One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    Guilty as charged, I said "nanothermite is science fiction" . What is meant is the troofer 'sci-fi movie' belief that nanothermite has magical properties. You need some magic potion to fit your insane narrative, so you force yourself to believe it exists.
    Like you previously said you  believed the planes were flown by remote control on 9/11. There is some crude technology in that area, so since you need to have remote control to fit the nutcase narrative, you force yourself to believe it exists. 
    I am too lazy to look up your questions, grim. Would you consider answering mine?

    1) where is your long-anticipated basic narrative of what happened on 9/11? Just a few paragraphs. Dont be modest and say you arent sure. Your 9 years of research must have reached some stirring conclusions, other than free fall...string together what really happened.  Who did it, and why. especially why the convoluted plan. Why WTC7 ..what happened at Pentagon,  Penn, flight 93...hijackers, phone calls from planes. etc.
     
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrwellsNightmare. Show OrwellsNightmare's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion:
    [QUOTE]Guilty as charged, I said "nanothermite is science fiction" . What is meant is the troofer 'sci-fi movie' belief that nanothermite has magical properties. You need some magic potion to fit your insane narrative, so you force yourself to believe it exists. Like you previously said you  believed the planes were flown by remote control on 9/11. There is some crude technology in that area, so since you need to have remote control to fit the nutcase narrative, you force yourself to believe it exists.  I am too lazy to look up your questions, grim. Would you consider answering mine? 1) where is your long-anticipated basic narrative of what happened on 9/11? Just a few paragraphs. Dont be modest and say you arent sure. Your 9 years of research must have reached some stirring conclusions, other than free fall...string together what really happened.  Who did it, and why. especially why the convoluted plan. Why WTC7 ..what happened at Pentagon,  Penn, flight 93...hijackers, phone calls from planes. etc.  
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    Nice little tactic Bob,

    You're painted into a corner on the amazing properties of Super Thermite, or Nano Thermite. 

    Yes, he proved the damn stuff actually exists. 

    Yes, he proved it would have increased the temperatures to those required to melt steel. 

    Yes, he proved  it has amazing detonation velocity.

    Yes,he proved  it is magnitudes quieter than C4, or any of the other traditional demolition explosives.

    Yes... yes... yesssss...ugggghhh

    What to do?

    Change the subject -- QUICK!

    Ask him lots and lots of questions, and if he responds, just rope-a-dope him and then, do it all over again.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    Alex/grim,
    Super nano thermite actually burns at around 350 m/s. Black powder 1200 m/s. You do not light thermite with detcord or blasting caps thus no "squibs". The quantity of thermite of any kind exceeds 10 tons to even think about using this material for cutting even half of one floor off of its supports. Carefully look at the well documented research and full definitions of all the underlying info to my statements, which I have made many times at(http://www.rense.com/general77/geddno.htm). There is no "detonation velocity" of note for NANO thermite. It burns so slowly that a loud fast hiss might result. Your stupid statement of powerful blast but very quiet is still making me shake my head. It is also seriously inefficient and hardly used. It certainly is not a secret kind of thing to put in place discretely in the walls and ceilings. Each charge would be the size of a cube fridge and would need to be place in locations where other equipment was already installed. At 200-300 pounds each, welders, steel frame supports, and removal of water, sprinkler, sewer, electric, and or air movement ducts would be required for installation. Give it up.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrwellsNightmare. Show OrwellsNightmare's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion:
    [QUOTE]Guilty as charged, I said "nanothermite is science fiction" . What is meant is the troofer 'sci-fi movie' belief that nanothermite has magical properties. You need some magic potion to fit your insane narrative, so you force yourself to believe it exists. Like you previously said you  believed the planes were flown by remote control on 9/11. There is some crude technology in that area, so since you need to have remote control to fit the nutcase narrative, you force yourself to believe it exists.  I am too lazy to look up your questions, grim. Would you consider answering mine? 1) where is your long-anticipated basic narrative of what happened on 9/11? Just a few paragraphs. Dont be modest and say you arent sure. Your 9 years of research must have reached some stirring conclusions, other than free fall...string together what really happened.  Who did it, and why. especially why the convoluted plan. Why WTC7 ..what happened at Pentagon,  Penn, flight 93...hijackers, phone calls from planes. etc.  
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    Finally after years of being ridiculed about your damn fool "nano thermite is science  fiction" comment, you decide to acknowledge you said it, and spin what you meant when you said it.

    I guess there is little chance of going back the, what, 3 years when you made the post, and finding it here on BDC to evaluate the context in which you said it.  So you're safe on that count, I can't prove how and why you said it.

    But the fact is, you were denying the very existance of Nano Thermite, on numerous posts, until your final classic outburst which earned you your updated Avatar from the Spy vs Spy that you had used with Agent 007 on it. 

    But instead of immediately defending and explaining what you meant, because at that time it was fresh and you couldn't, after repeated beratings and postings of the new Avatar, you just pulled your Spy vs Spy avatar and went with none. Yes that makes sense.

    Yes you are full of bull, you made a numbskull remark, got caught, and that's what it is.





     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrwellsNightmare. Show OrwellsNightmare's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion:
    [QUOTE]Guilty as charged, I said "nanothermite is science fiction" . What is meant is the troofer 'sci-fi movie' belief that nanothermite has magical properties. You need some magic potion to fit your insane narrative, so you force yourself to believe it exists. Like you previously said you  believed the planes were flown by remote control on 9/11. There is some crude technology in that area, so since you need to have remote control to fit the nutcase narrative, you force yourself to believe it exists.  I am too lazy to look up your questions, grim. Would you consider answering mine? 1) where is your long-anticipated basic narrative of what happened on 9/11? Just a few paragraphs. Dont be modest and say you arent sure. Your 9 years of research must have reached some stirring conclusions, other than free fall...string together what really happened.  Who did it, and why. especially why the convoluted plan. Why WTC7 ..what happened at Pentagon,  Penn, flight 93...hijackers, phone calls from planes. etc.  
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    "Like you previously said you  believed the planes were flown by remote control on 9/11. There is some crude technology in that area, so since you need to have remote control to fit the nutcase narrative, you force yourself to believe it exists."

    Here we go again.  So what you're saying is, the ability to remote control the flight of an airplane is "science fiction"?

    Are you saying that on the day of 9/11/2001 there was no technology in existence, and readily available, that could remotely take off, fly a complex flight plan, and then land an airliner, all without anyone touching the controls in the plane?

    Please tell us what you mean exactly, because I have a nice little surprise for you when you do.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PragmaticAmerican. Show PragmaticAmerican's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    Hell, I'm still waiting to hear how the buildings were prepped for demolition.  So far it's been of the "yes, yes, ignore that" category of answer.  Downright, "we'll just magically suppose it happened and move on" variety.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    Grim,
    Nano thermite is regular thermite just a little faster. If it gets too fast it explodes before it melts the metal. The practical use of thermite to melt metal is to transfer heat to the melting point. That is why no squibs. Can't start thermite with somthing that separates the melty stuff from the metal before the meatl melts. I know you did not respond to me. My science is dead on and you are just fishing for fools.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion


    In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion : Please go away Topaz, it gives me a headache to even try to understand your bizzarre ramblings.
    Posted by OrwellsNightmare[/QUOTE]

    Hey bud when you stop your bizzare ranting my job will be done.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    All I can say is: Thank GOD Grim is still focused on this. 

    If we ever did finally bring him around to seeing the impossibility of his dosed-out theories and Grim turned onto something else...   ...perhaps involving existing, tangible targets...  well, who knows what he is capable of. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrwellsNightmare. Show OrwellsNightmare's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    In Response to Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion:
    [QUOTE]Hell, I'm still waiting to hear how the buildings were prepped for demolition.  So far it's been of the "yes, yes, ignore that" category of answer.  Downright, "we'll just magically suppose it happened and move on" variety.
    Posted by PragmaticAmerican[/QUOTE]

    While you wait for my response, why not spend a little quality time reading the reply on Page 2, Post 8 of this thread?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: One Structural Engineer's Professional 9/11 Opinion

    Read that like a bad romance novel. "all the sudden her ni'bb'le was in my mouth" Kinda romance novel/ playboy forum. All action no fact no detail. No plausible statement considering type and amount of charge needed at each location, nor how they managed to get it there around all the cramped infrastructure of water, hvac, fire supression, electrical, and alarm systems. Only an idiot could believe that this kinda demo material could be precision placed in an active building secretly. Thats why A$E only has architects, anyone who has managed engineering in a building 30 years old can tell you that there is no space above the ceiling that will not interfere with stuff already there. Can't be done and was not done in the towers or any other demo job, ever.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share