The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-10-2013, 04:00 PM   #76
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by defilade View Post
Here is a simple experiment for you Morons... Fire up that Gas grill and crank it up as high as it will go. Let it run for hours.. notice something Gee! those steel grates did'nt melt under a perfect constant flame (Which the steel from the WTC could not receive from OFFICE FIRES) Talk about an easy way to de-bunk the official story!!

OFFICE FIRES!!

How's that Steel holding up!!
The 'moron' is the one who posts a BBQ picture to illustrate that steel doesn't melt.

Quote:
[Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of Newcastle, John Knapton] told BBC News Online: "The world trade centre was designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, but that was unusual... we are trying to discover why they [ the towers ] collapsed and what needs doing to rebuild them."

"The buildings survived the impact and the explosion but not the fire, and that is the problem."

"The 35 tonnes of aviation fuel will have melted the steel... all that can be done is to place fire resistant material around the steel and delay the collapse by keeping the steel cool for longer."
Quote:
Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the Trade Center's construction manager [sic], speculated that flames fuelled by thousands of litres of aviation fuel melted steel supports.

"This building would have stood had a plane or a force caused by a plane smashed into it," he said. "But steel melts, and 90,850 litres of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire."
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:15 PM   #77
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
The 'moron' is the one who posts a BBQ picture to illustrate that steel doesn't melt.
Not sure what your point was. I suspect you don't know either/

No way jet fuel (kerosene) could melt steel. Not even close. Yet something did melt steel.

The fires in the WTC basement burned for at least 3 months. In the early days the NY firemen sprayed millions of gallons of water on the rubble pile trying to put out the fires -- to no effect.

Water has no effect on burning thermite -- at 4500 degrees or hotter.
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:20 PM   #78
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
You love to just make **** up don't you? The top 20 floors did not just *poof* into dust. They were quickly obscured by a dust cloud created as the two parts of the building smashed into each other, but they did not, as you suggest, just *poof* into dust.



So no lateral forces great enough to operate on dust can be generated by the collapse of a building huh?





Once again for the idiot: hundreds of millions of kg of dust (even though it was not all "dustified") is still 100's of millions of kg.
You are so full of yourself -- but you are still wrong.

The WTC rubble pile was only about 6 stories high. If you study the photos you will see no concrete -- why? Because there was none.

Despite the fact the WTC was made up largely of concrete --

So what happened to the concrete? Simple. It was converted to dust. The dust piled up all over lower Manhattan.

A mere collapsing building cannot do this. Look at the photos of concrete buildings that have been destroyed by an earthquake -- and you will see the floors pancaked one on another.

There was no pancaking on 9/11. The concrete was converted to dust -- and this took a vey large amount of energy.

The only thing that could do this is explosives.

MHG
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:45 PM   #79
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Not sure what your point was. I suspect you don't know either/

No way jet fuel (kerosene) could melt steel. Not even close. Yet something did melt steel.

The fires in the WTC basement burned for at least 3 months. In the early days the NY firemen sprayed millions of gallons of water on the rubble pile trying to put out the fires -- to no effect.

Water has no effect on burning thermite -- at 4500 degrees or hotter.
That's exactly my point. Troofers are ignorant deniers of basic science.

You're the clown who ridiculed others because you couldn't understand that temperature and heat were NOT the same, something a schoolboy would know.

Now you want to dispute proven science, again.

I notice you have nothing to say about the two quotes I posted. Explain how they are lying and why?

Quote:
Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the Trade Center's construction manager:
But steel melts, and 90,850 litres of aviation fluid melted the steel. Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that fire."
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:47 PM   #80
defilade
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
The 'moron' is the one who posts a BBQ picture to illustrate that steel doesn't melt.
Must be over your head! To simple for ya.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:52 PM   #81
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by defilade View Post
Must be over your head! To simple for ya.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 06:33 PM   #82
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,903

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
You are so full of yourself -- but you are still wrong.

The WTC rubble pile was only about 6 stories high. If you study the photos you will see no concrete -- why? Because there was none.

Despite the fact the WTC was made up largely of concrete --

So what happened to the concrete? Simple. It was converted to dust. The dust piled up all over lower Manhattan.

A mere collapsing building cannot do this. Look at the photos of concrete buildings that have been destroyed by an earthquake -- and you will see the floors pancaked one on another.

There was no pancaking on 9/11. The concrete was converted to dust -- and this took a vey large amount of energy.

The only thing that could do this is explosives.

MHG
As has been explained to you dozens of times, you twit, the very large amount of energy (on the order of a small nuclear explosion) was provided by the collapse of the towers themselves. The collapse of those towers released nearly a half kiloton of energy.

Hell, I've even shown you the ****ing math: http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...6&postcount=56

Just because you refuse to acknowledge that fact does not an argument make.

Last edited by Fedaykin; 01-10-2013 at 06:39 PM..
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 04:07 AM   #83
defilade
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
As has been explained to you dozens of times, you twit, the very large amount of energy (on the order of a small nuclear explosion) was provided by the collapse of the towers themselves. The collapse of those towers released nearly a half kiloton of energy.

Hell, I've even shown you the ****ing math: http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...6&postcount=56

Just because you refuse to acknowledge that fact does not an argument make.
And as YOU have been explained to it was BOMBS!!! Controlled demolition!!! just like every other building that comes down in that fashion NIT-WIT!! why would anyone think otherwise?? Yep....OFFICE FIRES

You would have a better chance of convicing me that it was.........


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 05:43 AM   #84
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,710
Default

Back to thermite, I see.

Remember how you promoted red-mercury-powered pure-fusion mini-nukes, gaffe, to get around the impossibilities of thermite?

WTF happened with 'em?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 06:29 AM   #85
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,908

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

I can't think of a better place for this:

Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:01 AM   #86
orangeatheist
Champion of the Godless
 
orangeatheist's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by defilade View Post
And as YOU have been explained to it was BOMBS!!! Controlled demolition!!! just like every other building that comes down in that fashion NIT-WIT!! why would anyone think otherwise?? Yep....OFFICE FIRES

You would have a better chance of convicing me that it was.........


The BBQ grill had me suspicious, but THIS post convinces me.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we got ourselves a

orangeatheist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 01:49 PM   #87
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default

So Brit is still claiming that the jet fuel melted the steel.

Even after NIST acknowledged in its 2005 final report that this did not happen.
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 02:25 PM   #88
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,710
Default

What happened to red-mercury-powered pure-fusion mini-nukes, gaffe?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 02:44 PM   #89
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
So Brit is still claiming that the jet fuel melted the steel.

No, the quotes were from experts, unlike you, I look for 'expert opinion' not fairy tales.

Even after NIST acknowledged in its 2005 final report that this did not happen.
This what NIST said, but keep repeating the same troofer BS.

From the NIST website, 2011, which nicely summarizes the final report.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC Towers Investigation
6. What caused the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?
Quote:
Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York City Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudi..._wtctowers.cfm

And from a recent Purdue University study.

Quote:
Building fires may reach temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, or more than 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the strength of steel structures drops by about 40 percent when exposed to temperatures exceeding 500 degrees Celsius.
http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/resea...1Varma911.html

What sources are you using, Gaffney? Unicorns? the idiot, Gage?

Last edited by DenverBrit; 01-11-2013 at 02:47 PM..
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 03:02 PM   #90
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
This what NIST said, but keep repeating the same troofer BS.

From the NIST website, 2011, which nicely summarizes the final report.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC Towers Investigation
6. What caused the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudi..._wtctowers.cfm

And from a recent Purdue University study.


http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/resea...1Varma911.html

What sources are you using, Gaffney? Unicorns? the idiot, Gage?
I posted my first paper on the WTC collapse -- a critique of the NIST report -- in December 2006.

I reposted a slightly updated version the following year.

The only error that emerged was a typo -- I mis stated the name NIST. The paper has otherwise held up.

I've posted it on this board several times. Here's the link. I challenge you to read it -- but of course to understand it you would also have to study the NIST Report -- an investment of time I'm sure you are not ready to make.

As Allen Dulles said "Americans don't read reports..."

MHG

Still Dead on Arrival:
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle18999.htm
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 03:05 PM   #91
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default 1700 architects and engineers speak out

This is the best ever video on the WTC collapse.

It's two hours and is very thorough. The proponents of the official story have not tried to rebut it -- understandable. They simply cannot. It is too cogent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJ...layer_embedded
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 03:21 PM   #92
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
I posted my first paper on the WTC collapse -- a critique of the NIST report -- in December 2006.


This is why you come across as an arrogant, pompous ass.

You have no background, experience, qualifications or even the basic scientific knowledge of a schoolboy. So you 'critiquing' the NIST report is beyond funny.

At the same time you make this 'critique' claim, you were arguing that temperature and heat were exactly the same.
And you expect anyone, other than a troofer rube, to give you an ounce of credibility?

Stick to organic gardening.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 05:59 PM   #93
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,710
Default

Every post by gaffe regarding 9/11 is bull****. Every one.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 06:06 PM   #94
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,710
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
You have no background, experience, qualifications or even the basic scientific knowledge of a schoolboy. So you 'critiquing' the NIST report is beyond funny.
At one time, gaffe claimed that his bull**** was supported by NIST.

How can this be, you ask?

Well, he called someone at NIST and they verified some pissant numerical value that gaffe had already read from a NIST report.

gaffe then used that to claim that NIST agreed with him.

I called him out numerous times on his lie, but gaffe being gaffe, he didn't have the balls to admit he was a lying fraud **********.

gaffe is one of the most immoral, contemptible, POSes I've ever run across on the Intertubes - and that's 20+ years' worth.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 06:25 AM   #95
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

So let me get this straight:

Sane person: It was jet fuel.

Gaff: No even the NIST said it wasn't.

Another sane person: No they said it was and here's the link.

Gaff: I wrote a paper criticizing the NIST. They don't know what they're talking about.



Did anyone else catch the hilarity here??
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 07:41 AM   #96
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
At one time, gaffe claimed that his bull**** was supported by NIST.

How can this be, you ask?

Well, he called someone at NIST and they verified some pissant numerical value that gaffe had already read from a NIST report.

gaffe then used that to claim that NIST agreed with him.

I called him out numerous times on his lie, but gaffe being gaffe, he didn't have the balls to admit he was a lying fraud **********.

gaffe is one of the most immoral, contemptible, POSes I've ever run across on the Intertubes - and that's 20+ years' worth.
Gaffney is a fraud, along with Gage and the other self promoting con men of the pathetic troofer cabal.

Not one peer reviewed paper amongst the lot of them.

Why? Because they know they would be exposed for the money grubbing charlatans they are.

How ****ing difficult is it to see this assclown for what he is?

DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 07:53 AM   #97
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
So let me get this straight:

Sane person: It was jet fuel.

Gaff: No even the NIST said it wasn't.

Another sane person: No they said it was and here's the link.

Gaff: I wrote a paper criticizing the NIST. They don't know what they're talking about.



Did anyone else catch the hilarity here??
Every time Gaffney posts!
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 08:22 AM   #98
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,294

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Gage's constant appeals for troofer money is shameless.

The troofers have taken a page out of the televangelists book of cons.



The latest from his website. Unbelievable!

Quote:
Platinum Circle of Torchbearers – $25,000/yr

All of the benefits listed at the Gold Circle of Torchbearers plus:

Platinum level AE911Truth Plaque of Appreciation personally signed by Richard Gage, AIA
Privileged phone and meeting access to Richard Gage, AIA, & Board Members

Diamond Circle of Torchbearers – $50,000/yr (Every ****ing year!!)

All of the benefits listed at the Platinum Circle of Torchbearers level plus:

Diamond level AE911Truth Plaque of Appreciation, personally signed by Richard Gage, AIA.
Special Access to AE911Truth national and international events as personal guest of Richard Gage, AIA, including special honors announced at all events.
Founders’ Circle – $100,000 - (Lifetime Membership)

All of the benefits listed at the Diamond Circle of Torchbearers level plus:

Founder’s Circle level AE911Truth Plaque of Appreciation, personally signed by Richard Gage, AIA
Benefits package – customized for you
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-se...p-program.html
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 09:21 AM   #99
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,710
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
Gage's constant appeals for troofer money is shameless.

The troofers have taken a page out of the televangelists book of cons.



The latest from his website. Unbelievable!
gaffe fantasizes about having Gage as his personal whore. He desperately wants to get to that $100k level - he's gonna have to sell a hell of lot more books to do that. Which explains why he advertises on the OM. Gage reels in suckers - gaffe tries to do the same thing.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:58 AM   #100
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,941
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
So let me get this straight:

Sane person: It was jet fuel.

Gaff: No even the NIST said it wasn't.

Another sane person: No they said it was and here's the link.

Gaff: I wrote a paper criticizing the NIST. They don't know what they're talking about.

Did anyone else catch the hilarity here??
I agree. There is humor here. But it is a very dark humor.

We have bozos in here who don't even know the official story about the WTC collapse. No way to have a conversation with idiots.
mhgaffney is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:35 AM.


Denver Broncos