Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 3 votes

Investigate 9/11 Super Bowl Interview


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2012 replies to this topic

#46    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:41 AM

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 04:36 AM, said:

I remember having to correct a sock puppet truther who believed unsubstantiated eyewitness report are somehow better than opinion.
Did you??

I remember having to school a whole heap of pantomime debunkers who think that multiple eyewitnesses accounts from those at GZ, a recovered artefact and scientific reports are not as good evidence as the opinion of a group of people who were never at ground zero.

They seem to based this opinion on the fact they have the internet. lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#47    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:45 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 04:41 AM, said:

They seem to based this opinion on the fact they have the internet.

In other words, still no evidence to backup what you claim.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#48    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:53 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 February 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

In other words, still no evidence to backup what you claim.
Tully said that there were hot spots where he observed ‘literally molten steel.’

- Christopher Bollyn, “Foreign Firms Destroyed Crucial Evidence,” August 14, 2002,
http://www.bollyn.co...1-articles-2002

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#49    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:58 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 04:53 AM, said:

Tully said that there were hot spots where he observed ‘literally molten steel.’

Where's your evidence he saw molten steel?

There was nothing at ground zero that could have produced pools of molten steel, which simply means he was mistaken or he saw pools of molten aluminum since temperatures were high enough to melt aluminum but far too low to melt steel.

Remember, no evidence, no case.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#50    DecoNoir

DecoNoir

    The Entertainer

  • Member
  • 2,652 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2013

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 04:41 AM, said:

Did you??

I remember having to school a whole heap of pantomime debunkers who think that multiple eyewitnesses accounts from those at GZ, a recovered artefact and scientific reports are not as good evidence as the opinion of a group of people who were never at ground zero.

They seem to based this opinion on the fact they have the internet. lol

I have multiple eyewitnesses who can agree that certain Truthers (in denial of course) a complete twit who thinks anyone off the street (and themselves) can identify molten steel despite no background in metallurgy. Or his artifacts somehow prove his molten steel more than a paper mache footprint  proves bigfoot.
He also thinks that his consant jabs of "pantomime debunker" are subtle attempts to hide the fact that he has no real evidence or even an actual theory that explains the events of that day. We just go along with it so casual readers of the forum can get some decent entertainment.

Again this is all opinion, but since in this universe you can apparently identify molten steel with no background in metallurgy, I'm going to treat it as fact.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

#51    DecoNoir

DecoNoir

    The Entertainer

  • Member
  • 2,652 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2013

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:13 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 04:53 AM, said:


Tully said that there were hot spots where he observed ‘literally molten steel.’

- Christopher Bollyn, “Foreign Firms Destroyed Crucial Evidence,” August 14, 2002,
http://www.bollyn.co...1-articles-2002

And the result is... Page not found.

Links generally have to work in order to support an argument. That background is a lovely shade of teal however.


Edit: And of course he was attacked by goverment agents! Maybe they constructed BR/Prager's suitcase nuke? Ha!

Edited by DecoNoir, 04 February 2014 - 05:16 AM.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

#52    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:25 AM

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

I have multiple eyewitnesses who can agree that certain Truthers (in denial of course) a complete twit who thinks anyone off the street (and themselves) can identify molten steel despite no background in metallurgy.
More hypocrisy...

Metallurgist needed to identify molten steel = Yes
Metallurgist needed to identify molten aluminium = No

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

Or his artifacts somehow prove his molten steel more than a paper mache footprint  proves bigfoot.
The meteor is a fusion of molten steel and concrete.

Although some panto debunkers think it's proof of pancaking..........hahahahahahahaha!!

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

He also thinks that his consant jabs of "pantomime debunker" are subtle attempts to hide the fact that he has no real evidence or even an actual theory that explains the events of that day.
No different to your truther jabs....lol

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

We just go along with it so casual readers of the forum can get some decent entertainment.
Oh I'm sure the lurkers are having a good laugh at your expense.

However I'm sure the mods will help you out and remove anything that highlights your moronic pantomiming.....lol

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

Again this is all opinion, but since in this universe you can apparently identify molten steel with no background in metallurgy, I'm going to treat it as fact.
Why not, seeing as you can identify molten aluminium with no background in metallurgy. You don't even need to see it first hand either unlike the people at GZ.

You can just watch a grainy, compressed youtube video and look for the imaginary silver droplets no more than a few pixels in size, to be able to identify molten aluminium and prove those toofin twoofers a thing or two.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#53    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:27 AM

View PostDecoNoir, on 04 February 2014 - 05:13 AM, said:

And the result is... Page not found.

Links generally have to work in order to support an argument. That background is a lovely shade of teal however.


Edit: And of course he was attacked by goverment agents! Maybe they constructed BR/Prager's suitcase nuke? Ha!
Sorry the link didn't work....but you could also put the quote into google because it doesn't make the statement any less true.

http://www.bollyn.co...ucial-evidence/

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#54    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:28 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

More hypocrisy...se toofin twoofers a thing or two.

In other words, you admit that you cannot find evidence of pools of molten steel.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#55    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009

Posted 04 February 2014 - 05:30 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 February 2014 - 05:28 AM, said:

In other words, you admit that you cannot find evidence of pools of molten steel.
In other words, you have even less evidence than the molten steel....lol

What's that?? You have none??.........oh what a shame! lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#56    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 07:02 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

In other words, you have even less evidence than the molten steel...

In other words, NIST, MIT, FEMA, and other investigators spoke of molten aluminum and nothing about molten steel, which is understandable considering there was nothing at ground zero capable of producing pools of molten steel and add to the fact that videos and photos depict molten aluminum, not molten steel, which is understandable considering that recorded temperatures at ground zero did not reach the melting point of steel nor even came close while on the other hand, the recorded temperatures far exceeded the melting point of aluminum, which was in abundance in the facade of the WTC buildings and in the construction of the B-767s.

To sum it up, we have tons of evidence of molten aluminum, but absolutely nothing confirming the presence of pools of molten steel. In other words, you have no evidence of pools of molten steel, which simply means you've lost another case.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 February 2014 - 07:04 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#57    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 07:09 AM

View PostStundie, on 04 February 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

I\What's that?? You have none??.........oh what a shame!

The only shame is that you just got caught telling another FIB because:

Quote

Stephen D. Chastain: Metal Talk

Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open window. Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.

Stephen D. Chastain

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Molten Steel Debunked

In the videos some of the falling drops appeared silver and turned orange briefly when they struck the facade and then turned back to silver. The

orange glow

in that case wasn't due to black body radiation. The material couldn't have heated and cooled that quickly if it had been black body radiation.

One explanation is that molten aluminum, which is very reactive, interacted chemically with impurities on the facade and emitted spectra. The silver appearance is consistent with molten aluminumnear its melting point.

http://www.debunking...moltensteel.htm
_____________________________________________________

A photograph leaked from the ASCE-FEMA investigation shows a stream of what appears to be molten aluminum exiting from the northeast corner. This would indicate that what was left of the aircraft when it reached the north end of its travel was massive enough to have destroyed at least one floor.

NIST pg 43 Section H.9 App H Vol 4
Starting at around 9:52 a.m. a molten material began to pour from the top of the window 80-256 on the North face of WTC 2. The material appears intermittently until the tower collapses at 9:58:59. The observation of piles of debris in this area combined with the melting point behaviors of the primary alloys used in a Boeing 767 suggest that the material is molten aluminum derived from aircraft debris located on floor 81.


https://www.youtube....player_embedded


KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#58    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,351 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007

Posted 04 February 2014 - 07:24 AM

If we could please limit the "Stundie vs. Skyeagle Clown Act™" to the few threads it has already overrun and destroyed and not every or most every current thread that touches on 9/11


Posted Image




:rolleyes:





Cz

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan
"I'm tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact." - Phil Plait
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." - H. L. Mencken

#59    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,670 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 February 2014 - 07:29 AM

View PostCzero 101, on 04 February 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

If we could please limit the "Stundie vs. Skyeagle Clown Act™" to the few threads it has already overrun and destroyed and not every or most every current thread that touches on 9/11


Posted Image




:rolleyes:

Cz

That is the way the ball bounces! Just responding, you understand!

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 February 2014 - 07:35 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#60    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,712 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 04 February 2014 - 01:02 PM

View PostMerc14, on 03 February 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:

I think you misunderstand what I said purposely to take this on another tack.  I said "Liberty does NOT mean you have a right to do anything you please at any time to anyone, that is barbarism and chaos."  This wasn't in reference to this individual but it was in reference to your statement that condemning this dolt for his actions was an assault on liberty.  I agree he was being rude but he was also breaking the law and posing a threat to the player and the interviewer and they have every right o protect themselves.  The rest of your diatribe belongs in another thread entirely and how in the hell you can get my feelings on torture and bombing from condemning the 911 truther is beyond me.

It was your use of the word Merc, nothing more.  Apologies if you think I defamed you.

The word is a strong one.  Sorry if your feelings were hurt.  I agree the guy was rude, but it was short and sweet as to the message.