JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Reply
Old 31st March 2010, 12:45 PM   #41
Debaser
Muse
 
Debaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 806
Originally Posted by Mancman View Post
In part 4 he claims that the NYC building codes required the WTC to have an in-built demolition plan. The developers chose a nuclear device in the basement. Khalezov knew about this as early as 1984, and apparently this was mentioned in American newspapers.

The Sears Tower also has this feature.
Well that's property developers all over. Always going for the cheapest, laziest option.

The number of times I've sat before a council planning committee, dreading THAT question...'so, how are you going to demolish this building at the end of its life'...and having to admit that, yet again, it's the 'nuke in the basement' option. It's just so embarassing.
Debaser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 12:56 PM   #42
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,143
Originally Posted by Debaser View Post
Well that's property developers all over. Always going for the cheapest, laziest option.

The number of times I've sat before a council planning committee, dreading THAT question...'so, how are you going to demolish this building at the end of its life'...and having to admit that, yet again, it's the 'nuke in the basement' option. It's just so embarassing.
I thought nanothermite was supposed to be the cheapest option.
__________________
"... my favorite meal is grilled filet of spherical cow of uniform density ... with a side of mashed potatoes of indeterminate volume, peas arranged in an optimal packing configuration, and a glass of ideal fluid." (PhysicsForums)
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 01:07 PM   #43
Debaser
Muse
 
Debaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 806
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
I thought nanothermite was supposed to be the cheapest option.
Nah, you're thinking normal bog-standard thermite, which is admittedlly cheap as dirt.

But it's my understanding that to create yer actual 100% pure nano-thermite requires the strenuous efforts of dozens and dozens of young boys imprisoned in Bohemian Grove or someplace.

It's like gold-dust if you''re not in the...you know who.
Debaser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 01:11 PM   #44
Drudgewire
Critical Doofus
 
Drudgewire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,440
Originally Posted by Debaser View Post
It's like gold-dust if you''re not in the...you know who.

The KISS Army.
__________________
"You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc."
-lapman describing every twoofer on the internet
Drudgewire is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 02:28 PM   #45
fitzgibbon
Master Poster
 
fitzgibbon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Just west of the centre of the universe
Posts: 2,802
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Good grief, it amazes me that anyone can listen to such drivel without laughing out loud. How gullible do you have to be to take this idiot seriously?

Dave
I present you the 9/11 'Truth' movement. 'Nuff said?
__________________
"Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, side-show freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We're in the boredom-killing business! So if you want the truth... Go to God!"
Howard Beale, "Network"
fitzgibbon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 06:30 PM   #46
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 6,992
Originally Posted by Mancman View Post
In part 4 he claims that the NYC building codes required the WTC to have an in-built demolition plan. The developers chose a nuclear device in the basement.

Sounds more like a demolition plan for lower Manhattan.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 07:47 PM   #47
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 10,633
Wow.

What he's calling the "Granit" is the SS-N-19 Shipwreck missile as it's known to NATO. This weapon is about 10 meters end-to-end. It also has no waypoint "turn-to-target" capability like the US's Harpoon, so I don't see how it could have impacted the Pentagon where it did unless it was fired from the Ohio River. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't a submarine-launched weapon, either...it's only fielded on Kirov-class cruisers and the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier. Not exactly the most stealthy of oceangoing warships.

I highly doubt this person's credentials, although my phony-busting powers don't extend to the Russian Navy.

ETA: Correction - this weapon does have a submarine-launched variant. Just because it exists doesn't mean that's what hit the Pentagon.
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!

Last edited by JoeyDonuts; 31st March 2010 at 07:49 PM.
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 07:53 PM   #48
portlandatheist
Master Poster
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,154
The truth movement was so much more entertaining when they came up with new and crazier ideas every week. There hasn't been any new material in a very long time so its nice and refreshing to have something new to laugh at.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 08:04 PM   #49
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,143
Originally Posted by JoeyDonuts View Post
Just because it exists doesn't mean that's what hit the Pentagon.
Agreed. Whatever the variants are that happen to exist, I doubt that any of them carry a payload of human beings.

And if this "new" truther happens to allege that those bodies were planted... well, like I said earlier, he's simply parroting standard trutherisms at that point.
__________________
"... my favorite meal is grilled filet of spherical cow of uniform density ... with a side of mashed potatoes of indeterminate volume, peas arranged in an optimal packing configuration, and a glass of ideal fluid." (PhysicsForums)
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2010, 09:07 PM   #50
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Dark Side of the Sun
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
The truth movement was so much more entertaining when they came up with new and crazier ideas every week. There hasn't been any new material in a very long time so its nice and refreshing to have something new to laugh at.
hate to break it to you but nuclear bombs at the WTC and a cruise missile at the pentagon arent new
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2010, 06:26 PM   #51
MattTheTubaGuy
Critical Thinker
 
MattTheTubaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 263
What kind of damage would 10 tons of TNT do to one of the twin towers?
because that is approximately how powerful the smallest possible nuclear weapon would be.

I would imagine it would probably completely destroy a tower (or both) rather than causing it to collapse.
MattTheTubaGuy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2010, 06:43 PM   #52
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Dark Side of the Sun
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by MattTheTubaGuy View Post
What kind of damage would 10 tons of TNT do to one of the twin towers?
because that is approximately how powerful the smallest possible nuclear weapon would be.

I would imagine it would probably completely destroy a tower (or both) rather than causing it to collapse.
also, the low-yield weapons are notoriously inefficient, it would produce a large amount of radioactive fallout
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2010, 07:30 PM   #53
Mongrel
Begging for Scraps
 
Mongrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 20 minutes in the future
Posts: 1,684
Originally Posted by fitzgibbon View Post
I present you the 9/11 'Truth' movement. 'Nuff said?
Got to admit though, they're very green. That's a helluva lot of recycling going on there
__________________
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.” - Charles Darwin

...like so many contemporary philosophers he especially enjoyed giving helpful advice to people who were happier than he was. - Tom Lehrer
Mongrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2010, 11:08 PM   #54
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 10,633
Originally Posted by Mongrel View Post
Got to admit though, they're very green. That's a helluva lot of recycling going on there

OHHH Snap!
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2010, 01:49 AM   #55
catsmate1
Penultimate Amazing
 
catsmate1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Dublin (the one in Ireland)
Posts: 11,300
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
also, the low-yield weapons are notoriously inefficient, it would produce a large amount of radioactive fallout
True, basically such low yield weapons are nuclear weapons with a higher yield modified to have a less efficient fission process (no tritium injection, less optimal implosion sequence, no neutron stimulation) and hence use the same amount of fissile material as a more powerful weapon.

Quote:
What he's calling the "Granit" is the SS-N-19 Shipwreck missile as it's known to NATO. This weapon is about 10 meters end-to-end. It also has no waypoint "turn-to-target" capability like the US's Harpoon, so I don't see how it could have impacted the Pentagon where it did unless it was fired from the Ohio River. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't a submarine-launched weapon, either...it's only fielded on Kirov-class cruisers and the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier. Not exactly the most stealthy of oceangoing warships.
It's deployed on (at least) the "Oscar" class missile subs. It's believed to have mid course update capability (FAS agrees on this) but terminal guidance is radar/IRH, which I'm doubtful would be useful against a single building in a city.......

The Granit has a 750kg HE warhead and ~4.8GJ of kinetic energy on impact (assuming it's burned 3 tonnes of fuel, I don't have a source for it's impact mass to hand). Even if the ramjet powered version, which hasn't entered service, was used (~8.6GJ of KE on impact) with the FAE warhead, also not used in service, I'm dubious.

That's not to mention:
(a) the stupidity of attempting such an attack
(b) the missile looks nothing like a passenger jet
and
(c) the impact damage and debris pattern would be rather different.

Maybe Ultima has a new hobby?
catsmate1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2010, 06:00 AM   #56
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tuolumne City, CA
Posts: 20,344
Actually supersonic Russian missiles are probably the most original thing we've seen in here in some time.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2010, 10:56 AM   #57
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Dark Side of the Sun
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Actually supersonic Russian missiles are probably the most original thing we've seen in here in some time.
a cruise missile by another name...
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2010, 01:29 PM   #58
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Queens
Posts: 34,948
the mushroom cloud at the WTC is proof-positive, that a nuclear event may have occurred.

remember folks, absence of evidence...is NOT evidence of absence!!!!!


Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2010, 09:50 PM   #59
fess
Graduate Poster
 
fess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hiding in the sticks.
Posts: 1,217
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
the mushroom cloud at the WTC is proof-positive, that a nuclear event may have occurred.

remember folks, absence of evidence...is NOT evidence of absence!!!!!


I think if you do a little research, you will find that the mushroom cloud from a nuclear weapon would be higher, much higher than the dust cloud after the collapse. Not to mention the blinding flash and incinerated surroundings.
Lets not forget that HE and nuclear warheads leave distinctive fingerprints, none of which were found.
fess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd April 2010, 01:06 AM   #60
ktesibios
Worthless Aging Hippie
 
ktesibios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by fess View Post
I think if you do a little research, you will find that the mushroom cloud from a nuclear weapon would be higher, much higher than the dust cloud after the collapse. Not to mention the blinding flash and incinerated surroundings.
Lets not forget that HE and nuclear warheads leave distinctive fingerprints, none of which were found.
Parky's lately been making sarcastic truther-mode-parody posts from time to time. If the tone isn't a giveaway, he seems to prefer to use italics for these posts.
__________________
Ship me somewheres east of Suez, where the best is like the worst, where there ain't no ten commandments and a man can raise a small, bristly mustache.
ktesibios is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th April 2010, 05:24 AM   #61
Liszt
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer View Post
try reading that with a "Checkov" voice.
funniest post in JREf history - well done!
Liszt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th April 2010, 11:40 PM   #62
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 33,674
I just PMed 911thology with the link to this thread, so the poor guy has a chance to respond.
__________________
Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2010, 08:02 AM   #63
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 25,604
Well, contrary to his original posts in the Welcome Thread, he isn't quite so available to explain. He's got the same five posts he notched a week ago. I think that he's hitting as many sites as he can to try to drum up hits for his videos and/or sales for his book.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2010, 08:44 AM   #64
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Big corner office in NWO Towers
Posts: 11,766
I'm shocked. SHOCKED I say!
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 04:51 AM   #65
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
You invitation is accepted. Providing that...

Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
I just PMed 911thology with the link to this thread, so the poor guy has a chance to respond.
Hello to every one. My name is Dimitri A. Khalezov and I was invited here to answer questions (if any) by an invitation quoted above. I am sorry, I was very busy yesterday and can't be here earlier. If anyone has questions that he wants me to answer for public, you can leave these questions here and I will answer them. However, I would like to warn in advance that:

1) I will NOT answer any question of technical nature that has been answered in any of the 26 parts of the movie published on YouTube (the one discussed in this thread). Which means that if someone can't afford spending his or her precious time on watching the movie he or she must not force me to spend my precious time on answering his or her questions. Hope I made it clear enough. If some one asks such a question that is answered in the movie without any malicious intent, then the answer will sound like this: 'This question is answered in the movie'. I think I have to warn it in advance in order to avoid as much as possible creating lots of garbage on your respectable Forum.

2) Please, bear in mind that I agree to participate in this discussion with only reason in mind to educate as many people as possible in regard to my views on the 9/11 affair. By no means I am interested in spending my precious time on arguing with various zombies over questions whether aluminum tubes could penetrate thick steel bars or not. I am also not interested at all into indulging into long discussions with those who are convinced that I am wrong (or intentionally cheating) and who will not change their embedded opinions anyway. So all questions that do not show any genuine interest of the asker in the subject and that are merely designed to 'disprove my theory' at any cost will be either answered 'yes' or 'no' (in good case) or ignored whatsoever. To further save precious time I will designate in advance a special abbreviation that will be used for quick 'answer' to questions that show no genuine interest in getting the actual answer, but merely intended as an assault on my 'theory'. The abbreviation will sound like this: 'IRSMPTATQBINSAGIA' which will mean 'I Refuse Spending My Precious Time Answering This Question Because It does Not Show Any Genuine Interest of Asker'.

3) My book is not yet published and I am not quite sure when it will be published, so all those who left (or plan to leave) any gloating comments that sound sth like '... he is only selling his book..' can shut up and get lost at once.

4) To answer all questions in regard to thermite and so-called 'nano-thermite'. The answer is like this:
4.1) Ordinary thermite (used in electric welding) is indeed capable to slowly melting steel, but it is not capable of instantly reducing enormous amounts of steel into fluffy microscopic dust.
4.2) The so-called 'nano-thermite' does not exist in nature. It exists only in sick imaginations of completely brainless 9/11 conspiracy theorists, so-called '9/11truthers' and other kind of zombies.
4.3) Neither thermite, nor any so-called 'nano-thermite' causes any place of its usage to be called 'ground zero'.
4.4) If it were really true that alleged 'traces of thermite' were found among the WTC dust/debris, then this 'shocking revelation' should become public in 2002, latest in 2003, but not in 2009.

I hope I made it clear and no one will bother me with any questions in regard to 'thermite' or so-called 'nano-thermite'. Thank you for your kind understanding.

5) To answer all questions in regard to radiation. I state that radiation levels on the ground zero in Manhattan that were about several hundreds Roentgens per hour during the first hour. Then they dropped to a couple of hundreds of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for the next few hours, then they dropped to several tens of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a couple of days, then they dropped to several hundreds of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few days, then they dropped to several tens of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few weeks. Now the levels further dropped but remain noticeably above the normal radiation background even up to this day. Don’t believe – take your Geiger counter and go to ground zero. And you will see what will happen. Make sure that guards who guard the ground zero will notice you carry a Geiger counter before you enter the site. Then, please, report back to this Forum what happened with you and with your Geiger counter and what kind of discussions you had with the guards.

All statements claiming there was ‘no radiation’ on ground zero would be ignored from now on simply because I know that it was and I know it for sure, but those who make this kind of statements simply googled for such a ‘verifiable’ info or refer to other ‘reliable’ sources akin to the ‘NIST report’ or even the most respectable ‘Report of the 9/11 Commission’. I strongly suggest you don’t ask me about radiation anymore, but simply satisfy yourself with what is mentioned above in this regard.


All other questions are welcome providing the guidelines set above are duly observed.
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov.
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 09:49 AM   #66
Jackanory
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,339
Originally Posted by 911thology View Post
Hello to every one. My name is Dimitri A. Khalezov and I was invited here to answer questions (if any) by an invitation quoted above. I am sorry, I was very busy yesterday and can't be here earlier. If anyone has questions that he wants me to answer for public, you can leave these questions here and I will answer them. However, I would like to warn in advance that:

1) I will NOT answer any question of technical nature that has been answered in any of the 26 parts of the movie published on YouTube (the one discussed in this thread). Which means that if someone can't afford spending his or her precious time on watching the movie he or she must not force me to spend my precious time on answering his or her questions. Hope I made it clear enough. If some one asks such a question that is answered in the movie without any malicious intent, then the answer will sound like this: 'This question is answered in the movie'. I think I have to warn it in advance in order to avoid as much as possible creating lots of garbage on your respectable Forum.

2) Please, bear in mind that I agree to participate in this discussion with only reason in mind to educate as many people as possible in regard to my views on the 9/11 affair. By no means I am interested in spending my precious time on arguing with various zombies over questions whether aluminum tubes could penetrate thick steel bars or not. I am also not interested at all into indulging into long discussions with those who are convinced that I am wrong (or intentionally cheating) and who will not change their embedded opinions anyway. So all questions that do not show any genuine interest of the asker in the subject and that are merely designed to 'disprove my theory' at any cost will be either answered 'yes' or 'no' (in good case) or ignored whatsoever. To further save precious time I will designate in advance a special abbreviation that will be used for quick 'answer' to questions that show no genuine interest in getting the actual answer, but merely intended as an assault on my 'theory'. The abbreviation will sound like this: 'IRSMPTATQBINSAGIA' which will mean 'I Refuse Spending My Precious Time Answering This Question Because It does Not Show Any Genuine Interest of Asker'.

3) My book is not yet published and I am not quite sure when it will be published, so all those who left (or plan to leave) any gloating comments that sound sth like '... he is only selling his book..' can shut up and get lost at once.

4) To answer all questions in regard to thermite and so-called 'nano-thermite'. The answer is like this:
4.1) Ordinary thermite (used in electric welding) is indeed capable to slowly melting steel, but it is not capable of instantly reducing enormous amounts of steel into fluffy microscopic dust.
4.2) The so-called 'nano-thermite' does not exist in nature. It exists only in sick imaginations of completely brainless 9/11 conspiracy theorists, so-called '9/11truthers' and other kind of zombies.
4.3) Neither thermite, nor any so-called 'nano-thermite' causes any place of its usage to be called 'ground zero'.
4.4) If it were really true that alleged 'traces of thermite' were found among the WTC dust/debris, then this 'shocking revelation' should become public in 2002, latest in 2003, but not in 2009.

I hope I made it clear and no one will bother me with any questions in regard to 'thermite' or so-called 'nano-thermite'. Thank you for your kind understanding.

5) To answer all questions in regard to radiation. I state that radiation levels on the ground zero in Manhattan that were about several hundreds Roentgens per hour during the first hour. Then they dropped to a couple of hundreds of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for the next few hours, then they dropped to several tens of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a couple of days, then they dropped to several hundreds of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few days, then they dropped to several tens of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few weeks. Now the levels further dropped but remain noticeably above the normal radiation background even up to this day. Don’t believe – take your Geiger counter and go to ground zero. And you will see what will happen. Make sure that guards who guard the ground zero will notice you carry a Geiger counter before you enter the site. Then, please, report back to this Forum what happened with you and with your Geiger counter and what kind of discussions you had with the guards.

All statements claiming there was ‘no radiation’ on ground zero would be ignored from now on simply because I know that it was and I know it for sure, but those who make this kind of statements simply googled for such a ‘verifiable’ info or refer to other ‘reliable’ sources akin to the ‘NIST report’ or even the most respectable ‘Report of the 9/11 Commission’. I strongly suggest you don’t ask me about radiation anymore, but simply satisfy yourself with what is mentioned above in this regard.


All other questions are welcome providing the guidelines set above are duly observed.
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov.
You want us to ask questions about nuclear devices but wont permit questions that raise issues with regards to the effects of said nuclear devices? I think this will be short a sweet then. lol.

No blast, no heat wave and no fallout. Kinda dispels any nuclear device whatsoever. No first responders or NY locals reporting any illnesses related to a nuclear device. None that I am aware of anyway. Full heads of hair, no increase in still borns, no increase in deformaties etc etc etc. China hasnt reported anything either. Not looking good.

What is the weather like in Bangkok? I hear it is quite barmy this time of year.
__________________
The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
Jackanory is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:02 AM   #67
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,866
Gotta love it when the man with a story to sell won't take questions he doesn't like.

Methinks he hasn't thought this through properly.
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:10 AM   #68
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by uk_dave View Post
Gotta love it when the man with a story to sell won't take questions he doesn't like.

Methinks he hasn't thought this through properly.
Ironically I think he has..........he has identified his audience very accurately as since when did truthers ask tech questions and listen to the answers. They like to to be told "facts" that match their story and will simply not even see those that don't.
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:14 AM   #69
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Quote:
All statements claiming there was ‘no radiation’ on ground zero would be ignored from now on simply because I know that it was and I know it for sure, but those who make this kind of statements simply googled for such a ‘verifiable’ info or refer to other ‘reliable’ sources akin to the ‘NIST report’ or even the most respectable ‘Report of the 9/11 Commission’. I strongly suggest you don’t ask me about radiation anymore, but simply satisfy yourself with what is mentioned above in this regard.
Which of the 26 parts contains the reference to the source data to the radiation levels on and shortly after 9-11.?
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:15 AM   #70
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Big corner office in NWO Towers
Posts: 11,766
Methinks a more correct venue for "blowing the lid off the conspiracy" would be in the offices of a major respected news organization or some law enforcement agency, evidence in tow, instead of YouTube videos and posts on relatively obscure internet forums detailing what questions can and can't be asked.

But that's just me.

911thology, I claim BS.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:15 AM   #71
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
So, I don't see any question. Only silly talking about nothing. Is that I was called here for?
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:22 AM   #72
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
surprised

Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
Methinks a more correct venue for "blowing the lid off the conspiracy" would be in the offices of a major respected news organization or some law enforcement agency, evidence in tow, instead of YouTube videos and posts on relatively obscure internet forums detailing what questions can and can't be asked.

But that's just me.

911thology, I claim BS.
Hi, Twinstead. You also have no questions? Even in regard to why the video is published only on YouTube and nowhere else? Are you shy to ask this question directly from me and prefer to ask it from 'virtual nobody'?
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:22 AM   #73
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,143
Quote:
1) I will NOT answer any question of technical nature that has been answered in any of the 26 parts of the movie published on YouTube...
If you will not explain your stance, then there is nothing to discuss. I for one am not about to visit some YouTube video just to improve someone's hit count. You either deign to bring your argument here and allow questions on it, or there simply will be no debate, and you will lose by default.

Your condition is not acceptible.
__________________
"... my favorite meal is grilled filet of spherical cow of uniform density ... with a side of mashed potatoes of indeterminate volume, peas arranged in an optimal packing configuration, and a glass of ideal fluid." (PhysicsForums)
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:29 AM   #74
VonKleist
Muse
 
VonKleist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Shillville
Posts: 683
Originally Posted by 911thology View Post
5) To answer all questions in regard to radiation. I state that radiation levels on the ground zero in Manhattan that were about several hundreds Roentgens per hour during the first hour. Then they dropped to a couple of hundreds of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for the next few hours, then they dropped to several tens of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a couple of days, then they dropped to several hundreds of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few days, then they dropped to several tens of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few weeks. Now the levels further dropped but remain noticeably above the normal radiation background even up to this day.
How many people have been treated for radiation sickness arising from exposure to this radiation on 9-11-01?

To what degree were the most serious cases affected?

How large was the nuclear device used and what was the delivery method?
__________________
"It takes a brave man not to be a hero in the Red Army"
- Josef Stalin (attrib.)
VonKleist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:33 AM   #75
tj15
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 425
Originally Posted by 911thology View Post
Hello to every one. My name is Dimitri A. Khalezov and I was invited here to answer questions (if any) by an invitation quoted above. I am sorry, I was very busy yesterday and can't be here earlier. If anyone has questions that he wants me to answer for public, you can leave these questions here and I will answer them. However, I would like to warn in advance that:

1) I will NOT answer any question of technical nature that has been answered in any of the 26 parts of the movie published on YouTube (the one discussed in this thread). Which means that if someone can't afford spending his or her precious time on watching the movie he or she must not force me to spend my precious time on answering his or her questions. Hope I made it clear enough. If some one asks such a question that is answered in the movie without any malicious intent, then the answer will sound like this: 'This question is answered in the movie'. I think I have to warn it in advance in order to avoid as much as possible creating lots of garbage on your respectable Forum.

2) Please, bear in mind that I agree to participate in this discussion with only reason in mind to educate as many people as possible in regard to my views on the 9/11 affair. By no means I am interested in spending my precious time on arguing with various zombies over questions whether aluminum tubes could penetrate thick steel bars or not. I am also not interested at all into indulging into long discussions with those who are convinced that I am wrong (or intentionally cheating) and who will not change their embedded opinions anyway. So all questions that do not show any genuine interest of the asker in the subject and that are merely designed to 'disprove my theory' at any cost will be either answered 'yes' or 'no' (in good case) or ignored whatsoever. To further save precious time I will designate in advance a special abbreviation that will be used for quick 'answer' to questions that show no genuine interest in getting the actual answer, but merely intended as an assault on my 'theory'. The abbreviation will sound like this: 'IRSMPTATQBINSAGIA' which will mean 'I Refuse Spending My Precious Time Answering This Question Because It does Not Show Any Genuine Interest of Asker'.

3) My book is not yet published and I am not quite sure when it will be published, so all those who left (or plan to leave) any gloating comments that sound sth like '... he is only selling his book..' can shut up and get lost at once.

4) To answer all questions in regard to thermite and so-called 'nano-thermite'. The answer is like this:
4.1) Ordinary thermite (used in electric welding) is indeed capable to slowly melting steel, but it is not capable of instantly reducing enormous amounts of steel into fluffy microscopic dust.
4.2) The so-called 'nano-thermite' does not exist in nature. It exists only in sick imaginations of completely brainless 9/11 conspiracy theorists, so-called '9/11truthers' and other kind of zombies.
4.3) Neither thermite, nor any so-called 'nano-thermite' causes any place of its usage to be called 'ground zero'.
4.4) If it were really true that alleged 'traces of thermite' were found among the WTC dust/debris, then this 'shocking revelation' should become public in 2002, latest in 2003, but not in 2009.

I hope I made it clear and no one will bother me with any questions in regard to 'thermite' or so-called 'nano-thermite'. Thank you for your kind understanding.

5) To answer all questions in regard to radiation. I state that radiation levels on the ground zero in Manhattan that were about several hundreds Roentgens per hour during the first hour. Then they dropped to a couple of hundreds of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for the next few hours, then they dropped to several tens of Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a couple of days, then they dropped to several hundreds of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few days, then they dropped to several tens of milli-Roentgens per hour and persisted as such for a few weeks. Now the levels further dropped but remain noticeably above the normal radiation background even up to this day. Don’t believe – take your Geiger counter and go to ground zero. And you will see what will happen. Make sure that guards who guard the ground zero will notice you carry a Geiger counter before you enter the site. Then, please, report back to this Forum what happened with you and with your Geiger counter and what kind of discussions you had with the guards.

All statements claiming there was ‘no radiation’ on ground zero would be ignored from now on simply because I know that it was and I know it for sure, but those who make this kind of statements simply googled for such a ‘verifiable’ info or refer to other ‘reliable’ sources akin to the ‘NIST report’ or even the most respectable ‘Report of the 9/11 Commission’. I strongly suggest you don’t ask me about radiation anymore, but simply satisfy yourself with what is mentioned above in this regard.


All other questions are welcome providing the guidelines set above are duly observed.
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov.
If a missile hit the Pentagon, how do you explain all the eyewitnesses that saw an airplane and not a missile?
tj15 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:34 AM   #76
DavidJames
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 8,216
Originally Posted by 911thology View Post
Hi, Twinstead. You also have no questions? Even in regard to why the video is published only on YouTube and nowhere else? Are you shy to ask this question directly from me and prefer to ask it from 'virtual nobody'?
To which major media, police, insurance fraud investigators, lawyers, DA's, official investigative organizations, domestic or foreign, have you presented your evidence?
__________________
I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars.
Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe
Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.
DavidJames is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:35 AM   #77
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
I am very sorry for that.

Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
If you will not explain your stance, then there is nothing to discuss. I for one am not about to visit some YouTube video just to improve someone's hit count. You either deign to bring your argument here and allow questions on it, or there simply will be no debate, and you will lose by default.

Your condition is not acceptible.
I am very sorry that my condition is not acceptable, but this is the condition. I have already over 75.000 views on YouTube and I will not become any richer in this sense if you watch these 26 series and I will get just extra 26 views. And even if 10 of you will watch all these 26 series and make it 260 additional views it will not add much either. Don't make me laugh. But I can't afford spending my precious time answering silly questions of 'busy bodies' while these questions are perfectly answered in the movie in the most illustrative way. What I see here is a complete lack of interest and nothing else than this. If you have lack of interest in the subject whatsoever I have to presume that all your potential questions will not be inspired by curiosity, but by malicious desire to argue at any cost. I do not participate in this kind of argumentation, simply because those who usually indulge in such things do not observe general rules of argument and lack common politeness. They resort to personal insults and illogical and unfair argumentation practices. I have a lot of experience in this field. Hence the conditions mentioned above – in order to anticipate all of these negative things mentioned above. So, if you have any questions – ask them. Go ahead. If not - there is no problem for me at all.
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:43 AM   #78
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,143
Originally Posted by 911thology View Post
I am very sorry that my condition is not acceptable, but this is the condition. I have already over 75.000 views on YouTube and I will not become any richer in this sense if you watch these 26 series and I will get just extra 26 views. And even if 10 of you will watch all these 26 series and make it 260 additional views it will not add much either. Don't make me laugh. But I can't afford spending my precious time answering silly questions of 'busy bodies' while these questions are perfectly answered in the movie in the most illustrative way. What I see here is a complete lack of interest and nothing else than this. If you have lack of interest in the subject whatsoever I have to presume that all your potential questions will not be inspired by curiosity, but by malicious desire to argue at any cost. I do not participate in this kind of argumentation, simply because those who usually indulge in such things do not observe general rules of argument and lack common politeness. They resort to personal insults and illogical and unfair argumentation practices. I have a lot of experience in this field. Hence the conditions mentioned above – in order to anticipate all of these negative things mentioned above. So, if you have any questions – ask them. Go ahead. If not - there is no problem for me at all.
A question has been asked above:
Originally Posted by tj15 View Post
If a missile hit the Pentagon, how do you explain all the eyewitnesses that saw an airplane and not a missile?
You should answer it.
__________________
"... my favorite meal is grilled filet of spherical cow of uniform density ... with a side of mashed potatoes of indeterminate volume, peas arranged in an optimal packing configuration, and a glass of ideal fluid." (PhysicsForums)
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:43 AM   #79
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
answer

Originally Posted by garethdjb View Post
How many people have been treated for radiation sickness arising from exposure to this radiation on 9-11-01?

To what degree were the most serious cases affected?

How large was the nuclear device used and what was the delivery method?
Not too many people were treated for acute radiation sickness - there numbers were about 400 to 500 hundred. However, several thousands were treated for chronic radiation sickness that become apparent after 1 to 3 years after working on ground zero due to slow cumulative effect.

The most serious cases were acute radiation sickness with exposure exceeding 300 Roentgens. Outcome - imminent death within first 10 days.

Devices were 150 kiloton. Delivery method - mini railway leading from underneath the WTC-7 underneath of the targeted Twin Tower in special tunnels. All explained in the movie.
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2010, 10:46 AM   #80
911thology
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 58
answer

Originally Posted by tj15 View Post
If a missile hit the Pentagon, how do you explain all the eyewitnesses that saw an airplane and not a missile?
No witness actually saw any plane, because the missile that hit the Pentagon appoached it at a speed of 2.5 Mach and could hardly be seen at such a speed. Real witnesses (not liars who 'saw everyting' and not liars hired by the FBI to lie to the same effect) saw nothing at all. They believed that generator malfunctioned and exploded. I still have that footage in my personal collection of the 9/11 movies.
911thology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:34 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.