View Full Version : The Physics of 9-11
Sword_Of_Truth
29th November 2006, 09:18 PM
Good article up on counterpunch.org (http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html).
Twoofers will hate it for two reasons;
Science still isn't on thier side.
It's got "maths" in it. Twoofers don't like "maths". :(
EDIT: Bleh, I've had the stickies hidden for so long, I forgot they were there. Reposting to the appropriate thread.
JamesB
29th November 2006, 09:59 PM
Good article up on counterpunch.org (http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html).
Twoofers will hate it for two reasons;
Science still isn't on thier side.
It's got "maths" in it. Twoofers don't like "maths". :(
EDIT: Bleh, I've had the stickies hidden for so long, I forgot they were there. Reposting to the appropriate thread.
Excellent article. Thanks for finding it. It explains things even for us liberal arts majors. I linked it at SLC.
Kent1
30th November 2006, 11:29 AM
Excellent article. Thanks for finding it. It explains things even for us liberal arts majors. I linked it at SLC.
The other 2 articles are just as good or better
http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html (Fall of WTC 7)
http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html (The Thermodynamics of 9/11)
JamesB
30th November 2006, 12:47 PM
The moonbats over at 911 bloger are going absolutely apoplectic over these articles. Counterpunch has now overtaken Popular Mechanics as the NWO propaganda machine.
http://911blogger.com/node/4728
chipmunk stew
30th November 2006, 12:57 PM
The moonbats over at 911 bloger are going absolutely apoplectic over these articles. Counterpunch has now overtaken Popular Mechanics as the NWO propaganda machine.
http://911blogger.com/node/4728
Well, one of their primary contributors is Larry Silverstein's cousin.
Ken Silverstein
It's true.
JamesB
30th November 2006, 01:24 PM
Well, one of their primary contributors is Larry Silverstein's cousin.
It's true.
Well in the tradition of Benjamin Chertoff and Wirt Walker III, anyone with similar names must be related.
I hear Alex Jones is Steven Jones' love child.
Sword_Of_Truth
30th November 2006, 02:35 PM
Is James Bennet the cousin/brother/bastard love child of former Reagan Education Secretary and Bush 41 "Drug Czar" William Bennet?
Your secrets out, JB. Better you fess up now than if they have to force it out of you after the revolution. ;)
JamesB
30th November 2006, 02:45 PM
Is James Bennet the cousin/brother/bastard love child of former Reagan Education Secretary and Bush 41 "Drug Czar" William Bennet?
Your secrets out, JB. Better you fess up now than if they have to force it out of you after the revolution. ;)
No, but I am the love child of the great Tony Bennett. :D
Fly me to the moon...
PerryLogan
30th November 2006, 02:55 PM
"I hear Alex Jones is Steven Jones' love child."
No--Steven Jones is Alex Jones's love child. I'm almost positive.
Gravy
30th November 2006, 02:56 PM
Good find, Sword! All three articles are excellent.
gumboot
30th November 2006, 04:29 PM
I'm just listening to the JamesB radio talkback thingy on 9/11...
Am listening to the spokesman from a woowoo site...
One thing interesting... a primary argument seems to be "laws of physics defied".
I find this REALLY weird.
The laws of physics, by our understanding, are universal and absolute. Changing the nature of the event does not change the laws of physics.
If the collapse speed defied the laws of physics, it defied the laws of physics regardless of the mechanism that caused the collapse.
I just don't understand how people can manage this sort of "doublethink".
-Gumboot
Alt+F4
30th November 2006, 04:37 PM
One thing interesting... a primary argument seems to be "laws of physics defied".
I find this REALLY weird.
The laws of physics, by our understanding, are universal and absolute. Changing the nature of the event does not change the laws of physics.
If the collapse speed defied the laws of physics, it defied the laws of physics regardless of the mechanism that caused the collapse.
I just don't understand how people can manage this sort of "doublethink".
I doubt most of the CTers even understand high school physics. They look at the collapse of the WTC and it doesn't make sense that something like that could happen due to plane crashes. Then someone says, "it goes against the laws of physics". That's much easier to understand then all that complicated science.
Quad4_72
30th November 2006, 04:39 PM
Good reports indeed. They are in vain though I am afraid. The responses from the CTs will be "No way thats not true!" or "Pshhhhh! I bet that guy works for the CIA" and my personal favorite "Yeah well how did it fall so fast then!" (It was explained in the report but yet the question still gets asked.".
RecoveringYuppy
30th November 2006, 04:41 PM
If the collapse speed defied the laws of physics, it defied the laws of physics regardless of the mechanism that caused the collapse. I just don't understand how people can manage this sort of "doublethink".
-Gumboot
Yeah. I get the same feeling when creationists tell me the second law of thermodynamics precludes single celled organisms from evolving in to humans without realizing that interpretation of the law would also preclude pregnancy.
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.5, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.