In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:51:39 -0700 (PDT):
Hi,
[snip]
But even in Mills CQM when oxygen is active, if I am not mistaken, - it is the
O++ catalyst and not the hydrino, which emits the excess energy.
In CQM, the O++ first absorbs 54 eV from the Hydrino, becoming
John Steck wrote:
ANY resistance from 'pan caking' or structural failure would have shown up
in a significant increase in collapse time... several orders of magnitude
more.
That is incorrect. Many buildings have collapsed, on purpose and by accident,
and they fall nearly as quickly as with a
I do not think they went down in freefall, after a few seconds the rate
looks like it nearly stabilises as the resistance from the undamaged
structure below just about cancels the acceleration of the mass above - I
suspect this figure of 9 or 10 seconds need to be examined from the videos
and
Nick Palmer wrote:
I do not think they went down in freefall, after a few seconds the rate
looks like it nearly stabilises as the resistance from the undamaged
structure below just about cancels the acceleration of the mass above -
I suspect this figure of 9 or 10 seconds need to be
this is not true. we have footage that shows the collapse of the
inside of the building for the first few seconds, and arial footage
showing it from the inside.
On 2/27/07, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Palmer wrote:
I do not think they went down in freefall, after a
leaking pen wrote:
this is not true. we have footage that shows the collapse of the
inside of the building for the first few seconds, and arial footage
showing it from the inside.
Really! I didn't realize that. Is it possible to line up the view
from the inside and the images from the
: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:50 AM
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
Let me say something here, people: This is a science forum. Please
apply a modicum of quantitative thinking, basic physics and common
sense to your
Zell, Chris wrote:
More than that, I doubt the WTC buildings were as well built as the
Empire State building - when it survived A collision with a WWII
vintage bomber.
That is incorrect. The Towers were far stronger and better built than
the Empire State building. If you were to try to
That's my point exactly.
What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with
'Bush is a twit'.
Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the technical
stuff, members of the intelligence community did that.
Further no one is claiming there were suicide
That's my point exactly.
What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with
'Bush is a twit'.
Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the technical
stuff, members of the intelligence community did that.
Further no one is claiming there were suicide
Umm, so, if there were no suicide pilots, who was flying?
On 2/21/07, John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's my point exactly.
What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with
'Bush is a twit'.
Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the
Stranger and stranger. So how do you qualify the pilots, if not suicide pilots?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
That's my point exactly.
What I am
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Jed, you have said more than once that (nearly)
all the expert engineers /knew/ it would collapse.
That's absolutely not what I read in the mainstream press reports . . .
These reports were premature, and wrong. Later
interviews and testimony by experts revealed
leaking pen wrote:
Umm, so, if there were no suicide pilots, who was flying?
The planes were remote controlled, by CIA agents hiding behind the
grassy knoll, of course.
Haven't you been following the discussion? You've really gotta get with
the program, Pen.
The passengers were all
@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
That's my point exactly.
What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with
'Bush is a twit'.
Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the
technical stuff, members of the intelligence community did that.
Further
Well I must say at first I didn't believe it, but when you look at the
evidence the planes were clearly switched.
It starts off with the boarding of some of the flights, there were oddities
with different gates and such, very confusing, the details of one of the
planes was given, it was boarding
John Berry wrote:
There were also reports of two of the planes landing safely at an
airport, yes really. (according to the Mayor anyway:
http://www.rense.com/general68/says.htm)
The transponder signals were turned off over an airport and turned
back on, but it would not have been possible
Oh dear it's unbelievable one can believe such things. My remote controlled
live whales scheme pales in comparison :)
Michel
- Original Message -
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite
On 2/22/07, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh dear it's unbelievable one can believe such things. My remote
controlled live whales scheme pales in comparison :)
Oh look, your rhetoric made solid evidence disappear.
*poof*
Good job you don't have to deal with all those nasty facts.
not say it more clearly, this is CRAP
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 3:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
leaking pen wrote:
not a skeptic, but, with the flow inside and out of the girder
Jones Beene wrote:
Exactly. Anyone who says the NIST report somehow eliminated thermite
as contributory agent is seriously in error. They never considered
it at all. From the NIST site:
Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being
brought down by controlled
Yes, thermite, at least the more comonly used stuff, is iron II oxide
and aluminum powder. it reduces the aluminum to aluminum oxide, and
creates molten iron. So you get molten iron, which cools black and
lumpy, and you get a blackish purplish slag laying on top of it, which
is the aluminum
Stiffler Scientific wrote:
I can not say it more clearly, this is CRAP
Agreed. And who needs a flame war on top of crap.
This is my last posting on this subject.
Jones
of course, the traces of thermite are , again, iron, aluminum, and the
oxides of each. ohh, and high heat.
i think its safe to say the site was FULL of said materials.
(besides, the sheared angle of the broken girder looks more like a
shaped charge explosive cutting through. which would have
I wrote:
PROBLEM: How do you know what airplane is going to hit?
I meant what floor the airplane is going to hit. Sorry about that.
Did he conclude the building was brought down by explosives? Then
he is a flake with a PhD, like Steve Jones.
Why do we need that kind of comment in a
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
I meant what floor the airplane is going to hit. Sorry about that.
Err, I haven't followed the debate closely (many points
/21/07, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
I meant what floor the airplane is going to hit. Sorry about that.
Err, I
John Berry writes:
Actually it has been pointed out that there was a light (laser?) beam
visible on the building which was probably used for painting the taget . . .
These were amateur pilots. An experienced pilot would have great difficulty
doing that. Many of the Japanese kamikaze pilots
also, 5k pounds of thermite would be required to bring it down on its
own. thats not the conspiracy theory. the theory is that the
thermite was used to melt the concrete and weaken teh steal, allowing
the rest of the natural damage from the plane to do it. that requires
substantially less
Indeed, i recall experts being brought on teh air as the towers were
burning stating they were designed to take this and more. my
understanding the engineers who designed and built the suckers were
shocked when they fell.
On 2/20/07, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jed Rothwell
30 matches
Mail list logo
