Chop, chop: Let's Learn Properties of Steel

Dear Mr. Limey,

The "chop, chop" nit should be directed at me, instead of Mr. McKee. But since you drag me into this, I might as well address your concerns.

Mr. Limey wrote:

How about that factual backup for your comment that the fires would not have got hot enough to weaken the steel. Come on man, chop, chop!

Having problems with the Google, are we, sir? You could learn a lot by entering into Google phrases like "steel blast furnace", "temperatures weakening iron", "temperature steel loses strength", and "temperature jet fuel burns".

What temperature does steel lose strength? At about 550° C (1,000° F) steel is at 50% strength and at about 800° C (1472° F) structural steel loses 90% of its strength. The properties of steel vary widely, depending on its alloying elements.

What temperature does jet fuel reach in open air? 287.5 °C (549.5 °F).

Already you should be seeing a problem that jet fuel can't heat steel hot enough to lose 50% of its strength, and this is before the heat conductivity of steel in a structure is factored in. And this is before we observe that the buildings were over-designed by at least a factor of 2 and that NIST said the jet fuel burned off in the first few minutes (assuming of course that it was a commercial jet).

Refusing to Converse

Dear Mr. Limey wrote:

[El Once] posited the view that the planes that crashed into WTC1 and 2 where not in fact passenger liners and the footage screened throughout the world was CGI enhanced. I still maintain that this is utter nonsense and I still refuse to converse with el Once.

Mr. Limey's childish stance on refusing to converse with me applies not only to CGI, but also to selecting his favorite burned out 9/11 vehicle, as amassed on Dr. Judy Woods website.

Please ignore the limited hangout titles and subtitles for the pages referring to spaced based weapons and directed energy weapons (DEW). Just focus on the evidence. On the first link, look at the sequence starting with Figure toast2a to toast4. It shows a parking lot at some distance from the collapsing towers and the cloud of dust rolling in. Then it shows fires starting to burn in various vehicles, but not all vehicles and not paper or other non-metallic debris.

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam5.html#toasted
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/moretoastedcars.html

Mr. McKee and I love the fire truck.
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/firetruck-3.jpg

I also like:
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image165.jpg (fire truck)
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image184.jpg (another fire truck)
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image18swamp.jpg (police car)
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image9.jpg (another polic car)

Why does Mr. Limey refuse to pick out his favorite burned out vehicle? I believe that the starting point for his refusal is that he does not want to even acknowledge the pictorial evidence of these burned out cars, because to do so means that he has to dig for the official govt explanation regarding how gravitational collapse and fires from jet fuel and office furniture (80+ stories up) explains this. But this is something that the govt ignored and had no official explanation for. Ergo, better to come up with a lame excuse for not engaging Senor El Once than to expose this major weakness in the OGCT.

Witches and Hitler: the Psychology of Truthers

Dear Mr. Plumber,

I love how you start "this isn’t intended as an ad-hominem attack" and then proceed to do just that with references to Salem Witch trials and Hitler in your "attempt to understand the psychology of truthers", as if the 9/11 Truth Movement were a homogeneous caste of people with shared knowledge, experience, and fundamental religious/moral beliefs.

Oh snap! I stand corrected. We do have shared knowledge: Newtonian physics. Good to see that you want us to drown, burn at the stake, or suffer in death camps for harboring such heretical musings.

Your modest but growing body of work on this blog certainly make proud Cass Sunstein, Phillip Zelikow, the NSA Q-Group, and all the disinformation warriors in the employ of the US/Israeli govt. I'll leave it as an exercise to the readers to determine which of the 25 Rules of Disinformation you apply.

Milli-nuke is smaller than a kiloton nuke

Dear Mr. Plumber wrote:

About those photos. I’ll admit I laughed out loud. I find it hilarious that you believe this disproves the ‘official theory.’

What I find hilarious is that the OGCT doesn't have an explanation for those photos. It ignores them. The fires from dust theory is yours, I believe.

Mr. Plumber wrote:

I agree that it may seem difficult to comprehend how the dust could cause so many fires, but then again, if millinukes were uses it would be equally difficult to see much of anything could have survived. Also, if these photos are good evidence against the official theory, then it doesn’t make it good evidence for your theory. If nukes were used, then most if not all the buildings/vehicles would be vaporized. I was also under the impression that EMPs don’t cause physical damage, just electrical damage. What is your evidence that EMP damage is consistent with the photos of the damaged vehicles in the links?

A milliliter is smaller than a liter and a kiloliter. A millimeter is smaller than a meter and kilometer. A milli-nuke is smaller than the kiloton nukes you keep envisioning. The radius of destruction, particularly when within the confines of the chex outer steel mesh and at various heights in the structure, would not have reached to other buildings.

Vehicles in the streets were shielded from some of the direct effects of the nuclear discharge. Some of the burned damage to the vehicles is consistent with being hit by a heat wave; others are consistent with being hit by an EMP.

An EMP's damage doesn't have to be limited to electronics. It destroys unshielded electronics by inducing high currents in the metal it passes through. High currents cause high heat and can quickly cause thin circuit board traces and semiconductor leads to burn like a fuse. When that line-of-sight energy is directed at a piece of sheet metal like from a vehicle, the high currents induced can cause the paint and attachments like door handles and seals to burn away. Of course, the level of induced current is proportional to the radial distance from the source, and is affected by shading from other vehicles, structures, and the vehicle's orientation to the EMP.

The anomalous burn patterns to police cars and firetrucks as depicted in the pictures are explained as a side-effect to millinuke(s).

Early on you make the comment if millinukes were uses it would be equally difficult to see much of anything could have survived. Need I remind you about the thousands of people who were vaporized, whose remains could not be found in sufficient quantity to be pieced together, who had bone fragments scattered on the roofs of adjacent building? Open your eyes. Connect the dots.

Señor El Once

8% of 45 or 100% of 12 or all there was

Dear Mr. Plumber wrote:

I want your feelings on the Wally Miller quotes and what you make of them specifically.

In general, the statements someone makes immediately after an event, as opposed to later points in time, are the most accurate. They are the raw top-of-the-head data points before time has allowed them to cognitively connect them with other data points into potentially a completely different trend line.

The quotes in question were:

Shanksville, PA coroner Wally Miller who assisted in the clean up of the debris of Flight 93:

“There was just nothing visible. It was the strangest feeling... I stopped being a coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there. ... I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop. ... [L]ike someone took a scrap truck dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash in it.”

Miller and staff have identified remains of 12 passengers ... USNews paraphrases... only 8 percent of the human remains could be recovered.

Flight 93 had 38 passengers, five flight attendants, and two pilots = 45 people.

Plane crashes with passengers have bodies, body parts, seats, luggage, and aircraft parts. Miller's initial quote-mined observations seem to testify to the lack of the first two, while other witnesses to the crash site have commented on the lack of all of the above. There is no reason to dispute it.

My feeling is that his "correction" to his statements at a later point in time rings of outsider manipulation that has coached him to try to spin it away from the lack of bodies (which could imply vaporization by missile) and more importantly towards "of course it was the hijacked flight 93 and cause of death was known, namely impact with the ground".

Mr. Plumber continued (emphasis added):

... Miller was talking about the devastation of the plane impacts. The bodies were vaporized and discovering remains was difficult.

Vaporized, Mr. Plumber? Other than the anomalous Pentagon plane, since when do commercial passenger aircraft vaporize on impact so completely?

You could be implying that something was shot at the aircraft to vaporize them. Or you could be using that verbiage to spin the anomalies of this crash in a direction that matches the other three planes.

That 8% figure and even Miller's initial statements appear to be based on the flight manifest and based on the assumption that the aircraft was indeed Flight 93. If it wasn't Flight 93, then maybe 12 passengers is 100% of all there was.

Señor El Once

Agree with Them

Dear Mr. McKee,

The “clever” debunkers do not want a rational debate on the evidence and science. If they can get you off-topic by questioning your “delusional” beliefs, your bad intentions, and your cult actions, they’ve won half the battle.

It is much easier to agree with them.

Yep, you betcha! I am a certified member of the AE9/11 Truth cult. We are deluded into thinking that Newton’s Laws should have applicability in what we observed on 9/11. Our intentions certainly are bad from the perspective of “continuity of govt,” because by golly, we don’t want war crimes, torture, rendition, and a host of other paranoid plagues (figurative and literal) continuing.

I most certainly do hate American (leadership), those wimpy-ass Mo-Fo’s who can only think to vote in favor of their corporate sponsors and not in favor of the people. Certainly net neutrality, banking bailouts, and votes for more war profiteering are examples of this.

I most certainly do hate (unregulated) capitalism, because corporations aren’t people and don’t give a flying F about people, except the ones who help keep the profits flowing, and even then they’ll use them and abuse them and then show them the door. Unregulated and deregulated capitalism is one of the root causes of our problems, with the un/de-regulations being forced on us by corporate interests.

Señor El Once

Quote-Mines

Dear Mr. ConsDemo, you wrote:

It’s only a “religion” in the sense its “believers” are impervious to evidence in the material world. ... The truthers are equally divorced from reality but also do not have good intentions at all, so I don’t compare it to a formal religion.

Yes, indeed, I am a bit religiously fanatical about 9/11 Truth, but it is religious fanaticism to God-given mathematical truths of the universe of the form 2+3=5. Except that the cheerleaders for the official govt conspiracy theory (OGCT) continually tell us 2+3=4.7, which comes up short no matter how you measure it.

Football fanaticism and misguided American patriotism (mixed with perversions of Christ's Christianity) is what fuels proponents of the OGCT.

I will not admit that any anomalous aspect of 9/11 is contradictory to the govt's version, because the revelation of this fact unravels not just the crime, not just its "respected" culprits, but our very nation consisting for 50 States. Were I to let one wild seed of 9/11 truth germinate, it would mean that I'd have to be true to my oath regarding defending the Constitution from its enemies, both foreign and domestic. It would mean I might just have to muster up the courage akin to our founding fathers in wrestling our future from the oligarchs and corporations, and maybe to make new more manageable countries and territories out of fifty states.

Good (Disinfo) Document on the WTC Towers Collapse

Dear Mr. Limey,

Allow me to offer you encouragement to make more frequent postings to your blog. They are very representative and hold up well, but not quite in the direction that you would surmise.

In one of your previous postings, you lamented:

How (do you) deal with the incorrectly held view that refuses to be educated, and worse still, continues to peddle its nonsense to others?

The onus is on you to prove that the adverb incorrectly and the noun nonsense apply. As for the phrase refuses to be educated, does this branding apply to you?

Mr. Limey wrote:

I, like many sensible and critically thinking people, can not comprehend why there is still a vocal movement who denies the truth of what happened on that awful September 11th, when the WTC towers were struck by passenger planes, in a terrorist attack.

We have points of agreement.

9/11 Special Pleading

Well done. This serves as a very representative example, of which would be proud Philip Zelikow, the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission and author of their report.

While at Harvard Phillip Zelikow actually wrote about the use, and misuse, of history in policymaking. As he noted in his own words, “contemporary” history is “defined functionally by those critical people and events that go into forming the public’s presumptions about its immediate past. The idea of ‘public presumption’,” he explained, “is akin to [the] notion of ‘public myth’ but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word ‘myth.’ Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community.” So Zelikow, the guy who wrote The 9/11 Commission Report, was an expert in how to misuse public trust and create PUBLIC MYTHS.

http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/rape-story-phillip-d-zelikow-911-myth-maker/

Banned from 9/11 Blogger

Anybody in the 9/11 Truth Movement who has mustered their anonymous alias’s courage — fortified by superhero underwear, Toy Story pajamas, Cheetos, and beer in their mother’s basement — to step up onto their cyber soap boxes to enlighten their online world to the conspiracy truth has experienced not only the direct ridicule regarding these very aforementioned (real or imagined) issues but also the indirect after-the-fact embarrassment from having been led around by their noses and been mistaken on an issue or two.

“Pods on planes” comes to mind for me. A clever limited hangout I was once enamoured with. Today, I don’t think that. I think “planes on pods”, or rather, pixels representing planes covering over small military planes or cruise missiles on the video footage. Another good one is space based weapons & DEW. I don’t discount their existence, only their operational deployment on 9/11.

A propaganda trick I’m observing relates to spearheading the exploration into a theory, establish the legend base on a pile of substantiated truth, becoming the go-to expert, and then doing something that undermines credibility that serves to take both the theory and the underlying truths/evidence out of play in a guilt by association ploy. When all else fails, poor online behavior on either side of the debate can help it implode.

The taboo subjects are a knee-jerk reaction not just to the topics deemed collectively crazy upon some review. No, it is also kickback to the religious (or football) fanaticism to the subject, much of which was less than sincere, because its purpose wasn’t to shed light or enlighten or to demonstrate an open-mind that could be convinced it was wrong. Its purpose was to co-opt and divide the movement.

So having gone through those wringers, those who administer sites like 9/11 blogger are jaded. Imagine the “go-to” website on 9/11 infiltrated with a team of close-minded, misinformed, and often purposely obtuse (even in cases paid-to-post) fanatics. I’ve been there, done that. The first round is fun, but when you get dragged through the 2nd or n-th round covering the exact same dubious arguments, it gets old. Disinformation warriors never tire of such circles; it is their job, and they’ll gladly re-use entries from their database.

Fell Into Its Own Footprint

You point out 9 valid items that were anomalous in the demolition of one of the WTC towers. And then you come up with the following conclusion:

“Can all of this rule out explosives? I would say so. … I am utterly satisfied that the rest of the collapse is pure physics and requires no further help.”

Your comments about the tilted section falling back demonstrates an error in your understanding of about Newtonian physics. One of Newton’s laws says that once an object is in motion, it will stay in motion until some outside force acts upon it. Those upper floors tilting due to asymmetric failing support underneath and gaining angular momentum is believable. According to Newton’s laws, they should have continued to tip over and as a multi-story mass fallen outside the path of greatest resistance and creamed neighboring buildings.

You imply that the top section stops its angular momentum and falls back into line to continue the destruction through the path of greatest resistance. Where did the energy come from to stop that momentum and achieve this?

You talk about “immense pressure behind [the outer shell bursting outwards]“, yet can’t seem to rectify that if strictly Newtonian physics were at play, the energy needed for this observation combined with the energy used to arrest the angular momentum means that the collapse could not proceed at near gravitational acceleration.

Moreover, it is known that the structure at any arbitrary height h will be stronger than the structure at any height greater than h. For the sake of discussion, if height h had n floors above it and given more Newton laws about equal and opposite forces, those top n floors could destroy themselves into n floors below height h. Not only should the collapse have stopped at 2n floors (if not before), but also the destruction of each floor should have slow the collapse of 2n floors as something that even lay-people, the 9/11 Commission, or NIST could not use the phrase “at free-fall speed” to describe.

Additionally, when energy is consumed in pulverizing the mass of 2n floors and those crumbles of mass fall (or are ejected) outside the tower’s structure, that mass is no longer available to be used as a cohesive unit to destroy even more of the remaining tower.

All bets are off if additional energy sources are added.