Chain of Custody - Page 8

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Are they teardrops or spheres? Get your story straight.

Still waiting on your apology, by the way.

They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention.

I will appoligize to JREF for what exactly? Asking questions and having an opinion. Yeah right.

DGM · 25th January 2012, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention.

What the hell are you talking about?

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention.

I will appoligize to JREF for what exactly? Asking questions and having an opinion. Yeah right.

For this

You made a claim, and AS USUAL didn't back it up.

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek

SLT, you are funny

Shortly: as for paint solubility tests: when you go to some hobby market, do you expect that they will have in stock only one kind of paint? Really??? Still, this is actually what was expected by Bentham team: that only one kind of paint exists in this world, so it is good enough to compare solubility of their (evil nanothermite) chips with the solubility of some accidentally chosen paint

No, there was no explicit note in the Bentham paper which refuses to admit that two red primers were used in WTC. Still, authors simply should very seriously consider those paints as clear candidates for origin of their red chips. No such serious attempt was made.

1. You have not provided any "irrelevant experiments".
2. If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then?

DGM · 25th January 2012, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that?

Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why?

if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that.

Happy hunting bud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_steel

Quote:

As the carbon content rises, steel has the ability to become harder and stronger through heat treating, but this also makes it less ductile. Regardless of the heat treatment, a higher carbon content reduces weldability. In carbon steels, the higher carbon content lowers the melting point.[2]

Do you need someone to explain the words?

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 09:46 AM

Quote:

If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then?

If I were a betting man, I'd say he's learning how to make claims from you. You know, unsourced.

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by DGM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_steel

Wikipedia is in on it. Can't use them.

Ivan Kminek · 25th January 2012, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

1. You have not provided any "irrelevant experiments".
2. If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then?

1. Experiment, which compared solubility of chips with just one accidental paint is clearly and sadly irrelevant.
2. I wrote: "But, they still (at present, I.K.) refuse to admit that more (at least two) red paints could be sources of red chips in the dust." Try to read what is written.

Sunstealer · 25th January 2012, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that?

Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why?

if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that.

Happy hunting bud.

I'm a metallurgist. I have a degree in metallurgy and materials engineering. I decided to quit posting on 9/11 threads because of people like you. People who have no clue what they are talking about because ultimately it is pointless trying to educate you. However, just now and again a poster who is monumentally ignorant but doesn't know it will post something silly as you just did and won't have the grace to check out what I've said.

You do realise that when people talk about iron in iron working they are actually referring to cast irons and not pure iron. Nope didn't think so. Iron in those terms has more than 2% carbon by weight upto 4% and thus making the material far harder and more brittle, less ductile and less flexible than steel.

White cast iron for example cannot be easily machined it's too brittle due to high concentrations of cementite (iron carbide Fe₃C)

The reduction in carbon content to produce steels (carbon lower than 2% but above 0.02%) allows greater ductility and flexibility aswell as strength. Pure Iron is considered to be soft and ductile and Iron with less than 0.02%C are wrought irons (can't be hardened by heat treatment).

Please detail in your own words how the addition of carbon to iron makes steel flexible. Specifically I expect you to detail solid solution strengthening (interstitial and substitutional) and dispersion strengthening and how they relate to the increased flexibility of steel over pure iron as you say they must be. This will be good for a laugh because I don't think you even know what the word flexible means when it comes to materials science. It's upto you to show how the addition of carbon increases "flexibility" because you are claiming it. I'd also love to see how you think that the process of carburising can increase flexibility. However I'll cite sources talking about the role of carbon in iron showing that I am right and you are woefully wrong.

http://www.chemguide.co.uk/inorganic...tion/iron.html See wrought, mild and high carbon steel section.

http://www.keytometals.com/page.aspx...ite=kts&NM=164 Read section on Carbon and nitrogen in solution in α- and γ- iron

We'll leave it there because I know I won't get an answer and we'll leave the iron-carbon phase equilibrium diagram/TTT curves and heat-treatment and processing because I think it may just be a little over your head.

Sunstealer · 25th January 2012, 10:24 AM

Oh and by the way I can take a 3 samples of steel all of the same chemical composition (i.e. same carbon content) and change the material properties via differing heat treatments to give 3 samples with differing flexibility.

tsig · 25th January 2012, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that?

Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why?

if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that.

Happy hunting bud.

First hit on google:

Carbon and other elements act as a hardening agent,

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

For this

You made a claim, and AS USUAL didn't back it up.

When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6
post #214

Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to.

eat it.

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

Oh and by the way I can take a 3 samples of steel all of the same chemical composition (i.e. same carbon content) and change the material properties via differing heat treatments to give 3 samples with differing flexibility.

The kid said he took welding in High School. Isn't that good enough?

(By "took" I think he means "will take" when he gets there)

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6
post #214

Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to.

eat it.

Wrong. You link me to an entire page. Try again.

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Wrong. You link me to an entire page. Try again.

read again bud. post 214

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

I'm a metallurgist. I have a degree in metallurgy and materials engineering. I decided to quit posting on 9/11 threads because of people like you. People who have no clue what they are talking about because ultimately it is pointless trying to educate you. However, just now and again a poster who is monumentally ignorant but doesn't know it will post something silly as you just did and won't have the grace to check out what I've said.

You do realise that when people talk about iron in iron working they are actually referring to cast irons and not pure iron. Nope didn't think so. Iron in those terms has more than 2% carbon by weight upto 4% and thus making the material far harder and more brittle, less ductile and less flexible than steel.

White cast iron for example cannot be easily machined it's too brittle due to high concentrations of cementite (iron carbide Fe₃C)

The reduction in carbon content to produce steels (carbon lower than 2% but above 0.02%) allows greater ductility and flexibility aswell as strength. Pure Iron is considered to be soft and ductile and Iron with less than 0.02%C are wrought irons (can't be hardened by heat treatment).

http://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/lib...on_diagram.png

Please detail in your own words how the addition of carbon to iron makes steel flexible. Specifically I expect you to detail solid solution strengthening (interstitial and substitutional) and dispersion strengthening and how they relate to the increased flexibility of steel over pure iron as you say they must be. This will be good for a laugh because I don't think you even know what the word flexible means when it comes to materials science. It's upto you to show how the addition of carbon increases "flexibility" because you are claiming it. I'd also love to see how you think that the process of carburising can increase flexibility. However I'll cite sources talking about the role of carbon in iron showing that I am right and you are woefully wrong.

http://www.chemguide.co.uk/inorganic...tion/iron.html See wrought, mild and high carbon steel section.

http://www.keytometals.com/page.aspx...ite=kts&NM=164 Read section on Carbon and nitrogen in solution in α- and γ- iron

We'll leave it there because I know I won't get an answer and we'll leave the iron-carbon phase equilibrium diagram/TTT curves and heat-treatment and processing because I think it may just be a little over your head.

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

Edited by jhunter1163:

Edited for civility.

beachnut · 25th January 2012, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that?

Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why?

if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that.

Happy hunting bud.

How much carbon is in WTC steel?

tear drop? got photos?

You got a wiki degree of silly. You know as much about steel as you do 911, maybe more about steel. What engineering school did you get all this super stuff from? Wiki?

There is no valid chain of custody for the Jones delusional nan0-thermite scam. There is no evidence of thermite on any WTC steel. It is cute you cute and paste wiki answers, answers by the people for the people. Did you write the answer?

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

First hit on google:

Carbon and other elements act as a hardening agent,

I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this:

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 10:42 AM

So I have proven through citation that carbon added to iron makes steel flexible.

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB
Where did you get those degrees from? Back of a cereal box? LOL

You're now reduced to being a jerk to yourself?

You're wrong. About EVERYTHING. Get a new hobby.

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6
post #214

Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to.

eat it.

So your proof that nobody on JREF acknowledges Iron Microspheres, is a post ON JREF, showing IRON MICROSPHERES?

Holy crap. I expect nothing less from you people.

DGM · 25th January 2012, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

So I have proven through citation that carbon added to iron makes steel flexible.

Maybe to yourself. Those of us that can comprehend the written word know you can't (or refuse to).

Sunstealer: You tried.

Sunstealer · 25th January 2012, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this:

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

No - just adding high amounts of carbon does not make steels hard and flexible for knife blades.

The heat treatment does. Like I said before you can change the properties of steel via heat treatment. Lets take three 0.8% plain carbon steel samples and heat them to 1000°C - I want you to tell us all seeing as how you are so amazing at this what the general properties and why those properties occur (hint: microstructure) for each of the following.

1. Leave it to cool to room temperature in air.
2. Quench in oil to room temperature.
3. Quench as in 2 but then heat it to 420°C and leave for an hour and air cool

DGM · 25th January 2012, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this:

The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

That's the first time I've seen "I think" in a technical definition. Did you write that yourself?

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by beachnut

How much carbon is in WTC steel?

tear drop? got photos?

You got a wiki degree of silly. You know as much about steel as you do 911, maybe more about steel. What engineering school did you get all this super stuff from? Wiki?

There is no valid chain of custody for the Jones delusional nan0-thermite scam. There is no evidence of thermite on any WTC steel. It is cute you cute and paste wiki answers, answers by the people for the people. Did you write the answer?

O your just a silly man beach, always trying to get me mad and throw me off, never sucseeding.

Everyone here knows that the TT were known to flex in high winds right? That's why the STEEL CORE COLUMNS thinned as you got closer to the top.

I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds.

But all of you know this because you are sooooo in tune with the structure.

So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.??

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 11:03 AM

Quote:

I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds.

I'm calling BS.

Have you brought your concerns about Controlled Demolition to those people?

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

So your proof that nobody on JREF acknowledges Iron Microspheres, is a post ON JREF, showing IRON MICROSPHERES?

Holy crap. I expect nothing less from you people.

No I was reffering to the quoted post of shepleshills or whoever. You know this. Nevertheless i need not appoligize.

DGM · 25th January 2012, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.??

Who said it wasn't? What's this got to do with Carbon?

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

I'm calling BS.

Have you brought your concerns about Controlled Demolition to those people?

I have. That was actually the reason for me contacting this person. he worked on the 65th floor for 6 years. he has told me that when he took the elevator from the 44th floor( because you had to switch there) when he arrived in the lobby it was demolished. He says he froze up because he couldn't believe he was standing in the lobby. I remember hearing the same thing about building 7 via the Jennings interview, but thats a separate issue totally. He says he walked through the lobby before the second plane strike.

You do know people are opening up to this subject on a global scale right? It is not a dismissed as in the past. Just ask Geraldo.

You guys are gonna be really busy in the near future when the world beleives CD. You know, trying to change their minds.

Go and stop a random person on the street and ask them what they think brought down the WTC. I bet at least half, if not more say CD.

beachnut · 25th January 2012, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

O your just a silly man beach, always trying to get me mad and throw me off, never sucseeding.

Everyone here knows that the TT were known to flex in high winds right? That's why the STEEL CORE COLUMNS thinned as you got closer to the top.

I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds.

But all of you know this because you are sooooo in tune with the structure.

So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.??

wiki your way to knowledge
You don't know anything about steel, you are regurgitating wiki.

You have no degree in engineering, why are you trying to school people when you have delusions on 911?

A gymnast is flexible, but do you want your building bending down to the ground? Here you are in the chain of custody for a Jones insane claim of thermite thread bogged down with flexibility on a topic you have no knowledge save the googled wiki junk you copy and paste.

What is the percent of carbon in the WTC steel? What grades of steel were used, by strength, using standards the industry uses for the exterior sections? How were they selected?

The fact remains, zero thermite iron fused to WTC steel. No need for a chain of custody for thermite dust that never existed, like presenting a chain of custody for evidence of Santa Claus or Bigfoot; not needed.
Feel free to wiki your way to support your failed delusions on 911, it is what 911 truth does best.

ElMondoHummus · 25th January 2012, 11:19 AM

Wow, there's a ton of genius in this thread. The Towers swayed because of the steel flexibility, not due to the fact it was a complex structure with many column to column connections, column to truss connections, etc. It was the flexibility of the steel that was the reason for this.

And carbon is added to increase steel flexibility. Which means that low carbon alloys like standard steels (from .8 to 2.0% carbon content) are brittle and something like pig iron (3% carbon and higher) is flexible. Huh. Didn't know that all the citations of pig iron being brittle were all wrong. It's also funny how ductility seems to be associated with lower levels of carbon in steel, not higher, but I'm no genius. Those folks who work with steel professionally must not know what they're talking about.

superlogicalthinker · 25th January 2012, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by DGM

Who said it wasn't? What's this got to do with Carbon?

Well brother you see it's the carbon amount that make er flex-y-bal.

NoahFence · 25th January 2012, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

No I was reffering to the quoted post of shepleshills or whoever. You know this. Nevertheless i need not appoligize.

Nope. Your quote:

Quote:

There was nothing pretend about the TH. It really happened. Kind of like the iron rich spheres that you Jretreds pretend are not there.

So not only are you dishonest to people you're talking to, but you're dishonet to yourself?

Wow.

beachnut · 25th January 2012, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

I have. That was actually the reason for me contacting this person. he worked on the 65th floor for 6 years. he has told me that when he took the elevator from the 44th floor( because you had to switch there) when he arrived in the lobby it was demolished. He says he froze up because he couldn't believe he was standing in the lobby. I remember hearing the same thing about building 7 via the Jennings interview, but thats a separate issue totally. He says he walked through the lobby before the second plane strike.

You do know people are opening up to this subject on a global scale right? It is not a dismissed as in the past. Just ask Geraldo.

You guys are gonna be really busy in the near future when the world beleives CD. You know, trying to change their minds.

Go and stop a random person on the street and ask them what they think brought down the WTC. I bet at least half, if not more say CD.

You are an agent for an anti-intellectual movement of woo, which only exists in your mind. You have no clue what happen on 911 because you don't do science, you can't do simple physics to save you from the lies you adopt out of ignorance and spread due to the same.

You are now claiming everyone is dumbed down saying WTC 1 was a CD. Guess you could be right, the world could be falling into a dark age of stupid, not the first time millions of people fall for hate and ignorance, Hitler guided Germany into delusions, hate and ignorance, and you freely follow 911 truth into the pit of ignorance.

You don't care there is zero iron fused to steel from thermite at the WTC complex, you blindly spew lies and claim you will triumph, bringing in a new age of darkness where lies, hearsay, and fantasy rule. Good for you! Ignore science, ignore evidence, go for the woo. You are making up delusions based on your delusions.

uke2se · 25th January 2012, 11:28 AM

This thing is about to be BLOWN WIDE OPEN!

Any day now...

Gaspode · 25th January 2012, 12:04 PM

Keep the discussion civil please. Ensure posts address the argument not the arguer.

Posted By:Gaspode

Edx · 25th January 2012, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

No I was reffering to the quoted post of shepleshills or whoever. You know this. Nevertheless i need not appoligize.

You claimed "we" say the iron microspheres do not exist, that is not true. Do you accept that or not?

And btw, did you really quote a WIKI Answers page as your only source??? lol?

uke2se · 25th January 2012, 12:17 PM

Chris, if I might make a suggestion it would be this:

Start a new thread. Outline the experiment as much as you are able. Ask two questions:

1. If the experiment went off as outlined, would you accept the results?

2. If the answer to the previous question was "no", please outline what changes would need to be made for you to accept it. Please note that any suggestions that didn't also apply to the Harrit study will be discarded.

Ask the mods to put the thread on moderated status and to discard all posts that don't follow this basic outline.

That would reduce the amount of jibber-jabber and force the twoofers to commit to the study or prove themselves to be hypocrites.

sheeplesnshills · 25th January 2012, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker

Yes....but there not in a shape of a tear drop. They were pulled from extreme pressure to that shape. Cmon dude. Please.

surface tension does that, no pressure, extreme or otherwise required. So SLT where did you go to college and what did you study? We know it wasn't Engineering........

25th January 2012, 09:40 AM	#282
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,308	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention. What the hell are you talking about?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

25th January 2012, 09:40 AM	#283
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention. I will appoligize to JREF for what exactly? Asking questions and having an opinion. Yeah right. For this You made a claim, and AS USUAL didn't back it up.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 09:45 AM	#285
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,308	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that? Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why? if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that. Happy hunting bud. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_steel Quote: As the carbon content rises, steel has the ability to become harder and stronger through heat treating, but this also makes it less ductile. Regardless of the heat treatment, a higher carbon content reduces weldability. In carbon steels, the higher carbon content lowers the melting point.[2] Do you need someone to explain the words?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley Last edited by DGM; 25th January 2012 at 09:48 AM.

25th January 2012, 09:46 AM	#286
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Quote: If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then? If I were a betting man, I'd say he's learning how to make claims from you. You know, unsourced.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 09:47 AM	#287
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by DGM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_steel Wikipedia is in on it. Can't use them.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 09:36 AM	#281
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by NoahFence Are they teardrops or spheres? Get your story straight. Still waiting on your apology, by the way. They are spheres pulled into a tear drop shape from extreme pressure due to surface tention. I will appoligize to JREF for what exactly? Asking questions and having an opinion. Yeah right.

25th January 2012, 09:43 AM	#284
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek SLT, you are funny Shortly: as for paint solubility tests: when you go to some hobby market, do you expect that they will have in stock only one kind of paint? Really??? Still, this is actually what was expected by Bentham team: that only one kind of paint exists in this world, so it is good enough to compare solubility of their (evil nanothermite) chips with the solubility of some accidentally chosen paint No, there was no explicit note in the Bentham paper which refuses to admit that two red primers were used in WTC. Still, authors simply should very seriously consider those paints as clear candidates for origin of their red chips. No such serious attempt was made. 1. You have not provided any "irrelevant experiments". 2. If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then?

25th January 2012, 09:54 AM	#288
Ivan Kminek Muse Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 813	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker 1. You have not provided any "irrelevant experiments". 2. If there is no note in the paper saying they refuse to admit there was two red paints, why are you saying that the refused to admit it then? 1. Experiment, which compared solubility of chips with just one accidental paint is clearly and sadly irrelevant. 2. I wrote: "But, they still (at present, I.K.) refuse to admit that more (at least two) red paints could be sources of red chips in the dust." Try to read what is written.

25th January 2012, 10:20 AM	#289
Sunstealer Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,596	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that? Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why? if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that. Happy hunting bud. I'm a metallurgist. I have a degree in metallurgy and materials engineering. I decided to quit posting on 9/11 threads because of people like you. People who have no clue what they are talking about because ultimately it is pointless trying to educate you. However, just now and again a poster who is monumentally ignorant but doesn't know it will post something silly as you just did and won't have the grace to check out what I've said. You do realise that when people talk about iron in iron working they are actually referring to cast irons and not pure iron. Nope didn't think so. Iron in those terms has more than 2% carbon by weight upto 4% and thus making the material far harder and more brittle, less ductile and less flexible than steel. White cast iron for example cannot be easily machined it's too brittle due to high concentrations of cementite (iron carbide Fe₃C) The reduction in carbon content to produce steels (carbon lower than 2% but above 0.02%) allows greater ductility and flexibility aswell as strength. Pure Iron is considered to be soft and ductile and Iron with less than 0.02%C are wrought irons (can't be hardened by heat treatment). Please detail in your own words how the addition of carbon to iron makes steel flexible. Specifically I expect you to detail solid solution strengthening (interstitial and substitutional) and dispersion strengthening and how they relate to the increased flexibility of steel over pure iron as you say they must be. This will be good for a laugh because I don't think you even know what the word flexible means when it comes to materials science. It's upto you to show how the addition of carbon increases "flexibility" because you are claiming it. I'd also love to see how you think that the process of carburising can increase flexibility. However I'll cite sources talking about the role of carbon in iron showing that I am right and you are woefully wrong. http://www.chemguide.co.uk/inorganic...tion/iron.html See wrought, mild and high carbon steel section. http://www.keytometals.com/page.aspx...ite=kts&NM=164 Read section on Carbon and nitrogen in solution in α- and γ- iron We'll leave it there because I know I won't get an answer and we'll leave the iron-carbon phase equilibrium diagram/TTT curves and heat-treatment and processing because I think it may just be a little over your head.
	__________________ Proof that thermite was NOT discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. Proof of Tnemec red primer paint in Harrit et al paper.

25th January 2012, 10:24 AM	#290
Sunstealer Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,596	Oh and by the way I can take a 3 samples of steel all of the same chemical composition (i.e. same carbon content) and change the material properties via differing heat treatments to give 3 samples with differing flexibility.
	__________________ Proof that thermite was NOT discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. Proof of Tnemec red primer paint in Harrit et al paper.

25th January 2012, 10:28 AM	#291
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,677	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that? Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why? if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that. Happy hunting bud. First hit on google: Carbon and other elements act as a hardening agent,

25th January 2012, 10:29 AM	#292
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by NoahFence For this You made a claim, and AS USUAL didn't back it up. When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6 post #214 Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to. eat it.

25th January 2012, 10:30 AM	#293
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by Sunstealer Oh and by the way I can take a 3 samples of steel all of the same chemical composition (i.e. same carbon content) and change the material properties via differing heat treatments to give 3 samples with differing flexibility. The kid said he took welding in High School. Isn't that good enough? (By "took" I think he means "will take" when he gets there)
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 10:31 AM	#294
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6 post #214 Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to. eat it. Wrong. You link me to an entire page. Try again.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 10:35 AM	#295
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by NoahFence Wrong. You link me to an entire page. Try again. read again bud. post 214

25th January 2012, 10:38 AM	#296
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by Sunstealer I'm a metallurgist. I have a degree in metallurgy and materials engineering. I decided to quit posting on 9/11 threads because of people like you. People who have no clue what they are talking about because ultimately it is pointless trying to educate you. However, just now and again a poster who is monumentally ignorant but doesn't know it will post something silly as you just did and won't have the grace to check out what I've said. You do realise that when people talk about iron in iron working they are actually referring to cast irons and not pure iron. Nope didn't think so. Iron in those terms has more than 2% carbon by weight upto 4% and thus making the material far harder and more brittle, less ductile and less flexible than steel. White cast iron for example cannot be easily machined it's too brittle due to high concentrations of cementite (iron carbide Fe₃C) The reduction in carbon content to produce steels (carbon lower than 2% but above 0.02%) allows greater ductility and flexibility aswell as strength. Pure Iron is considered to be soft and ductile and Iron with less than 0.02%C are wrought irons (can't be hardened by heat treatment). http://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/lib...on_diagram.png Please detail in your own words how the addition of carbon to iron makes steel flexible. Specifically I expect you to detail solid solution strengthening (interstitial and substitutional) and dispersion strengthening and how they relate to the increased flexibility of steel over pure iron as you say they must be. This will be good for a laugh because I don't think you even know what the word flexible means when it comes to materials science. It's upto you to show how the addition of carbon increases "flexibility" because you are claiming it. I'd also love to see how you think that the process of carburising can increase flexibility. However I'll cite sources talking about the role of carbon in iron showing that I am right and you are woefully wrong. http://www.chemguide.co.uk/inorganic...tion/iron.html See wrought, mild and high carbon steel section. http://www.keytometals.com/page.aspx...ite=kts&NM=164 Read section on Carbon and nitrogen in solution in α- and γ- iron We'll leave it there because I know I won't get an answer and we'll leave the iron-carbon phase equilibrium diagram/TTT curves and heat-treatment and processing because I think it may just be a little over your head. The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

25th January 2012, 10:41 AM	#298
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,891	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker WOW! So you are saying that steel in NOT an alloy of iron with added carbon for flexibilty? Sure about that? Do you know when they swiched to steel from iron in constuction? Do you know why? if you are actually saying that steel does not have carbon added to it for flexibilty show me a citiation that says that. Happy hunting bud. How much carbon is in WTC steel? tear drop? got photos? You got a wiki degree of silly. You know as much about steel as you do 911, maybe more about steel. What engineering school did you get all this super stuff from? Wiki? There is no valid chain of custody for the Jones delusional nan0-thermite scam. There is no evidence of thermite on any WTC steel. It is cute you cute and paste wiki answers, answers by the people for the people. Did you write the answer?
	Last edited by beachnut; 25th January 2012 at 10:49 AM.

25th January 2012, 10:41 AM	#299
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by tsig First hit on google: Carbon and other elements act as a hardening agent, I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this: The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry. Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB

25th January 2012, 10:42 AM	#300
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	So I have proven through citation that carbon added to iron makes steel flexible. So I have proven through citation that carbon added to iron makes steel flexible.

25th January 2012, 10:43 AM	#301
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Quote: Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB Where did you get those degrees from? Back of a cereal box? LOL You're now reduced to being a jerk to yourself? You're wrong. About EVERYTHING. Get a new hobby.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 10:45 AM	#302
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker When I said " the one's you say are not there" I was reffering to this post here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=228172&page=6 post #214 Oystien corrected him already so I don't have to. eat it. So your proof that nobody on JREF acknowledges Iron Microspheres, is a post ON JREF, showing IRON MICROSPHERES? Holy crap. I expect nothing less from you people.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 10:47 AM	#303
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,308	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker So I have proven through citation that carbon added to iron makes steel flexible. Maybe to yourself. Those of us that can comprehend the written word know you can't (or refuse to). Sunstealer: You tried.
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

25th January 2012, 10:51 AM	#304
Sunstealer Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,596	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this: The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry. Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB No - just adding high amounts of carbon does not make steels hard and flexible for knife blades. The heat treatment does. Like I said before you can change the properties of steel via heat treatment. Lets take three 0.8% plain carbon steel samples and heat them to 1000°C - I want you to tell us all seeing as how you are so amazing at this what the general properties and why those properties occur (hint: microstructure) for each of the following. 1. Leave it to cool to room temperature in air. 2. Quench in oil to room temperature. 3. Quench as in 2 but then heat it to 420°C and leave for an hour and air cool
	__________________ Proof that thermite was NOT discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. Proof of Tnemec red primer paint in Harrit et al paper. Last edited by Sunstealer; 25th January 2012 at 10:52 AM.

25th January 2012, 10:53 AM	#305
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,308	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker I love how you cut the sentence down so the word flexible is not shown. my first hit came up this: The main ingredient is carbon. Carbon is what makes iron into steel. Other chemicals are added, like chromium, which makes stainless steel. Different amounts of carbon can change the properties. Adding a lot of carbon makes high-carbon steel, which is hard and flexible, used to make knife blades and (lower quality) springs. Adding molybdenum (and chrome, I think) makes chromoly steel, very flexible and strong steel often used in the racing industry. Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad...#ixzz1kUqDnyGB That's the first time I've seen "I think" in a technical definition. Did you write that yourself?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

25th January 2012, 11:01 AM	#306
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by beachnut How much carbon is in WTC steel? tear drop? got photos? You got a wiki degree of silly. You know as much about steel as you do 911, maybe more about steel. What engineering school did you get all this super stuff from? Wiki? There is no valid chain of custody for the Jones delusional nan0-thermite scam. There is no evidence of thermite on any WTC steel. It is cute you cute and paste wiki answers, answers by the people for the people. Did you write the answer? O your just a silly man beach, always trying to get me mad and throw me off, never sucseeding. Everyone here knows that the TT were known to flex in high winds right? That's why the STEEL CORE COLUMNS thinned as you got closer to the top. I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds. But all of you know this because you are sooooo in tune with the structure. So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.??

25th January 2012, 11:03 AM	#307
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Quote: I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds. I'm calling BS. Have you brought your concerns about Controlled Demolition to those people?
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 11:04 AM	#308
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by NoahFence So your proof that nobody on JREF acknowledges Iron Microspheres, is a post ON JREF, showing IRON MICROSPHERES? Holy crap. I expect nothing less from you people. No I was reffering to the quoted post of shepleshills or whoever. You know this. Nevertheless i need not appoligize.

25th January 2012, 11:13 AM	#309
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,308	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.?? Who said it wasn't? What's this got to do with Carbon?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

25th January 2012, 11:13 AM	#310
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by NoahFence I'm calling BS. Have you brought your concerns about Controlled Demolition to those people? I have. That was actually the reason for me contacting this person. he worked on the 65th floor for 6 years. he has told me that when he took the elevator from the 44th floor( because you had to switch there) when he arrived in the lobby it was demolished. He says he froze up because he couldn't believe he was standing in the lobby. I remember hearing the same thing about building 7 via the Jennings interview, but thats a separate issue totally. He says he walked through the lobby before the second plane strike. You do know people are opening up to this subject on a global scale right? It is not a dismissed as in the past. Just ask Geraldo. You guys are gonna be really busy in the near future when the world beleives CD. You know, trying to change their minds. Go and stop a random person on the street and ask them what they think brought down the WTC. I bet at least half, if not more say CD.

25th January 2012, 11:14 AM	#311
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,891	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker O your just a silly man beach, always trying to get me mad and throw me off, never sucseeding. Everyone here knows that the TT were known to flex in high winds right? That's why the STEEL CORE COLUMNS thinned as you got closer to the top. I have spoken with people who worked in the towers whom have said you could feel them sway in high winds. But all of you know this because you are sooooo in tune with the structure. So how could steel possably NOT be flexible if 200,000 tons would flex in high winds.?? wiki your way to knowledge You don't know anything about steel, you are regurgitating wiki. You have no degree in engineering, why are you trying to school people when you have delusions on 911? A gymnast is flexible, but do you want your building bending down to the ground? Here you are in the chain of custody for a Jones insane claim of thermite thread bogged down with flexibility on a topic you have no knowledge save the googled wiki junk you copy and paste. What is the percent of carbon in the WTC steel? What grades of steel were used, by strength, using standards the industry uses for the exterior sections? How were they selected? The fact remains, zero thermite iron fused to WTC steel. No need for a chain of custody for thermite dust that never existed, like presenting a chain of custody for evidence of Santa Claus or Bigfoot; not needed. Feel free to wiki your way to support your failed delusions on 911, it is what 911 truth does best.

25th January 2012, 11:19 AM	#312
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 11,938	Wow, there's a ton of genius in this thread. The Towers swayed because of the steel flexibility, not due to the fact it was a complex structure with many column to column connections, column to truss connections, etc. It was the flexibility of the steel that was the reason for this. And carbon is added to increase steel flexibility. Which means that low carbon alloys like standard steels (from .8 to 2.0% carbon content) are brittle and something like pig iron (3% carbon and higher) is flexible. Huh. Didn't know that all the citations of pig iron being brittle were all wrong. It's also funny how ductility seems to be associated with lower levels of carbon in steel, not higher, but I'm no genius. Those folks who work with steel professionally must not know what they're talking about.
	__________________ must take this very carefully....booze is wise men's drink..... -pillory "... I'm quite willing to have everyone use my rejection of the 9/11 conspiracy theory as a basis for assessing my intelligence, judgment, and trustworthiness" -Prof. Ann Althouse

25th January 2012, 11:20 AM	#313
superlogicalthinker Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 316	Originally Posted by DGM Who said it wasn't? What's this got to do with Carbon? Well brother you see it's the carbon amount that make er flex-y-bal.

25th January 2012, 11:24 AM	#314
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,296	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker No I was reffering to the quoted post of shepleshills or whoever. You know this. Nevertheless i need not appoligize. Nope. Your quote: Quote: There was nothing pretend about the TH. It really happened. Kind of like the iron rich spheres that you Jretreds pretend are not there. So not only are you dishonest to people you're talking to, but you're dishonet to yourself? Wow.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

25th January 2012, 11:25 AM	#315
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,891	Originally Posted by superlogicalthinker I have. That was actually the reason for me contacting this person. he worked on the 65th floor for 6 years. he has told me that when he took the elevator from the 44th floor( because you had to switch there) when he arrived in the lobby it was demolished. He says he froze up because he couldn't believe he was standing in the lobby. I remember hearing the same thing about building 7 via the Jennings interview, but thats a separate issue totally. He says he walked through the lobby before the second plane strike. You do know people are opening up to this subject on a global scale right? It is not a dismissed as in the past. Just ask Geraldo. You guys are gonna be really busy in the near future when the world beleives CD. You know, trying to change their minds. Go and stop a random person on the street and ask them what they think brought down the WTC. I bet at least half, if not more say CD. You are an agent for an anti-intellectual movement of woo, which only exists in your mind. You have no clue what happen on 911 because you don't do science, you can't do simple physics to save you from the lies you adopt out of ignorance and spread due to the same. You are now claiming everyone is dumbed down saying WTC 1 was a CD. Guess you could be right, the world could be falling into a dark age of stupid, not the first time millions of people fall for hate and ignorance, Hitler guided Germany into delusions, hate and ignorance, and you freely follow 911 truth into the pit of ignorance. You don't care there is zero iron fused to steel from thermite at the WTC complex, you blindly spew lies and claim you will triumph, bringing in a new age of darkness where lies, hearsay, and fantasy rule. Good for you! Ignore science, ignore evidence, go for the woo. You are making up delusions based on your delusions.

25th January 2012, 11:28 AM	#316
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	This thing is about to be BLOWN WIDE OPEN! Any day now...
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126