speaking up, and the
government is using this as a lever to prevent him from . . .
speaking up.
No of course not. The crime, if there was one (and that is not clear) -- would
have already been
Jones Beene wrote:
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
If there's something more concrete, which pins the temperature and
the date a
little better, I'd love to see it.
Well, there was, but I am having trouble finding it now. Maybe you can help.
I remember seeing
Michel Good points Horace, but note Rick doesn't deny global warming,
he only disputes the anthropogenic explanation for some reason (maybe he
owns oil fields or something?) /Michel
Thanks, I guess, but my reasons were also clearly posted. You mean my
motivation? I'm an alien. Didn't you see The
From a recent comment Jones made:
If you were charged with doing a thorough investigation, would not you at
least
interview him - hopefully with a grant of immunity from future prosecution ?
FWIW,
I'm reminded of what a number of UFO investigators have tried to do
when it came to the
Stephen,
However, remote sensing can't see high temperatures through an opaque
mass of debris. At wavelengths emitted by very hot objects, which are
in the visible band, it can only read the *surface* temperature.
Yes but... Here is a page with a tiny version of the same or a similar
The pool of tears wonderland-style:
Ok the following may be venturing way down into the rabbitt hole of Alice, so
it is worth prefeacing these remarks as being generally unrelated to the prior
discussion about thermite - such as used in demolition.
Question to the Cheshire Cat: What do
Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please note they concur with the NIST findings.
And - you know this, how?
I know this because I read Japanese newspapers and watch the NHK news.
After all, the whitewash has only been out a few
days, and yet these thousands of agenicies . . .
The
Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen,
However, remote sensing can't see high temperatures through an opaque
mass of debris. At wavelengths emitted by very hot objects, which are
in the visible band, it can only read the *surface* temperature.
Yes but... Here is a page with a tiny version of
On Sep 8, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
(typo: 2009 in last heading)
Thanks!
Good points Horace, but note Rick doesn't deny global warming, he
only disputes the anthropogenic explanation for some reason
(maybe he owns oil fields or something?)
Michel
It strikes me as
40 matches
Mail list logo
