25 US military officers challenge official 9/11 story - Page 4 - The Orange Mane

mhgaffney · 10-30-2010, 05:39 PM

very funny.

I'll bet the Dalmation is smarter than you.

Atwater 27 · 10-30-2010, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

very funny.

I'll bet the Dalmation is smarter than you.

Naaa. that dog's brain more closely resembles yours...

mhgaffney · 10-30-2010, 07:30 PM

The problem with your post is -- I'm not a liberal Democrat.

heh heh

Joke's on you.

mhgaffney · 10-30-2010, 08:30 PM

chemical engineer confirms Dr Steven Jones' discovery of nanothermite

Check out this video in which Mark Basile, a materiels scientist at Worchester Polytech, explains how he acquired two samples of WTC dust and replicated discoveries made by Steven Jones.

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-2...mical-engineer

Obushma · 10-31-2010, 10:03 AM

Every person in the United States should question the 9/11 Commission Report, whether you are a truther, or someone who believes it was terrorists.

W*GS · 10-31-2010, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThyNatural

Every person in the United States should question the 9/11 Commission Report, whether you are a truther, or someone who believes it was terrorists.

Before they question it, they ought to read it.

W*GS · 10-31-2010, 11:08 AM

I like this site:

http://ae911truth.info/wordpress

But let's not gaff-o confused with the facts.

mhgaffney · 10-31-2010, 11:25 AM

I read it.

W*gs is plainly unaware that the report fails to mention WTC 7.

It's one reason why one commissioner withdrew from the panel in disgust -- and compared it to the Warren Commission coverup of the assassination of JFK.

W*GS · 10-31-2010, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

I read it.

W*gs is plainly unaware that the report fails to mention WTC 7.

Because the report wasn't intending to replace the work that NIST was doing at the time.

Man, you are dumb.

mhgaffney · 10-31-2010, 03:58 PM

W*gs,

Who said anything about replace? I said: mention.

The collapse of WTC 7 was (and is) so subversive to the official story that the 9/11 Commission refused even to mention it, once, in its report.

The same was true of the US media-- which refused to air footage of the collapse. This is still the case -- and explains why polls as late as 2008-2009 indicated that nearly half of Americans were not even aware that a third high tower fell on 9/11.

This is how the propaganda system works. But the truth eventually triumphs.

MHG

W*GS · 10-31-2010, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

The collapse of WTC 7 was (and is) so subversive to the official story that the 9/11 Commission refused even to mention it, once, in its report.

Sigh.

I should know better by now than to indulge your crap about 9/11.

I've said about all I can say.

This thread and all the others you'll start about 9/11 will no longer be commented upon by me. You're too far gone to be reached with facts, evidence, and reason.

mhgaffney · 10-31-2010, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

Sigh.

I should know better by now than to indulge your crap about 9/11.

I've said about all I can say.

This thread and all the others you'll start about 9/11 will no longer be commented upon by me. You're too far gone to be reached with facts, evidence, and reason.

Finally-- W*gs concedes that he is out of his depth.

Will wonders never cease?

ha ha. I'll believe it when I heard his silence.

W*GS · 10-31-2010, 04:55 PM

I'm not out of my depth - it's just that you're incapable of reason or logic, and arguing 9/11 is like arguing global warming with this guy:

Quote:

“[Global warming]’s a flat-out lie,” Mr. Dennison said in an interview after the debate, adding that he had based his view on the preaching of Rush Limbaugh and the teaching of Scripture. “I read my Bible,” Mr. Dennison said.

You and I have no language in common.

DenverBrit · 10-31-2010, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

Finally-- W*gs concedes that he is out of his depth.

Will wonders never cease?

ha ha. I'll believe it when I heard his silence.

This is just ONE reason you need an editor.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-31-2010, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

I'll bet the Dalmation is smarter than you.

I think he's dispelled all doubt on that account.

mhgaffney · 11-01-2010, 07:15 PM

Don't miss this!

Physicist Jeff Farrer talks about finding nanothermite in the WTC dust...

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-2...de-center-dust

The Lone Bolt · 11-01-2010, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

Don't miss this!

Physicist Jeff Farrer talks about finding nanothermite in the WTC dust...

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-2...de-center-dust

So they found nanothermite! OMGOMGOMG!!

So now Jones and Ferrer will submit their samples anonymously to reputable independent labs for verification, right?

Oh wait. Let me guess -- Jones' next move is to invent a "reputable" lab (run by himself of course

) to verify his findings. And then Gaff will be back to proclaim that lab as legit.

IT'S AN INSIDE JOOOOOOBBBY-JOOBBB!!

The Lone Bolt · 11-01-2010, 10:02 PM

For those who would like to read the counterargument (obviously not Gaff or LABF), link to: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=189896

mhgaffney · 11-01-2010, 10:20 PM

Bolt,

You are floundering around. Send me a message with your address and I will burn you a copy of the presentation Steven Jones made in Sydney last year -- addressed to the world.

Americans have been so dumbed down -- many will never wake up. I'll send you the video for free and you can make up your own mind.

mhgaffney · 11-01-2010, 10:27 PM

I went up to the Randi page- - and it's just garbage.

For one thing -- the WTC dust IS being made available to serious researchers -- to scientists with credentials who want to check the research -- and corroborate or refute. That is already happening.

Someone wrote: We need independent confirmation. I agree. So does Jones. This is why they are making the dust available to other scientists. It's also why we are calling for an independent investigation of 9/11.

FYI Brigham Young University opened its labs to Dr Jones and his team. BYU made available the hi tech equipment (such as electron microscopes) needed to analyze the dust and continue the research. BYU has not take a position on the results -- neither yeah or ney.

The Lone Bolt · 11-01-2010, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

Bolt,

You are floundering around. Send me a message with your address and I will burn you a copy of the presentation Steven Jones made in Sydney last year -- addressed to the world.

Americans have been so dumbed down -- many will never wake up. I'll send you the video for free and you can make up your own mind.

Gaff, I've been following this debate for years now.

I've heard your side and examined your evidence.

I've also listened to the counterarguments and examined their evidence.

After years of careful consideration I have concluded, like many others, that the truthers have no case.

Want to really change my mind? You can start by having Jones submit his samples to Harvard, Princeton, Cornell, CalTech, UC Berkeley, Yale, MIT, or Oxford for independent and anonymous analysis and confirmation. Then, when one or more of these labs confirm his results, I will be more open to his claims.

Simple, no? But of course, this will never happen. You and Jones will invent excuses to avoid it (of course).

The Lone Bolt · 11-01-2010, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhgaffney

I went up to the Randi page- - and it's just garbage.

For one thing -- the WTC dust IS being made available to serious researchers -- to scientists with credentials who want to check the research -- and corroborate or refute. That is already happening.

Someone wrote: We need independent confirmation. I agree. So does Jones. This is why they are making the dust available to other scientists. It's also why we are calling for an independent investigation of 9/11.

FYI Brigham Young University opened its labs to Dr Jones and his team. BYU made available the hi tech equipment (such as electron microscopes) needed to analyze the dust and continue the research. BYU has not take a position on the results -- neither yeah or ney.

OK, when his results are confirmed by independent researchers from reputable labs like the ones I've listed (not truther sham "researchers") I will be more open to his claims.

mhgaffney · 11-01-2010, 10:42 PM

I looked at one of the write-ups by Sunstealer. He seems to misunderstand the work done with the calorimeter.

Jones et al never state that the samples alone can melt steel.

They put the samples in a calorimeter -- and applied energy. At a certain temperature the red chips react -- and release a huge amount of energy -- for their size. In the process they produce iron droplets.

The iron was already there as iron oxide. When the reaction runs the iron droplets are a by product.

In larger quantities however- -the nanothermite will definitely melt steel.

mhgaffney · 11-01-2010, 10:44 PM

Yes -- it will happen. You are wrong. Time will tell.

11-01-2010, 10:02 PM	#94
The Lone Bolt Ring of Famer GO CHARGERS!!!! Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA) Posts: 2,894	For those who would like to read the counterargument (obviously not Gaff or LABF), link to: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=189896 Last edited by The Lone Bolt; 11-01-2010 at 10:13 PM..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-30-2010, 05:37 PM	#76
Atwater 27 Broncosfrums refugee & D. Smith greatest tandem EVER!* Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oregon Posts: 428 Adopt-a-Bronco: B. Bunkley

10-30-2010, 05:39 PM	#77
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	very funny. I'll bet the Dalmation is smarter than you.

10-30-2010, 07:30 PM	#79
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	The problem with your post is -- I'm not a liberal Democrat. heh heh Joke's on you.

10-30-2010, 08:30 PM	#80
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	chemical engineer confirms Dr Steven Jones' discovery of nanothermite Check out this video in which Mark Basile, a materiels scientist at Worchester Polytech, explains how he acquired two samples of WTC dust and replicated discoveries made by Steven Jones. http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-2...mical-engineer

10-31-2010, 10:03 AM	#81
Obushma Ring of Famer Bring your lunch pail Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: SLC Utah Posts: 2,100 Adopt-a-Bronco: Zane Beadles	Every person in the United States should question the 9/11 Commission Report, whether you are a truther, or someone who believes it was terrorists.

10-31-2010, 11:08 AM	#83
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,601	I like this site: http://ae911truth.info/wordpress But let's not gaff-o confused with the facts.

10-31-2010, 11:25 AM	#84
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	I read it. W*gs is plainly unaware that the report fails to mention WTC 7. It's one reason why one commissioner withdrew from the panel in disgust -- and compared it to the Warren Commission coverup of the assassination of JFK.

10-31-2010, 03:58 PM	#86
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	W*gs, Who said anything about replace? I said: mention. The collapse of WTC 7 was (and is) so subversive to the official story that the 9/11 Commission refused even to mention it, once, in its report. The same was true of the US media-- which refused to air footage of the collapse. This is still the case -- and explains why polls as late as 2008-2009 indicated that nearly half of Americans were not even aware that a third high tower fell on 9/11. This is how the propaganda system works. But the truth eventually triumphs. MHG

11-01-2010, 07:15 PM	#92
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	Don't miss this! Physicist Jeff Farrer talks about finding nanothermite in the WTC dust... http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-2...de-center-dust

11-01-2010, 10:20 PM	#95
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	Bolt, You are floundering around. Send me a message with your address and I will burn you a copy of the presentation Steven Jones made in Sydney last year -- addressed to the world. Americans have been so dumbed down -- many will never wake up. I'll send you the video for free and you can make up your own mind.

11-01-2010, 10:27 PM	#96
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	I went up to the Randi page- - and it's just garbage. For one thing -- the WTC dust IS being made available to serious researchers -- to scientists with credentials who want to check the research -- and corroborate or refute. That is already happening. Someone wrote: We need independent confirmation. I agree. So does Jones. This is why they are making the dust available to other scientists. It's also why we are calling for an independent investigation of 9/11. FYI Brigham Young University opened its labs to Dr Jones and his team. BYU made available the hi tech equipment (such as electron microscopes) needed to analyze the dust and continue the research. BYU has not take a position on the results -- neither yeah or ney.

11-01-2010, 10:42 PM	#99
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	I looked at one of the write-ups by Sunstealer. He seems to misunderstand the work done with the calorimeter. Jones et al never state that the samples alone can melt steel. They put the samples in a calorimeter -- and applied energy. At a certain temperature the red chips react -- and release a huge amount of energy -- for their size. In the process they produce iron droplets. The iron was already there as iron oxide. When the reaction runs the iron droplets are a by product. In larger quantities however- -the nanothermite will definitely melt steel.

11-01-2010, 10:44 PM	#100
mhgaffney Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 9,844	Yes -- it will happen. You are wrong. Time will tell.