ProfWag,
Can you watch this two minute video clip and explain or justify this obvious clear cut lie by NIST?
Is he lying deliberately or just uninformed? If he's uninformed, then why was he appointed to be the director of NIST?
ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?ProfWag,
Can you watch this two minute video clip and explain or justify this obvious clear cut lie by NIST? Is he lying deliberately or just uninformed? If he's uninformed, then why was he appointed to be the director of NIST? “Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?what is it they say - none so blind as those who WILL not see ??
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?Nope. Sure can't. And NEITHER can you! I DON"T know who said these things and when. What were they referring too? When did they say it? How many of these things were taken out of context? There are people who have said they saw molten flows. Yep, sure are! The NIST also explained them. Aluminum melts and flows (airplanes are made of aluminum). As do many other things. Skyscrapers of this size are made up of more things than just steel.
"Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass. Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft. *Amount of aluminum can be ascertained by counting the droplets and measuring their size compared to the known size of the window. It's not easy to get a good number on this. It's based on the number of slugs seen in video stills, their size relative to the window width which was about 22 inches, and the density of aluminum, assuming this was aluminum. http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magconda.htm The weight of a gallon of aluminum is about 22.5 pounds. A hundred of these would already be 2250 lbs. A gallon size is not unlike the size of the slugs that were pouring out the window. Look at them relative to the window size. They look small at first, but when you realize how big the towers were, the slugs were fairly large. It must have been in the thousands of pounds...." http://www.debunking911.com There is not ONE ugly, freakin theory that your people come up with that there isn't a logical explanation for.
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?Can I just ask, in abbreviated but laymen's terms preferrably, what you are suggesting happened to the Twin Towers on 9/11?
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?Thanks again Nostradamus. I watched a little bit of it, but it was obvious that they really have an agenda and weren't going to have answers for the simple questions. If they think that a controlled demolition occured at the WTC, then it would have had to have been coordinated with Al Quada since they flew planes into those buildings 2 hours before the collapse. Denying that planes flew into the buildings would be moronic in my opinion. Coordinating something on a grand scale like that with or enemies just isn't going to happen. That simple common freakin' sense question essentially rules out anything that Gage has to say and proves he's either fraudulent or a total dumbass. C'mon conspiracy theorists, THINK and use common sense!
Re: ProfWag, can you explain this obvious lie and denial?If my $.02 is worth anything here... I went to ground zero a few days after the collapse and personally witnessed nothing but smouldering rubble. Mostly what looked like powdered concrete, small particles and massive destruction. I do remember paper being everywhere around the site. The stench hit you first, from many blocks away and it was horrid. Somewhere in my giant box of floppy discs, I have probably hundreds of pictures that I took that day as well as from subsequent visits.
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests |
|