Randi - You've Been Had! TS1234 Email to Randi - Page 5

TruthSeeker1234 · 26th October 2006, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Welcome to the forums, Roger. [ETA: Oh, I see you've been here since June '05. Don't be such a stranger!]

As for the "squibs," I measured the most prominent one, near the top of the north tower, and calculated its average speed as 35 mph. I'd like to see a high explosive that can accomplish that.

Suppose a shaped charge was in the core section. How fast would we expect the air to be moving by the time it was at the perimeter? Could thermobarics behave this way?

How else do we explain these tightly focused jets of smoke and debris? Let me see if I have this right. A separate collapse front of falling floor assemblies is proceeding 10-30 floors below the main collapse front. It impacts drywall and crushes it into powder, then expells it out the sideways. It acts like a piston, or the plunger in a syringe.

I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this.

Horatius · 26th October 2006, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this.

Have you ever heard the adage, "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link"? One of the windows was likely not set as strongly into its frame as the others, and it failed first. After that, the pressure on the other windows would drop, as air is being expelled through the first window. Since the pressure is dropping, the other windows are no longer near their failure point.

Until the rest of the building hits them, of course.

hellaeon · 26th October 2006, 03:54 PM

d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s

defaultdotxbe · 26th October 2006, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by hellaeon

d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s

why not? i got them eating out of my hand

Horatius · 26th October 2006, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by hellaeon

d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s

I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around.

hellaeon · 26th October 2006, 04:04 PM

ahhh I know, im just...uhhh over the style of CTists this morning

post a question, block your ears, post a question, block your ears....repeat indefinately until one day, a dormant brain cell awakes and logic exists.

Carry on

Horatius · 26th October 2006, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by hellaeon

ahhh I know, im just...uhhh over the style of CTists this morning

post a question, block your ears, post a question, block your ears....repeat indefinately until one day, a dormant brain cell awakes and logic exists.

Carry on

Hey, if it was easy, everybody'd be doing it!

Mancman · 26th October 2006, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Suppose a shaped charge was in the core section. How fast would we expect the air to be moving by the time it was at the perimeter? Could thermobarics behave this way?

How else do we explain these tightly focused jets of smoke and debris? Let me see if I have this right. A separate collapse front of falling floor assemblies is proceeding 10-30 floors below the main collapse front. It impacts drywall and crushes it into powder, then expells it out the sideways. It acts like a piston, or the plunger in a syringe.

I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this.

Air pressure. Not seperate collapses.

Gravy · 26th October 2006, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this.

Yes you do. Repeat your thought experiment, but with the center window open and the others closed. Describe what you would expect to see when the air pressure rapidly rises inside the building as the smoke- and debris-filled upper section falls.

Likewise, imagine that you're a mechanical floor, with vents all around directly to the exterior! Describe what you would expect to see when the air pressure rapidly rises inside the building as the smoke- and debris-filled upper section falls.

The Central Scrutinizer · 26th October 2006, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by Calcas

Yep, that's TS.

"Nick" from Cleveland. He should change it to "nuts" from Cleveland.

http://myspace-534.vo.llnwd.net/0126...66023534_l.jpg

"Purjury"

Elizabeth I · 26th October 2006, 05:24 PM

Truthseeker1-4: You utterly misstate what I was saying. Of course a cinder block dropped will injure your toe, it cannot injure anything on the way down.

Originally Posted by Horatius

Unless there's something else in the way - like another foot. Or a floor structure.

Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you for saying that. I screamed and pulled my own hair when I read "...it cannot injure anything on the way down."

TruthSeeker1234 · 26th October 2006, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by Horatius

I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around.

Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

Garb · 26th October 2006, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

The truth was exposed when Osama confessed. Duh.

And you do realize how ridiculous your theory is right?

beachnut · 26th October 2006, 06:41 PM

has there been a return email on this alleged email to of the famous "You've Been Had! TS1234 Email to Randi "

did we miss the reply, or could this be a ct of the missing email?

TruthSeeker1234 · 26th October 2006, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

Truthseeker1-4: You utterly misstate what I was saying. Of course a cinder block dropped will injure your toe, it cannot injure anything on the way down.

Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you for saying that. I screamed and pulled my own hair when I read "...it cannot injure anything on the way down."

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It's just at odds with itself.

firecoins · 26th October 2006, 06:46 PM

Truthseeker1234....you bend the truth better than Geller bent spoons.

firecoins · 26th October 2006, 06:48 PM

double post

Garb · 26th October 2006, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. Your are trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It just at odds with itself.

Well the fact that you said it fell in freefall time says a lot. It didn't. And yes it did damage everything, but a lot was left of the building. How many times have we told you how big the basement was?

Your explosive theory is on the basis of "too much dust" and a picture of a pile of debris that you say "is all microscopic" yet it isn't.

Lets see how silly your theory is: Our government wanted to go to Iraq by creating this whole 9/11 scheme. Yet the highjackers were from a group called Al Quaida, which has little or no connection with Saddam. We crash a missle into the Pentagon, blow up a plane in Shanksville, and crash two planes into a large building. But no, there is more. We rig up wtc 7 for no reason, and decide to blow up every little thing of the wtc with both silent and invisible explosives that cannot be detected.

What a power our government is...

TruthSeeker1234 · 26th October 2006, 06:53 PM

Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is.

Quote:

You are wrong. It is you who have been “taken,” not I…

I do not discuss conspiracy theories.

James Randi.

realitybites · 26th October 2006, 06:57 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

You could always try, oh I don't know... voting.

... Just a thought.

Garb · 26th October 2006, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is.

Good and blunt.

beachnut · 26th October 2006, 07:05 PM

the real conspiracy is the simple one, have surprise!

learn to fly jets, (these guys are idiots, most Americans could fly the jets without training better and have the sense not to hit the ground moving fast, translation any kid off the street in American can out fly a terrorist!) foreign students always come to America to learn, and as always we hope they do their flying as far away as possible! (beware Norwegian pilots are damn good, (dead insect to you too))

learn to cut throats, no pilot will let you have his jets pilots do not share, the easiest way to get a pilot out of the seat is to kill him, I know this is a fact ask a pilot why. (however, no one has ever used this idea for real until 9/11, we usually just beat them to the jet)

Calculate the impact energy of an aircraft speeding = close to a ton of TNT

Calculate the reaction of killing all the passengers into a symbol of the US and the World

Calculate the reaction of hitting the pentagon (personally it killed all the jokes you could make up on the subject, but now is bad humor)

Calculate the reaction of hitting the White House!

11, surprise, 175 surprise, we are now armed yet not ready 77 not yet ready, 93 ready and volunteers took action,,, we won after we had the rule book in the fourth quarter!!!!!

Not a lot of steps to do this, a lot more simple than any CT plot on the truth side!

You guys were not around when we had a lot of hijackings in the 60s?

Never did the hijackers fly the plane and kill the pilot, new ideas are called surprises.

Is anyone behind you right now wanting you computer, could you friend be the next terrorist to get you and steal your computer?

stateofgrace · 26th October 2006, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

Yet you are more than willing to believe your fellow countrymen would actively plan, participate in and cover up mass murder of their fellow countrymen.

Maybe you need to grow up.

firecoins · 26th October 2006, 07:12 PM

Mr Randi wastes no time with B.S.

rwguinn · 26th October 2006, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Horatius

I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around.

Typical Costal Wimpy liberal answer!

Failed policys don't deter you guys! Ha!

This guy is worse than my kid at refusing to let go of a subject that dead, dead, dead!

Edit: Ok--you're Canadian. Why did yopu guys have to go and model yourselves after our left/lefter coast liberals? Dadgum!

Augustine · 26th October 2006, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down.

The rest of the post is just plain wrong, but right here: gravity accelerates the falling mass. The only way for gravity not to accelerate the falling mass is if the kinetic energy of the falling mass is less than the structure's ability to plastically deform. In the WTC, kinetic energy was 8 times greater than the energy required to fail the columns at the start of the collapse. The collapse was going to accelerate, period.

Horatius · 26th October 2006, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

Typical Costal Wimpy liberal answer!

Failed policys don't deter you guys! Ha!

This guy is worse than my kid at refusing to let go of a subject that dead, dead, dead!

Edit: Ok--you're Canadian. Why did yopu guys have to go and model yourselves after our left/lefter coast liberals? Dadgum!

Well, it's Canada. We could have had the Govenment of England, the industry of the US and the culture of France. Instead we ended up with the industry of England, the government of France and the culture of the US.

Horatius · 26th October 2006, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

Well, you may get that police state anyways, as part of the overreaction to the threat of terrorism, combined with your usual progress in the war on drugs and all that.

If you want to avoid this, stop wasting your time on this garbage, and work for real change. There's an election coming up - get people out to vote for someone who'll stand up against this stuff in Congress. They're out there, but they don't have enough support.

Really, the only way to show that Bush&Company aren't the Ultimate Masters of Everything is to vote for the Throw the Bastids Out Party. I vote that way pretty much every election.

Zep · 26th October 2006, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It's just at odds with itself.

Answer me this: Did you do physics at school? Honestly, now...no fibbing, OK?

fuelair · 26th October 2006, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It's just at odds with itself.

Please get help.

CurtC · 26th October 2006, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is.

Wow. Randi was feeling verbose today - you got about ten more words out of him than I figured you would.

CurtC · 26th October 2006, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

I'm with you so far. The thing you don't realize is that even slowing down by 15 or 20 percent (which is what we see with the towers) means that a huge amount of energy was available for being dissipated on the way down, by breaking stuff.

Bell · 26th October 2006, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is.

lol, who would have thought?

Good of you to post it, btw.

Gravy · 26th October 2006, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It's just at odds with itself.

I strongly encourage you not to bring this philosophy to avalanche country.

defaultdotxbe · 26th October 2006, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by CurtC

I'm with you so far. The thing you don't realize is that even slowing down by 15 or 20 percent (which is what we see with the towers) means that a huge amount of energy was available for being dissipated on the way down, by breaking stuff.

yeah, ive noticed this with alot of CTers "how can the little bit on top crush the entire bottom" arguments

they fail to reailze that when 50,000+ tons is falling, even a tiny amount of KE being bled off is a HUGE amount of force, more than enough to push the next floor to its failure point

and if the mass of the top 20 stories is enough to push the floor below it to the failure point after accelerating the distance of 1 floor, then the falling mass will gain enough KE in falling the next 12-15 feet to destroy the next floor, and so on and so force until it hits the ground

R.Mackey · 26th October 2006, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by CurtC

I'm with you so far. The thing you don't realize is that even slowing down by 15 or 20 percent (which is what we see with the towers) means that a huge amount of energy was available for being dissipated on the way down, by breaking stuff.

Yup.

Here's some simple math for you, TruthSeeker1234. Each tower had on the order of 10¹² Joules of energy. Suppose we model it as all kinetic energy, e.g. m v².

In the "Free Fall" case, we know it takes about 10 seconds to totally collapse.

In what actually happened, it took about 15 seconds. So the velocity here is 10 seconds / 15 seconds = roughly 66% of what it would have been in freefall. Mass stays the same, and we have a lower velocity.

Using these new numbers, the undissipated kinetic energy of the real case is m (66% v)² or 0.44 x m v². That leaves 0.56 x m v² available for deformation, or 56%.

That is to say, by slowing it down just five seconds, we have expended OVER HALF of the energy on the way down. That's 5 x 10¹¹ Joules. Or, in layman's terms, a metric crapload of energy.

Now do you get it? The "near freefall" thing is just a canard. Delaying only a slight amount means dissipation of tremendous amounts of energy, giving rise to precisely what we all saw.

Disclaimer: This analysis is overly simplistic, but you get the point. In actual fact the 10 second freefall is too high, since the tower was not a point mass suspended at the top. Thus the fraction of energy available for destruction is, in reality, even higher than 56%.

roger · 26th October 2006, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take.

Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down.

Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time.

It's just at odds with itself.

I'm intrigued. The math, please.

delphi_ote · 26th October 2006, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.

If you believe this, find the evidence. Show proof. Not image stills and a thousand logical fallacies. Own up to your mistakes. Admit when you are mistaken. If you're right, you'll have our full support if you show us the proof. Evidence - not vapid propaganda - changes minds.

Earlier in this thread, you claimed that inelastic collisions could not damage both objects. That is false. Why won't you admit that you made a mistake? Are you so afraid of admitting that you're wrong about something so trivial? If you're that afraid of something so minor, how are you going to act in the face of evidence proving something more important to you wrong?

LashL · 26th October 2006, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

Yup.

Here's some simple math for you, TruthSeeker1234. Each tower had on the order of 10¹² Joules of energy. Suppose we model it as all kinetic energy, e.g. m v².

In the "Free Fall" case, we know it takes about 10 seconds to totally collapse.

In what actually happened, it took about 15 seconds. So the velocity here is 10 seconds / 15 seconds = roughly 66% of what it would have been in freefall. Mass stays the same, and we have a lower velocity.

Using these new numbers, the undissipated kinetic energy of the real case is m (66% v)² or 0.44 x m v². That leaves 0.56 x m v² available for deformation, or 56%.

That is to say, by slowing it down just five seconds, we have expended OVER HALF of the energy on the way down. That's 5 x 10¹¹ Joules. Or, in layman's terms, a metric crapload of energy.

Now do you get it? The "near freefall" thing is just a canard. Delaying only a slight amount means dissipation of tremendous amounts of energy, giving rise to precisely what we all saw.

Disclaimer: This analysis is overly simplistic, but you get the point. In actual fact the 10 second freefall is too high, since the tower was not a point mass suspended at the top. Thus the fraction of energy available for destruction is, in reality, even higher than 56%.

TS1234 doesn't do math.

Or science.

Or logic.

Or critical thinking.

Or sanity.

Etc.

LashL · 26th October 2006, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by roger

I'm intrigued. The math, please.

See above.

TS1234 doesn't do math..... etc.

26th October 2006, 03:34 PM	#161
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Originally Posted by Gravy Welcome to the forums, Roger. [ETA: Oh, I see you've been here since June '05. Don't be such a stranger!] As for the "squibs," I measured the most prominent one, near the top of the north tower, and calculated its average speed as 35 mph. I'd like to see a high explosive that can accomplish that. Suppose a shaped charge was in the core section. How fast would we expect the air to be moving by the time it was at the perimeter? Could thermobarics behave this way? How else do we explain these tightly focused jets of smoke and debris? Let me see if I have this right. A separate collapse front of falling floor assemblies is proceeding 10-30 floors below the main collapse front. It impacts drywall and crushes it into powder, then expells it out the sideways. It acts like a piston, or the plunger in a syringe. I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

26th October 2006, 03:48 PM	#162
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 22,020	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this. Have you ever heard the adage, "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link"? One of the windows was likely not set as strongly into its frame as the others, and it failed first. After that, the pressure on the other windows would drop, as air is being expelled through the first window. Since the pressure is dropping, the other windows are no longer near their failure point. Until the rest of the building hits them, of course.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

26th October 2006, 03:54 PM	#163
hellaeon Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: City of Burning Churches, Australia Posts: 1,493	d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s
	__________________ Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. - Carl Sagan I don't exactly have a Phd in physics. I have something much better. Common sense. - pagan How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years? It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes. - Irony, MirageMemories style

26th October 2006, 03:57 PM	#164
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Dark Side of the Sun Posts: 7,482	Originally Posted by hellaeon d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s why not? i got them eating out of my hand
	__________________ 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

26th October 2006, 04:00 PM	#165
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 22,020	Originally Posted by hellaeon d o n t f e e d t h e t r o l l s I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

26th October 2006, 04:04 PM	#166
hellaeon Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: City of Burning Churches, Australia Posts: 1,493	ahhh I know, im just...uhhh over the style of CTists this morning post a question, block your ears, post a question, block your ears....repeat indefinately until one day, a dormant brain cell awakes and logic exists. Carry on
	__________________ Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. - Carl Sagan I don't exactly have a Phd in physics. I have something much better. Common sense. - pagan How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years? It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes. - Irony, MirageMemories style

26th October 2006, 04:10 PM	#167
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 22,020	Originally Posted by hellaeon ahhh I know, im just...uhhh over the style of CTists this morning post a question, block your ears, post a question, block your ears....repeat indefinately until one day, a dormant brain cell awakes and logic exists. Carry on Hey, if it was easy, everybody'd be doing it!
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

26th October 2006, 04:21 PM	#168
Mancman Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Suppose a shaped charge was in the core section. How fast would we expect the air to be moving by the time it was at the perimeter? Could thermobarics behave this way? How else do we explain these tightly focused jets of smoke and debris? Let me see if I have this right. A separate collapse front of falling floor assemblies is proceeding 10-30 floors below the main collapse front. It impacts drywall and crushes it into powder, then expells it out the sideways. It acts like a piston, or the plunger in a syringe. I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this. Air pressure. Not seperate collapses.
	__________________ R.I.P Dr. Adequate

26th October 2006, 04:24 PM	#169
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 I'm imagining that I am inside the tower looking across the floor towards the many windows. I'm trying to imagine that if I was a flat floor, how would I focus the dust into a tight jet pattern and get it to go out the center window. I need help with this. Yes you do. Repeat your thought experiment, but with the center window open and the others closed. Describe what you would expect to see when the air pressure rapidly rises inside the building as the smoke- and debris-filled upper section falls. Likewise, imagine that you're a mechanical floor, with vents all around directly to the exterior! Describe what you would expect to see when the air pressure rapidly rises inside the building as the smoke- and debris-filled upper section falls.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

26th October 2006, 04:24 PM	#170
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,556	Originally Posted by Calcas Yep, that's TS. "Nick" from Cleveland. He should change it to "nuts" from Cleveland. http://myspace-534.vo.llnwd.net/0126...66023534_l.jpg "Purjury"
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

26th October 2006, 05:24 PM	#171
Elizabeth I Olympic Equestrian Wannabe Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Defending the Alamo Posts: 9,350	Truthseeker1-4: You utterly misstate what I was saying. Of course a cinder block dropped will injure your toe, it cannot injure anything on the way down. Originally Posted by Horatius Unless there's something else in the way - like another foot. Or a floor structure. Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you for saying that. I screamed and pulled my own hair when I read "...it cannot injure anything on the way down."

26th October 2006, 06:32 PM	#172
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Originally Posted by Horatius I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around. Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

26th October 2006, 06:39 PM	#173
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice. The truth was exposed when Osama confessed. Duh. And you do realize how ridiculous your theory is right?
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	__________________ When I changed to my new computer, I was worried about info on the old computer being used for identity theft and such. Folks said: "Just yank the hard drive" and somesuch. But I blew up the apartment. Only way to be safe. -kookbreaker

26th October 2006, 06:41 PM	#174
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,944	has there been a return email on this alleged email to of the famous "You've Been Had! TS1234 Email to Randi " did we miss the reply, or could this be a ct of the missing email?

26th October 2006, 06:43 PM	#175
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Originally Posted by Elizabeth I Truthseeker1-4: You utterly misstate what I was saying. Of course a cinder block dropped will injure your toe, it cannot injure anything on the way down. Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you for saying that. I screamed and pulled my own hair when I read "...it cannot injure anything on the way down." Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down. Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time. It's just at odds with itself.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Last edited by TruthSeeker1234; 26th October 2006 at 06:48 PM.

26th October 2006, 06:46 PM	#176
firecoins Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Nyack, NY Posts: 3,191	Truthseeker1234....you bend the truth better than Geller bent spoons.
	__________________ NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist. I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.

26th October 2006, 06:48 PM	#177
firecoins Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Nyack, NY Posts: 3,191	double post
	__________________ NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist. I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.

26th October 2006, 06:48 PM	#178
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down. Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. Your are trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time. It just at odds with itself. Well the fact that you said it fell in freefall time says a lot. It didn't. And yes it did damage everything, but a lot was left of the building. How many times have we told you how big the basement was? Your explosive theory is on the basis of "too much dust" and a picture of a pile of debris that you say "is all microscopic" yet it isn't. Lets see how silly your theory is: Our government wanted to go to Iraq by creating this whole 9/11 scheme. Yet the highjackers were from a group called Al Quaida, which has little or no connection with Saddam. We crash a missle into the Pentagon, blow up a plane in Shanksville, and crash two planes into a large building. But no, there is more. We rig up wtc 7 for no reason, and decide to blow up every little thing of the wtc with both silent and invisible explosives that cannot be detected. What a power our government is...
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	__________________ When I changed to my new computer, I was worried about info on the old computer being used for identity theft and such. Folks said: "Just yank the hard drive" and somesuch. But I blew up the apartment. Only way to be safe. -kookbreaker

26th October 2006, 06:53 PM	#179
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Randi's Reply Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is. Quote: You are wrong. It is you who have been “taken,” not I… I do not discuss conspiracy theories. James Randi.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

26th October 2006, 06:57 PM	#180
realitybites Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Location: Harrisburg, PA Posts: 1,066	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice. You could always try, oh I don't know... voting. ... Just a thought.
	__________________ This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes. 102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers. A Must Read.

26th October 2006, 06:59 PM	#181
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is. Good and blunt.
Garb Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 873	__________________ When I changed to my new computer, I was worried about info on the old computer being used for identity theft and such. Folks said: "Just yank the hard drive" and somesuch. But I blew up the apartment. Only way to be safe. -kookbreaker

26th October 2006, 07:05 PM	#182
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,944	the real conspiracy is the simple one, have surprise! learn to fly jets, (these guys are idiots, most Americans could fly the jets without training better and have the sense not to hit the ground moving fast, translation any kid off the street in American can out fly a terrorist!) foreign students always come to America to learn, and as always we hope they do their flying as far away as possible! (beware Norwegian pilots are damn good, (dead insect to you too)) learn to cut throats, no pilot will let you have his jets pilots do not share, the easiest way to get a pilot out of the seat is to kill him, I know this is a fact ask a pilot why. (however, no one has ever used this idea for real until 9/11, we usually just beat them to the jet) Calculate the impact energy of an aircraft speeding = close to a ton of TNT Calculate the reaction of killing all the passengers into a symbol of the US and the World Calculate the reaction of hitting the pentagon (personally it killed all the jokes you could make up on the subject, but now is bad humor) Calculate the reaction of hitting the White House! 11, surprise, 175 surprise, we are now armed yet not ready 77 not yet ready, 93 ready and volunteers took action,,, we won after we had the rule book in the fourth quarter!!!!! Not a lot of steps to do this, a lot more simple than any CT plot on the truth side! You guys were not around when we had a lot of hijackings in the 60s? Never did the hijackers fly the plane and kill the pilot, new ideas are called surprises. Is anyone behind you right now wanting you computer, could you friend be the next terrorist to get you and steal your computer?

26th October 2006, 07:05 PM	#183
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Scotland Posts: 3,847	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice. Yet you are more than willing to believe your fellow countrymen would actively plan, participate in and cover up mass murder of their fellow countrymen. Maybe you need to grow up.

26th October 2006, 07:12 PM	#184
firecoins Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Nyack, NY Posts: 3,191	Mr Randi wastes no time with B.S.
	__________________ NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist. I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.

26th October 2006, 07:13 PM	#185
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 8,504	Originally Posted by Horatius I'm not sure that TS1234 really counts as a troll. He's a bit too fixated on his pet theories and estimates, but it doesn't seem like he's posting just to get a rise out of us. I still have hopes that we can bring him around. Typical Costal Wimpy liberal answer! Failed policys don't deter you guys! Ha! This guy is worse than my kid at refusing to let go of a subject that dead, dead, dead! Edit: Ok--you're Canadian. Why did yopu guys have to go and model yourselves after our left/lefter coast liberals? Dadgum!
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275 Last edited by rwguinn; 26th October 2006 at 07:15 PM. Reason: wrong country

26th October 2006, 07:21 PM	#186
Augustine Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 893	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The rest of the post is just plain wrong, but right here: gravity accelerates the falling mass. The only way for gravity not to accelerate the falling mass is if the kinetic energy of the falling mass is less than the structure's ability to plastically deform. In the WTC, kinetic energy was 8 times greater than the energy required to fail the columns at the start of the collapse. The collapse was going to accelerate, period.
Augustine Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 893

26th October 2006, 07:26 PM	#187
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 22,020	Originally Posted by rwguinn Typical Costal Wimpy liberal answer! Failed policys don't deter you guys! Ha! This guy is worse than my kid at refusing to let go of a subject that dead, dead, dead! Edit: Ok--you're Canadian. Why did yopu guys have to go and model yourselves after our left/lefter coast liberals? Dadgum! Well, it's Canada. We could have had the Govenment of England, the industry of the US and the culture of France. Instead we ended up with the industry of England, the government of France and the culture of the US.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

26th October 2006, 07:31 PM	#188
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 22,020	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Yes, bring me around. Please. If I could only believe in this ridiculous fairy tale of Osama and the 19 kamakazees, my life would be so much easier. If it was just me, I wouldn't care so much, but I have two kids. They need to grow up in a U.S. without a police state. A growing number of us think that the only way to prevent police state is to expose 9/11 truth and bring the perpetrators to justice. Well, you may get that police state anyways, as part of the overreaction to the threat of terrorism, combined with your usual progress in the war on drugs and all that. If you want to avoid this, stop wasting your time on this garbage, and work for real change. There's an election coming up - get people out to vote for someone who'll stand up against this stuff in Congress. They're out there, but they don't have enough support. Really, the only way to show that Bush&Company aren't the Ultimate Masters of Everything is to vote for the Throw the Bastids Out Party. I vote that way pretty much every election.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

26th October 2006, 07:32 PM	#189
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down. Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time. It's just at odds with itself. Answer me this: Did you do physics at school? Honestly, now...no fibbing, OK?
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

26th October 2006, 08:15 PM	#190
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 29,285	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down. Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time. It's just at odds with itself. Please get help.
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 29,285

26th October 2006, 08:20 PM	#191
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,761	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is. Wow. Randi was feeling verbose today - you got about ten more words out of him than I figured you would.

26th October 2006, 08:22 PM	#192
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,761	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. I'm with you so far. The thing you don't realize is that even slowing down by 15 or 20 percent (which is what we see with the towers) means that a huge amount of energy was available for being dissipated on the way down, by breaking stuff.

26th October 2006, 08:46 PM	#193
Bell beautiful freak Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 20,593	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Mr. Randi has replied to my letter. Here it is. lol, who would have thought? Good of you to post it, btw.
	__________________ Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life. I♥NY You gotta love cops.

26th October 2006, 08:57 PM	#194
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Maybe if I speak slowly you guys can get this. A falling cinder block can injure any number of things on the way down, but every time it does, it subtracts energy from the equation. Each collision is an energy sink. That energy is spent doing the work of breaking something, thus it is not available for accelerating the falling mass downward, therefore the falling mass will slow down. The more things that are broken, the longer it will take. Put the other way around, if falling mass arrives to the ground in free-fall time, then it did not injure anything on the way down. If falling mass arrives to the ground in just over free-fall time, then it did not injure very much of anything on the way down. Thus the scenario you all want to imagine is trying to have it both ways. You're trying to say that falling mass damages everything, so much so that very little is even left of the whole building, yet damaged so little that it was able to arrive in just over free-fall time. It's just at odds with itself. I strongly encourage you not to bring this philosophy to avalanche country.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

26th October 2006, 09:47 PM	#195
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Dark Side of the Sun Posts: 7,482	Originally Posted by CurtC I'm with you so far. The thing you don't realize is that even slowing down by 15 or 20 percent (which is what we see with the towers) means that a huge amount of energy was available for being dissipated on the way down, by breaking stuff. yeah, ive noticed this with alot of CTers "how can the little bit on top crush the entire bottom" arguments they fail to reailze that when 50,000+ tons is falling, even a tiny amount of KE being bled off is a HUGE amount of force, more than enough to push the next floor to its failure point and if the mass of the top 20 stories is enough to push the floor below it to the failure point after accelerating the distance of 1 floor, then the falling mass will gain enough KE in falling the next 12-15 feet to destroy the next floor, and so on and so force until it hits the ground
	__________________ 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