Pyroclastic Ignorance

Blender Head · 14th May 2008, 07:25 PM

I made this video after being bombarded with the idiocy that the dust cloud resulting from the Tower collapses were "pyroclastic flows", and I figured I'd share it with you folks here at the JREF NWO forums.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

defaultdotxbe · 14th May 2008, 07:30 PM

typo at 2:33, lol

i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well

Blender Head · 14th May 2008, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

typo at 2:33, lol

i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well

Yeah, I noticed it right after posting it.

I'll reupload it and place it in the OP.

Arus808 · 14th May 2008, 07:44 PM

? no video?

plumjam · 14th May 2008, 07:47 PM

Every time I've tried to understand pyroclastic flows I soon find myself overwhelmed, and the rest just goes over my head.

Brainache · 14th May 2008, 07:49 PM

It worked for me.

It really does astound me that anyone could be persuaded by Sophia Shafquat. Just how stupid do you have to be to believe that stuff?

Blender Head · 14th May 2008, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by Arus808

? no video?

Try it now.

1337m4n · 14th May 2008, 08:09 PM

Where can I find more about this apartment?

Blender Head · 14th May 2008, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by 1337m4n

Where can I find more about this apartment?

The Google on the Internets.

gumboot · 15th May 2008, 12:10 AM

The pyroclastic flow argument is too stupid to even look at. The fact that this muppet uses the claim of pyroclastic surges (a pyroclastic flow that consists of more gas and less rock, and is typically both hotter and faster) just makes their argument even more idiotic.

Finally, the fact that their pictures of volcanoes show ash columns and not pyroclastic flows, and the fact that the VO claims "slow moving" while their own on screen text declares "high speed" just seals the deal that this Sophia woman knows nothing.

Yes, the collapse of the WTC towers caused clouds of gases with temperatures up to 1,000 degrees C to flow away from the towers at speeds of up to 700 km/h... right.

Gazpacho · 15th May 2008, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

It really does astound me that anyone could be persuaded by Sophia Shafquat.

Her voice. Soothing to some, irritating to others.

But it wasn't her idea anyway. It came from the nut who made 9/11 eyewitness.

DC · 15th May 2008, 03:43 AM

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/wtc/images/wtc-photo.jpg

when you take a look at the cars on the sat picture, the parkings top right to ground zero, you can see alot burned cars.

maybe thats one of the reasons they call it a pyroclastic flow.

also firefighters described it as very hot, some even told how theyr cloths caught fire from the dustcloud.

peteweaver · 15th May 2008, 03:52 AM

Its caught fire, not catched fire DC.

And wouldn't cars burn if hit by burning debris ?

DC · 15th May 2008, 03:56 AM

Originally Posted by peteweaver

Its caught fire, not catched fire DC.

And wouldn't cars burn if hit by burning debris ?

thx for correction.

and
yes they would burn, did burning debris fly to that parkinglots? i doubt it, especially because there is not debris on the parkinglots other than dust.
and its around 20+ cars.

bonavada · 15th May 2008, 04:42 AM

Originally Posted by gumboot

The pyroclastic flow argument is too stupid to even look at. The fact that this muppet uses the claim of pyroclastic surges (a pyroclastic flow that consists of more gas and less rock, and is typically both hotter and faster) just makes their argument even more idiotic

Trying to get my head around the CT thinking on this.
The CT argument is that their "pyroclastic" event at WTC proves an internal explosive in the towers?
I do seem to recall an explanation of real pyroclastic flows involved the collapse of the huge columns of volcanic dust and other ejecta post-eruption. I think the sequence is Volcano erupts - High columns of hot dust/rock ejecta - Column collapse - Pyroclastic flow.
In other words the actual pyroclastc flow is gravity driven not as a direct result of the actual eruption/explosion? So the CT logic link evades me.

BTW good debunk video. Great to see the big lebowski in there.

BV

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

thx for correction.

and
yes they would burn, did burning debris fly to that parkinglots? i doubt it, especially because there is not debris on the parkinglots other than dust.
and its around 20+ cars.

The debris would not have needed to be burning to set the cars on fire, just hot enough to start any combustibles it might contact. Since you can't tell make of car and year from the photo, it is hard to determine how easily it would catch on fire. Also, you would need to know trim level to find out materials were actually in the car.

aggle-rithm · 15th May 2008, 05:44 AM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

typo at 2:33, lol

i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well

But it only PARTIALLY collapsed, so it never really happened!

DC · 15th May 2008, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

The debris would not have needed to be burning to set the cars on fire, just hot enough to start any combustibles it might contact. Since you can't tell make of car and year from the photo, it is hard to determine how easily it would catch on fire. Also, you would need to know trim level to find out materials were actually in the car.

just mark the debris that you think was close enough to set those cars on fire, on the picture.
i talk about the big parking lot above and right to ground zero.

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

just mark the debris that you think was close enough to set those cars on fire, on the picture.
i talk about the big parking lot above and right to ground zero.

Why does it have to be big debris? Small pieces of hot metal or hot ash would set cars on fire, depending on the material it contacted. You make it seem like there would have to be large chunks falling from the sky when this is not true.

DC · 15th May 2008, 06:14 AM

hot ash is a good point

Naughtyhippo · 15th May 2008, 06:14 AM

You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?) this discussion of 'pyroclastic flow' is so silly, that I can't even work out what it's supposed to mean.

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 06:23 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

hot ash is a good point

It would be expected in any fire.

DC, what do those burnt cars mean to you? How would they fit into a conspiracy? I would not expect you to believe in DEW based on your prvious posts, so I am curious about your feelings on this.

Dave Rogers · 15th May 2008, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo

You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?)

It depends. If you believe 9-11 was the work of terrorists, then you're just a geology groupie (cf. Brett Blanchard). If you believe 9-11 was an inside job, then you're the world's leading geologist (cf. Danny Jowenko).

Dave

DC · 15th May 2008, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

It would be expected in any fire.

DC, what do those burnt cars mean to you? How would they fit into a conspiracy? I would not expect you to believe in DEW based on your prvious posts, so I am curious about your feelings on this.

woot there was no DEW??

i dont thaught to much about the burned cars, but in context of the alleged "pyroclastic flow" those cars fit into it.

cause the picture from that parking lot and the cars look strange burned.

and i dont know how that would fit into the CD of the towers.

but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow.

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

woot there was no DEW??

i dont thaught to much about the burned cars, but in context of the alleged "pyroclastic flow" those cars fit into it.

cause the picture from that parking lot and the cars look strange burned.

and i dont know how that would fit into the CD of the towers.

but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow.

Fair enough. I have a way to help anyone who might believe the cars prove something. Put them near a campfire and let them get burned a few times by the ash in the air from a small fire.

DC · 15th May 2008, 07:03 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

Fair enough. I have a way to help anyone who might believe the cars prove something. Put them near a campfire and let them get burned a few times by the ash in the air from a small fire.

dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke.

but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows.

chillzero · 15th May 2008, 07:06 AM

DC, I think the point here is not whether there is ash in a pyroclastic flow - rather whether there was a pyroclastic flow at WTC.

Naughtyhippo · 15th May 2008, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke.

but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows.

If you really think that the collapse of the WTC towers generated a pyroclastic flow as vulcanologists define them, I'm willing to discuss it with you, but I can't tell from your posts - so do you think there was one?

tanabear · 15th May 2008, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by Blender Head

I made this video after being bombarded with the idiocy that the dust cloud resulting from the Tower collapses were "pyroclastic flows", and I figured I'd share it with you folks here at the JREF NWO forums.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

"Aside from natural events, a very tragic example of a pyroclastic flow is what happened on the 11th of September, 2001. Huge amounts of rubble were brought up into the air as the Twin Towers collapsed, the rubble-laden air was heavier than the surrounding air, and it propagated down the streets of New York very rapidly. Some people died as a result of asphyxiation many blocks away, because people's lungs can't cope with very many particles in the air they breathe. From the point of view of fluid mechanics, the questions that were of interest were how quickly the concentration of particulates would decrease, and also how far would the flow travel. It didn't go all the way to Upper Manhattan, but it did go quite a way."
Herbert Huppert, Professor of Theoretical Geophysics and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Geophysics at the University of Cambridge.

What would a professor of Geophysics know about pyroclastics flows? Should I listen to him or the Randians here?

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke.

but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows.

Hot ash is found in any fire with solid combustibles. Burnt cars some distance away from the even t does nothing to prove pyroclastic flows.

DC · 15th May 2008, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo

If you really think that the collapse of the WTC towers generated a pyroclastic flow as vulcanologists define them, I'm willing to discuss it with you, but I can't tell from your posts - so do you think there was one?

i dont think about a pyroclastic flow like from vulcanos.
but hot air/dust/ash that seems to be calle pyroclastic flow by many truthers.
but its hard to say how hot it was. ppl like Dr. Marquis (not sure about the spelling) that filmed how they got trapped by the dust flow, it seems not very hot. but others describe it as hot and very "powerfull"

i would have to look up the name, but there was a report from those 503 firstresponders, that described how her clothes caught fire by that "pyroclastic flow"

i think here we could say, the truthers use a similie. oc it had nothing to do with vulcanos.

Disbelief · 15th May 2008, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by tanabear

"Aside from natural events, a very tragic example of a pyroclastic flow is what happened on the 11th of September, 2001. Huge amounts of rubble were brought up into the air as the Twin Towers collapsed, the rubble-laden air was heavier than the surrounding air, and it propagated down the streets of New York very rapidly. Some people died as a result of asphyxiation many blocks away, because people's lungs can't cope with very many particles in the air they breathe. From the point of view of fluid mechanics, the questions that were of interest were how quickly the concentration of particulates would decrease, and also how far would the flow travel. It didn't go all the way to Upper Manhattan, but it did go quite a way."
Herbert Huppert, Professor of Theoretical Geophysics and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Geophysics at the University of Cambridge.

What would a professor of Geophysics know about pyroclastics flows? Should I listen to him or the Randians here?

You will of course listen to whoever "supports" your silly theory. Of course, all of this was explained to you in this thread:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3532049

~enigma~ · 15th May 2008, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow.

Possible but these people must be hellastupid to ignore what a pyroclastic flow actually is and as Gumboot pointed out, the text on Sofia the idiot's video says "high speed" while she says "slow-moving". Anybody believes based on her bs is not ignorant, they are willfull wastes of oxygen.

~enigma~ · 15th May 2008, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney

i the truthers use a similie

Anybody else find this deliciously ironic?

bonavada · 15th May 2008, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by tanabear

What would a professor of Geophysics know about pyroclastics flows? Should I listen to him or the Randians here?

I know not much about vulcanology. But isn't the strict definition of the word "pyroclastic" one that always involves hot igneous rocks and particulates from volcano eruptions etc? No-one could possibly claim such events on 9-11. Surely?
A source for your quote is HERE the feature there discusses the gravity -driven nature of pyroclastic flows. Can you explain how this particular nature of the phenomenon relates to an inside job on 9-11.

ETA just read disbeliefs LINK HERE explaining some of the terms used in this thread. Seems Tanabear has learnt nothing from the exchanges there. The merry-go-round keeps turning.

BV

GlennB · 15th May 2008, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo

You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?) this discussion of 'pyroclastic flow' is so silly, that I can't even work out what it's supposed to mean.

Ah, so you'll be voting for my May Stundie nomination eh? (canvassing for votes is permitted I presume?)

In fairness, my nominee also retreated to "pyroclastic-like flow", which for my money is even more dunderheaded if such a thing is possible. But I'll bow to your knowledge of geology on this

chillzero · 15th May 2008, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by bonavada

I know not much about vulcanology. But isn't the strict definition of the word "pyroclastic" one that always involves hot igneous rocks and particulates from volcano eruptions etc? No-one could possibly claim such events on 9-11. Surely?
A source for your quote is HERE the feature there discusses the gravity -driven nature of pyroclastic flows. Can you explain how this particular nature of the phenomenon relates to an inside job on 9-11.

BV

an adjective used to describe rock materials formed by fragmentation as a result of volcanic action.
park.org/Philippines/pinatubo/page7.html

Pyroclastic (meaning "fire fragmented") refers to broken-up rocks, pumice, ash, and other bits of material that are formed in a volcanic eruption. ...
www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/volcano/glossary/indexp.shtml

Pertaining to fragmented (clastic) rock material formed by a volcanic explosion or ejection from a volcanic vent.
www.hull.ac.uk/geogmods/html/glossary.html

Lava ejected from its volcano may pick up fragments of rock. Igneous rocks contaning fragments have pyroclastic texture.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igneous_textures

Fragmented (clastic) rock materials formed by a volcanic eruption.
craterlake.wr.usgs.gov/glossary.html

Being or pertaining to rock fragments formed in a volcanic eruption.
www.college.hmco.com/geology/resources/geologylink/glossary/p.html

strictly speaking, a pyroclast is a rock made up of fragments of volcanic rock thrown around by volcanic eruptions, usually violent eruptions. The term refers to volcanically-formed clasts and volcanic ash on the moon.
jeff.medkeff.com/astro/lunar/glossary.htm

composed chiefly of fragments of volcanic origin. [AHDOS]
www.memphisgeology.org/glossary_oq.htm

1337m4n · 15th May 2008, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Blender Head

The Google on the Internets.

Yah, I know that, but I still need a search term to type in. What's the building's name?

Blender Head · 15th May 2008, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by 1337m4n

Yah, I know that, but I still need a search term to type in. What's the building's name?

The only thing I know is that it was in Russia, according to reputable sources in the original YouTube video

tanabear · 15th May 2008, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

You will of course listen to whoever "supports" your silly theory. Of course, all of this was explained to you in this thread:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3532049

So I shouldn't listen to a professor of geophysics when he refers to it as a "pyroclastic flow?" What was explained to me? Nothing, except the fact that Randians like to redefine words to suit their cult like beliefs.

Originally Posted by bonavada

I know not much about vulcanology. But isn't the strict definition of the word "pyroclastic" one that always involves hot igneous rocks and particulates from volcano eruptions etc? No-one could possibly claim such events on 9-11. Surely?
A source for your quote is HERE the feature there discusses the gravity -driven nature of pyroclastic flows. Can you explain how this particular nature of the phenomenon relates to an inside job on 9-11.

ETA just read disbeliefs LINK HERE explaining some of the terms used in this thread. Seems Tanabear has learnt nothing from the exchanges there. The merry-go-round keeps turning.

BV

Why do the Randians show such hostility to the word "pyroclastic flow" anyway? If someone said that the huge plumes of dust and debris resembled a pyroclastic flow would this be acceptable?

"At ground zero, meanwhile, the collapsing towers bore little resemblance to a small earthquake but every resemblance to another geological phenomenon: the so-called pyroclastic flow... It was indeed, as if a volcano had erupted, violently and without warning, in the heart of Lower Manhattan, the towers themselves reduced to a shell as meager and flimsy as the one left after Mt. Saint Helens exploded in Washington State in 1980."
After the Earth Quakes: Elastic Rebound on an Urban Planet by Susan Elizabeth Hough

"The equations solved therefore include pyroclastic flow such as occurred when the World Trade Towers fell."
CT-ANALYST:FAST AND ACCURATE CBR EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT Jay P. Boris, Keith Obenschain, Gopal Patnaik, and Theodore R. Young, Jr. Laboratory for Computational Physics and Fluid Dynamics
U.S. Naval Research laboratory

So is this what a building looks like after a "pancake" or "pile-driver" like collapse?

14th May 2008, 07:30 PM	#2
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Dark Side of the Sun Posts: 7,482	typo at 2:33, lol i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

14th May 2008, 07:42 PM	#3
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe typo at 2:33, lol i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well Yeah, I noticed it right after posting it. I'll reupload it and place it in the OP.
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	__________________ "As you know, Bush never attempted to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks." -Ron Wieck "The only way for there to be no conspiracy is for nothing to exist." -Travis [DRG] is a follower of Jesus Christ and the Truth, so I will follow St. Griffin as well in this regard. -Galileo

14th May 2008, 07:44 PM	#4
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,202	? no video?
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,202	__________________ Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato. “Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.” “Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”

14th May 2008, 07:47 PM	#5
plumjam Banned Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Valencia, Spain Posts: 7,837	Every time I've tried to understand pyroclastic flows I soon find myself overwhelmed, and the rest just goes over my head.
	Last edited by plumjam; 14th May 2008 at 07:49 PM.

14th May 2008, 07:49 PM	#6
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Knob Hill. Posts: 9,086	It worked for me. It really does astound me that anyone could be persuaded by Sophia Shafquat. Just how stupid do you have to be to believe that stuff?
	__________________ Words cannot convey the vertiginous retching horror that enveloped me as I lost consciousness. - W. S. Burroughs Invert the prominent diaphragm!!!

14th May 2008, 08:00 PM	#7
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	Originally Posted by Arus808 ? no video? Try it now.
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	__________________ "As you know, Bush never attempted to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks." -Ron Wieck "The only way for there to be no conspiracy is for nothing to exist." -Travis [DRG] is a follower of Jesus Christ and the Truth, so I will follow St. Griffin as well in this regard. -Galileo

14th May 2008, 08:09 PM	#8
1337m4n Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,499	Where can I find more about this apartment?
	__________________ http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...2b728514ea.gif "The evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job just keeps not coming in." --pomeroo

14th May 2008, 08:18 PM	#9
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	Originally Posted by 1337m4n Where can I find more about this apartment? The Google on the Internets.
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	__________________ "As you know, Bush never attempted to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks." -Ron Wieck "The only way for there to be no conspiracy is for nothing to exist." -Travis [DRG] is a follower of Jesus Christ and the Truth, so I will follow St. Griffin as well in this regard. -Galileo

15th May 2008, 12:10 AM	#10
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,103	The pyroclastic flow argument is too stupid to even look at. The fact that this muppet uses the claim of pyroclastic surges (a pyroclastic flow that consists of more gas and less rock, and is typically both hotter and faster) just makes their argument even more idiotic. Finally, the fact that their pictures of volcanoes show ash columns and not pyroclastic flows, and the fact that the VO claims "slow moving" while their own on screen text declares "high speed" just seals the deal that this Sophia woman knows nothing. Yes, the collapse of the WTC towers caused clouds of gases with temperatures up to 1,000 degrees C to flow away from the towers at speeds of up to 700 km/h... right.
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

15th May 2008, 01:08 AM	#11
Gazpacho Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Valley Lodge, USA Posts: 2,136	Originally Posted by Brainache It really does astound me that anyone could be persuaded by Sophia Shafquat. Her voice. Soothing to some, irritating to others. But it wasn't her idea anyway. It came from the nut who made 9/11 eyewitness.
	Last edited by Gazpacho; 15th May 2008 at 01:08 AM.

15th May 2008, 03:43 AM	#12
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/wtc/images/wtc-photo.jpg when you take a look at the cars on the sat picture, the parkings top right to ground zero, you can see alot burned cars. maybe thats one of the reasons they call it a pyroclastic flow. also firefighters described it as very hot, some even told how theyr cloths caught fire from the dustcloud.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it Last edited by DC; 15th May 2008 at 03:57 AM. Reason: thx peteweaver :)

15th May 2008, 03:52 AM	#13
peteweaver Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK Posts: 1,005	Its caught fire, not catched fire DC. And wouldn't cars burn if hit by burning debris ?

15th May 2008, 03:56 AM	#14
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	Originally Posted by peteweaver Its caught fire, not catched fire DC. And wouldn't cars burn if hit by burning debris ? thx for correction. and yes they would burn, did burning debris fly to that parkinglots? i doubt it, especially because there is not debris on the parkinglots other than dust. and its around 20+ cars.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 04:42 AM	#15
bonavada Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,079	Originally Posted by gumboot The pyroclastic flow argument is too stupid to even look at. The fact that this muppet uses the claim of pyroclastic surges (a pyroclastic flow that consists of more gas and less rock, and is typically both hotter and faster) just makes their argument even more idiotic Trying to get my head around the CT thinking on this. The CT argument is that their "pyroclastic" event at WTC proves an internal explosive in the towers? I do seem to recall an explanation of real pyroclastic flows involved the collapse of the huge columns of volcanic dust and other ejecta post-eruption. I think the sequence is Volcano erupts - High columns of hot dust/rock ejecta - Column collapse - Pyroclastic flow. In other words the actual pyroclastc flow is gravity driven not as a direct result of the actual eruption/explosion? So the CT logic link evades me. BTW good debunk video. Great to see the big lebowski in there. BV
bonavada Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,079

15th May 2008, 05:33 AM	#16
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney thx for correction. and yes they would burn, did burning debris fly to that parkinglots? i doubt it, especially because there is not debris on the parkinglots other than dust. and its around 20+ cars. The debris would not have needed to be burning to set the cars on fire, just hot enough to start any combustibles it might contact. Since you can't tell make of car and year from the photo, it is hard to determine how easily it would catch on fire. Also, you would need to know trim level to find out materials were actually in the car.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 05:44 AM	#17
aggle-rithm Ardent Formulist Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 14,149	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe typo at 2:33, lol i liked the apartment collapse, freefall speed into its own footprint...or at least as the WTC was as well But it only PARTIALLY collapsed, so it never really happened!
	__________________ To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.

15th May 2008, 06:00 AM	#18
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	Originally Posted by Disbelief The debris would not have needed to be burning to set the cars on fire, just hot enough to start any combustibles it might contact. Since you can't tell make of car and year from the photo, it is hard to determine how easily it would catch on fire. Also, you would need to know trim level to find out materials were actually in the car. just mark the debris that you think was close enough to set those cars on fire, on the picture. i talk about the big parking lot above and right to ground zero.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 06:11 AM	#19
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney just mark the debris that you think was close enough to set those cars on fire, on the picture. i talk about the big parking lot above and right to ground zero. Why does it have to be big debris? Small pieces of hot metal or hot ash would set cars on fire, depending on the material it contacted. You make it seem like there would have to be large chunks falling from the sky when this is not true.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 06:14 AM	#20
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	hot ash is a good point
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 06:14 AM	#21
Naughtyhippo I, for one, welcome our kitteh overlords Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: In job application Hell. Posts: 658	You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?) this discussion of 'pyroclastic flow' is so silly, that I can't even work out what it's supposed to mean.
	__________________ RL got me.

15th May 2008, 06:23 AM	#22
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney hot ash is a good point It would be expected in any fire. DC, what do those burnt cars mean to you? How would they fit into a conspiracy? I would not expect you to believe in DEW based on your prvious posts, so I am curious about your feelings on this.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 06:27 AM	#23
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: In a world lit only by fire. Posts: 17,894	Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?) It depends. If you believe 9-11 was the work of terrorists, then you're just a geology groupie (cf. Brett Blanchard). If you believe 9-11 was an inside job, then you're the world's leading geologist (cf. Danny Jowenko). Dave
	__________________ "We will punish the murderer together. Our punishment will be more generosity, more tolerance and more democracy." - Fabian Stang, Mayor of Oslo SSKCAS, covert member

15th May 2008, 06:47 AM	#24
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	Originally Posted by Disbelief It would be expected in any fire. DC, what do those burnt cars mean to you? How would they fit into a conspiracy? I would not expect you to believe in DEW based on your prvious posts, so I am curious about your feelings on this. woot there was no DEW?? i dont thaught to much about the burned cars, but in context of the alleged "pyroclastic flow" those cars fit into it. cause the picture from that parking lot and the cars look strange burned. and i dont know how that would fit into the CD of the towers. but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 06:58 AM	#25
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney woot there was no DEW?? i dont thaught to much about the burned cars, but in context of the alleged "pyroclastic flow" those cars fit into it. cause the picture from that parking lot and the cars look strange burned. and i dont know how that would fit into the CD of the towers. but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow. Fair enough. I have a way to help anyone who might believe the cars prove something. Put them near a campfire and let them get burned a few times by the ash in the air from a small fire.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 07:03 AM	#26
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	Originally Posted by Disbelief Fair enough. I have a way to help anyone who might believe the cars prove something. Put them near a campfire and let them get burned a few times by the ash in the air from a small fire. dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke. but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 07:06 AM	#27
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	DC, I think the point here is not whether there is ash in a pyroclastic flow - rather whether there was a pyroclastic flow at WTC.

15th May 2008, 07:13 AM	#28
Naughtyhippo I, for one, welcome our kitteh overlords Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: In job application Hell. Posts: 658	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke. but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows. If you really think that the collapse of the WTC towers generated a pyroclastic flow as vulcanologists define them, I'm willing to discuss it with you, but I can't tell from your posts - so do you think there was one?
	__________________ RL got me.

15th May 2008, 07:23 AM	#30
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney dont worry, i dont belive in DEW or mininuke. but afaik hot ash is also found in pyroclastic flows. Hot ash is found in any fire with solid combustibles. Burnt cars some distance away from the even t does nothing to prove pyroclastic flows.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 07:28 AM	#31
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,639	Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo If you really think that the collapse of the WTC towers generated a pyroclastic flow as vulcanologists define them, I'm willing to discuss it with you, but I can't tell from your posts - so do you think there was one? i dont think about a pyroclastic flow like from vulcanos. but hot air/dust/ash that seems to be calle pyroclastic flow by many truthers. but its hard to say how hot it was. ppl like Dr. Marquis (not sure about the spelling) that filmed how they got trapped by the dust flow, it seems not very hot. but others describe it as hot and very "powerfull" i would have to look up the name, but there was a report from those 503 firstresponders, that described how her clothes caught fire by that "pyroclastic flow" i think here we could say, the truthers use a similie. oc it had nothing to do with vulcanos.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th May 2008, 07:33 AM	#32
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by tanabear "Aside from natural events, a very tragic example of a pyroclastic flow is what happened on the 11th of September, 2001. Huge amounts of rubble were brought up into the air as the Twin Towers collapsed, the rubble-laden air was heavier than the surrounding air, and it propagated down the streets of New York very rapidly. Some people died as a result of asphyxiation many blocks away, because people's lungs can't cope with very many particles in the air they breathe. From the point of view of fluid mechanics, the questions that were of interest were how quickly the concentration of particulates would decrease, and also how far would the flow travel. It didn't go all the way to Upper Manhattan, but it did go quite a way." Herbert Huppert, Professor of Theoretical Geophysics and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Geophysics at the University of Cambridge. What would a professor of Geophysics know about pyroclastics flows? Should I listen to him or the Randians here? You will of course listen to whoever "supports" your silly theory. Of course, all of this was explained to you in this thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3532049
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

15th May 2008, 07:37 AM	#33
~enigma~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Center of the universe Posts: 7,954	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney but my point was that maybe this could lead ppl to belive in a pyroclastic flow. Possible but these people must be hellastupid to ignore what a pyroclastic flow actually is and as Gumboot pointed out, the text on Sofia the idiot's video says "high speed" while she says "slow-moving". Anybody believes based on her bs is not ignorant, they are willfull wastes of oxygen.
	Last edited by ~enigma~; 15th May 2008 at 07:43 AM.

15th May 2008, 07:41 AM	#34
~enigma~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Center of the universe Posts: 7,954	Originally Posted by Dictator Cheney i the truthers use a similie Anybody else find this deliciously ironic?

15th May 2008, 07:50 AM	#35
bonavada Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,079	Originally Posted by tanabear What would a professor of Geophysics know about pyroclastics flows? Should I listen to him or the Randians here? I know not much about vulcanology. But isn't the strict definition of the word "pyroclastic" one that always involves hot igneous rocks and particulates from volcano eruptions etc? No-one could possibly claim such events on 9-11. Surely? A source for your quote is HERE the feature there discusses the gravity -driven nature of pyroclastic flows. Can you explain how this particular nature of the phenomenon relates to an inside job on 9-11. ETA just read disbeliefs LINK HERE explaining some of the terms used in this thread. Seems Tanabear has learnt nothing from the exchanges there. The merry-go-round keeps turning. BV
bonavada Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,079	Last edited by bonavada; 15th May 2008 at 08:01 AM.

15th May 2008, 07:52 AM	#36
GlennB Jellied eel and offal fancier Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arcadia Posts: 8,923	Originally Posted by Naughtyhippo You know, as a geologist (I have a degree in it, it does count right?) this discussion of 'pyroclastic flow' is so silly, that I can't even work out what it's supposed to mean. Ah, so you'll be voting for my May Stundie nomination eh? (canvassing for votes is permitted I presume?) In fairness, my nominee also retreated to "pyroclastic-like flow", which for my money is even more dunderheaded if such a thing is possible. But I'll bow to your knowledge of geology on this

15th May 2008, 07:57 AM	#37
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	Originally Posted by bonavada I know not much about vulcanology. But isn't the strict definition of the word "pyroclastic" one that always involves hot igneous rocks and particulates from volcano eruptions etc? No-one could possibly claim such events on 9-11. Surely? A source for your quote is HERE the feature there discusses the gravity -driven nature of pyroclastic flows. Can you explain how this particular nature of the phenomenon relates to an inside job on 9-11. BV an adjective used to describe rock materials formed by fragmentation as a result of volcanic action. park.org/Philippines/pinatubo/page7.html Pyroclastic (meaning "fire fragmented") refers to broken-up rocks, pumice, ash, and other bits of material that are formed in a volcanic eruption. ... www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/volcano/glossary/indexp.shtml Pertaining to fragmented (clastic) rock material formed by a volcanic explosion or ejection from a volcanic vent. www.hull.ac.uk/geogmods/html/glossary.html Lava ejected from its volcano may pick up fragments of rock. Igneous rocks contaning fragments have pyroclastic texture. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igneous_textures Fragmented (clastic) rock materials formed by a volcanic eruption. craterlake.wr.usgs.gov/glossary.html Being or pertaining to rock fragments formed in a volcanic eruption. www.college.hmco.com/geology/resources/geologylink/glossary/p.html strictly speaking, a pyroclast is a rock made up of fragments of volcanic rock thrown around by volcanic eruptions, usually violent eruptions. The term refers to volcanically-formed clasts and volcanic ash on the moon. jeff.medkeff.com/astro/lunar/glossary.htm composed chiefly of fragments of volcanic origin. [AHDOS] www.memphisgeology.org/glossary_oq.htm