The aluminum of Flights 11 & 175 was used to create phreato-thermatic explosions.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Thanks Oprah.

Ad hominem logical fallacy. pomeroo's occupation has no bearing on the arguments he puts forth in his post.

[e^n]

Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade

Ad hominem logical fallacy. pomeroo's occupation has no bearing on the arguments he puts forth in his post.

Arkan, as keeper of the fallacies could you look over my posts in reply to Max and vet them for stupidity please? Thanks

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade

[snip] pomeroo's occupation has no bearing on the arguments he puts forth in his post.

Amen to that.




(Nothing does.)

* * *

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by e^n

Your retraction is noted, however I do not accept that this is not an efficient use of time. Your theory (to me at least) seems to be the product of fitting all the evidence to an immutable predetermined conclusion, that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. I will elaborate on why I feel this is the most productive route further down the post.

I did not say it wasn't an efficient use of time. I said it wasn't the highest-and-best-use of time.

Quote:

While I don't accept that evidence was destroyed incorrectly

Well at least you're smarter than Oprah, and can admit that evidence WAS destroyed[/quote]

Quote:

(the amount of work done at Fresh Kills is beyond comparison)

Good grief, it's not like they built the Great Wall of China.

Quote:

I do agree that given adequate work your theory (at least the heat weakening of steel) could have been accomplished without the steel being damaged oddly enough to warrant NIST or FEMA etc marking it to be saved.

e^n, since they COULD have missed something the first time through, wasn't it a clear case of spoliation?

In ALL other crime scenes, isn't evidence preserved exactly because new information, perspectives, etc., might come to the fore, making seemingly information-free evidence suddenly extremely valuable? (For God's sake, please say yes.)

Quote:

This is not to say it was and I will get to that in a second. If so, a more thorough analysis may have uncovered evidence to support your theory, however this is also flawed as I will demonstrate:

Quote:

Let us forget for a moment the logistical difficulties of such placement

No need to forget them, because it was not difficult - the thermite was simply placed in the little rectangular tube that forms where two top chords are juxtaposed (as they sit in the truss seat).

Quote:

this still seems to be literally on the truss seat?

That paper and plastic caught on the truss seat does not mean the thermite was on the truss seat.



http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot4.png.xs.jpghttp://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot5.png.xs.jpg

Quote:

Thermite (as you know) burns at extremely high temperatures, I have seen 2500C quoted but the precise magnitude is irrelevant, there are many many problems with your characterisation of this panel. Let us presume for the moment that no molten iron actually dripped onto the truss seat.


I find it very hard to believe you've not just made this up

Of course I'm making it up! That's why I call it MAX-MIHOP. (Is that confusing?)

Quote:

NIST quite clearly states in their characterisation of this panel that the binder most likely melted when the perimeter panel was horizontal, IE post-collapse. How else do you explain the drip pattern on the underside?

I think you are regressing to an earlier time in your life e^n.

Surely you know that if you have horizontal surface, and pour a liquid on it such that the liquid runs off the edges of the horizontal surface, that surface tension can cause some fingers of liquid to run on the underside of the surface.

Quote:

edit: I had forgotten to write a section on temperatures attained!

As we know the truss seat and offset plates were tested for spider-web paint cracking. This type of cracking indicates a temperature attained of between 250c and 650c. The panel and seat in question shows evidence of being exposed to the upper range of that temperature for a reasonable period but as you can clearly see from the fire timeline it was exposed to fire for a reasonable period. It of course shows no signs of being exposed to anywhere near the temperature of thermite or molten iron. I find it hard to believe that even if the thermite somehow did not drip onto this section temperatures would remain so low barely inches from such a heat source.

Wow, everyone seems so lost about temperature, heat transport, etc.,

e^n, is your model: IF THERMITE, THEN STEEL TEMP = 2500C

Is there any way you can imagine that with a small amount of thermite, and given heat transport, that thermite can be used to locally heat steel to between 250C and 650C?

I am amazed everyone face-plants here.

Remember when I first arrived, and everyone said thermite would simply melt through the steel, and I had to do all those stupid little posts saying stuff like, "Do you really think that - just for the sake of discussion - one gram of thermite would melt through steel?"

If I recall, you were guilty. Crazy Bandsaw was guilty. And there were other rush-to-judgment types.

Quote:

I also believe even your 'shock tube' theory is in serious doubt, indeed this appears to be a grounding wire as with some trivial investigation it turns out the 99th floor section of column 142 was photographed:
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot6.png.xs.jpg

Your 'shock tube' appears to be screwed into the spandrel panel between columns 142 and 143. Why on earth would this be the case?

Wait, are you saying you THINK it is grounding wire, or that you KNOW it is grounding wire?

And are you saying you THINK the wires are screwed in to the truss seat, or you KNOW the wires are screwed into the truss seat?

Quote:

Frankly Max

Hey Apollo, if we ever happen to write a paper together, here's our title.

Quote:

your theory bears all the hallmarks of someone who has simply thought up what they personally believe to be most plausible without doing the requisite research behind it.

e^n, I really sincerely apologize for not taking the time to look inside WTC2 fire-affected perimeter panels for evidence of thermite placed inside those columns.

A Springer marathon was on, and well, you know...

Quote:

Well I put it to you Max that my familiarity with the evidence seems to be higher than yours, and that in fact the evidence doesn't support this particular section being damaged by thermite at all. Not to mention that this perimeter panel is located on the opposite side to where the building failed and doesn't appear to play any role whatsoever in the collapse:
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot7.png.xs.jpg

Says the guy who was unfamiliar with the 8 column splices in a row at WTC2/81/NE.

e^n, you have repeatedly demonstrated your propensity to believe that because you don't understand something, that it is too complex to be possible, or simply doesn't exist.

Consider art classes. They are very good for opening up that little idea generator of yours.


Oh, by the way (and I am dead serious), please name the columns that did play a role the collapse.

I want to see what NIST says about them. (Perhaps you'd be kind enough to get me started with some references.)

Quote:

When a theory involves only supposition and incidental characteristics and provides no firm logical basis for testing

If you say that one more time...


MAX-MIHOP IS TESTABLE!!!

JUST LOOK INSIDE THE FIRE-AFFECTED BOX COLUMNS OF WTC2!

AND WHILE YOUR AT IT, EXPLAIN THE SPOLIATION.

Quote:

nor an easily understandable history of derivation

It's perfectly understandable to me.

Quote:

the most likely assumption is it is based on an incorrect premise.

The above is simply nonsensical.

Quote:

This is my summation of your theory Max. It's not meant to be offensive or insult you as a person

I never take any of this personally e^n, but thanks for your considerate preamble.

Quote:

but I fail to see any redeeming value to MAX-MIHOP.

Kudos to your clear, direct stance.

Quote:

To me, it seems like you just invented it because you believe in controlled demolition but couldn't resolve it with the NIST report.

Absolutely true.

Quote:

If this is not the case I welcome you to keep presenting evidence, but I suggest in [the] future you provide a more rigorous basis for your assumptions.

If I'm correct, but my assumptions didn't have a rigorous basis, will you still love me?


Thanks for your participation e^n.

I welcome more from you.

Cheers!

Max Making It Up As He Goes Along Photon


P.S. Is it getting brighter in here, or is it just me?

* * *

[omegablue]

AAhhh those anti-truthers are a show arent them?!?!?! They just nitpick, run in circles , use bad rhetoric, and just pretend there is no suspicious attitudes towards how the evidence was destroyed or analyzed, or overlooked.

[uruk]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Well at least you're smarter than Oprah, and can admit that evidence WAS destroyed

How long do you think they should have hung on to 200,000 tones of steel?

Quote:

Good grief, it's not like they built the Great Wall of China.

How long do you think they needed to take to study the steel?

Quote:

e^n, since they COULD have missed something the first time through, wasn't it a clear case of spoliation?

In ALL other crime scenes, isn't evidence preserved exactly because new information, perspectives, etc., might come to the fore, making seemingly information-free evidence suddenly extremely valuable? (For God's sake, please say yes.)

Evidence is usually returned to owners or destroyed after a period of time after the trial has ended. And I believe there are still sections of the steel still available for additional study in memorial museums and other like places.

Quote:

Of course I'm making it up! That's why I call it MAX-MIHOP. (Is that confusing?)

Seems like you should base that sort of thing on reaserch and experimentation.
It might give MAX-MIHOP alittle more wieght.

Quote:

Wow, everyone seems so lost about temperature, heat transport, etc.,

e^n, is your model: IF THERMITE, THEN STEEL TEMP = 2500C

Is there any way you can imagine that with a small amount of thermite, and given heat transport, that thermite can be used to locally heat steel to between 250C and 650C?

I am amazed everyone face-plants here.

Remember when I first arrived, and everyone said thermite would simply melt through the steel, and I had to do all those stupid little posts saying stuff like, "Do you really think that - just for the sake of discussion - one gram of thermite would melt through steel?"

Do you know how long one gram of thermite takes to combust? Do you know how much heat it could tranfere to the thermal mass of the steel in the amount of time one gram of thermite burns?
If you have can you show us the calculations?

Quote:

Wait, are you saying you THINK it is grounding wire, or that you KNOW it is grounding wire?

And are you saying you THINK the wires are screwed in to the truss seat, or you KNOW the wires are screwed into the truss seat?

The picture e^n provided shows a cable that looks remarkably like your thermite dusted shock tube bolted to the spandrel
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot6.png.xs.jpg

Quote:

Says the guy who was unfamiliar with the 8 column splices in a row at WTC2/81/NE.

Did you take a look at the diagram e^n provided?
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot7.png.xs.jpg
It shows where N8 is in refrence to the plane impact.

Quote:

e^n, you have repeatedly demonstrated your propensity to believe that because you don't understand something, that it is too complex to be possible, or simply doesn't exist.

MAX-MIHOP is not really all that hard to understand.

Quote:

Oh, by the way (and I am dead serious), please name the columns that did play a role the collapse.

I want to see what NIST says about them. (Perhaps you'd be kind enough to get me started with some references.)

Here's a start:
http://wtc.nist.gov/WTC_Conf_Sep13-1...on2/2Gayle.pdf
It talks about heat damage and SFRM damage visible from video and photographs before the collapse.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Amen to that.




(Nothing does.)

* * *

Then why do you keep bringing it up? Address his arguments. If you continue to personalize the issue by bringing up pomeroo's occupation I will be forced to start reporting your posts as breach of civility.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Originally Posted by omegablue

AAhhh those anti-truthers are a show arent them?!?!?! They just nitpick, run in circles , use bad rhetoric, and just pretend there is no suspicious attitudes towards how the evidence was destroyed or analyzed, or overlooked.

Nice handwaving. Any plans on posting an argument that is a little less vapid?

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by uruk

How long do you think they should have hung on to 200,000 tones of steel?

Well, the IRS expects us to keep tax records indefinitely.

Just try telling an auditor you didn't need them any longer.


Let's try a different tack...

If your family members were murdered, and the murderer was still at large, how long would you like them to keep the evidence?

Quote:

How long do you think they needed to take to study the steel?

Well, it's been six years and there is still no WTC7 report (and, in case you didn't notice, it was a related event.)


How long do they take to investigate commercial airline crashes?


Studies could have and should have been conducted for decades to come.

Quote:

Evidence is usually returned to owners or destroyed after a period of time after the trial has ended.

uruk, I'm kind of slow.

When did the trial end?

Quote:

And I believe there are still sections of the steel still available for additional study in memorial museums and other like places.

From fire-affected panels from WTC2?

Sweet! Please post where. I will go ASAP!

Quote:

Seems like you should base that sort of thing on reaserch and experimentation.

Well I built a full-scale model of the towers, flew a couple of jets into them, and then looked in box columns, and sure enough, I found evidence of thermite!

Quote:

It might give MAX-MIHOP alittle more wieght.

Max Photon travels light.

Quote:

Do you know how long one gram of thermite takes to combust?

Any thermite recipe in particular?

Quote:

Do you know how much heat it could tranfere to the thermal mass of the steel in the amount of time one gram of thermite burns? If you have can you show us the calculations?

No problemo (since you don't seem to know your way around).

Check NIST FAQ #12

Quote:

The picture e^n provided shows a cable that looks remarkably like your thermite dusted shock tube bolted to the spandrel
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot6.png.xs.jpg

Yeah, that's because you're looking at N8.

(Are you at a pub or something?)

Quote:

Did you take a look at the diagram e^n provided?
http://xs320.xs.to/xs320/07405/screenshot7.png.xs.jpg
It shows where N8 is in refrence to the plane impact.

And?

Good grief, do you think I don't know where N8 comes from?

uruk, yet again, you are shadow boxing images in YOUR head.

Quote:

MAX-MIHOP is not really all that hard to understand.

Then start demonstrating that fact.

Quote:

Here's a start:
http://wtc.nist.gov/WTC_Conf_Sep13-1...on2/2Gayle.pdf
It talks about heat damage and SFRM damage visible from video and photographs before the collapse.

That is not what I asked e^n.


uruk, you are obviously intelligent, but you are consistently off track, thought I suspect you'll get more on track over time, because you are a decent fellow.

Regardless, I appreciate your participation, and welcome more.

Cheers!

Max

* * *

[uruk]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Well, the IRS expects us to keep tax records indefinitely.

Just try telling an auditor you didn't need them any longer.

I've heard three to five years. I could be mistaken

Quote:

Let's try a different tack...

If your family members were murdered, and the murderer was still at large, how long would you like them to keep the evidence?

Untill after the trial ended. There are no statutes of limitations on murder trials

Quote:

Well, it's been six years and there is still no WTC7 report (and, in case you didn't notice, it was a related event.)

The WTC report is coming. Just be patient. You wouldn't want them to make any mistakes.

Quote:

How long do they take to investigate commercial airline crashes?

Untill they've found the reason the plane crashed.

Quote:

studies could have and should have been conducted for decades to come.

Why is that? They've pretty much found the answers they were looking for.
The only people who are still wanting an investigation are people like you who believe the government is involved. To re-open the investigation you need to provide proof that the government was responsible. Conjecture is not going to open those doors. Hard evidence will.
And besides there is still evidence available if you know where to look.

Quote:

uruk, I'm kind of slow.

When did the trial end?

Do you mean the Moussaoui trial? Or the official government investigation? The investigation is over as far as WTC 1&2 is concerned.

Quote:

From fire-affected panels from WTC2?

Sweet! Please post where. I will go ASAP!

According to this article there are more than 1000 pieces of steel from the WTC in storage at JFK Intl. airport.:http://www.1010wins.com/pages/899632.php?

According to this report FEMA over saw the collection of steel for further study.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd_x.pdf

So it seems that key pieces of steel are in storage for further study.

Quote:

Well I built a full-scale model of the towers, flew a couple of jets into them, and then looked in box columns, and sure enough, I found evidence of thermite!

Ah, Why use an honest answer where faceciousness and sarcasm Will do.

Quote:

Max Photon travels light.

Well, that explains alot.

Quote:

Any thermite recipe in particular?

You choose. It's your hypothesis

Quote:

No problemo (since you don't seem to know your way around).

Check NIST FAQ #12

It says .13 pounds of thermite to heat 1 pound of steel to 700 degrees. How many pounds of steel are in the connection joints?

Quote:

Yeah, that's because you're looking at N8.

(Are you at a pub or something?)

Well, There was alot of repetition in engineering design. All the columns and sections look remarkably the same. Could there be a reason for that?

Quote:

And?

Good grief, do you think I don't know where N8 comes from?
uruk, yet again, you are shadow boxing images in YOUR head.

Well judging from your reparte, the thought had crossed my mind.

Quote:

uruk, you are obviously intelligent, but you are consistently off track, thought I suspect you'll get more on track over time, because you are a decent fellow.

Regardless, I appreciate your participation, and welcome more.

Cheers!

Max

* * *

Well, Thanks and likewise.

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by uruk

Why is that? They've pretty much found the answers they were looking for.

They found the answers they were looking for.

Exactly.


Max

* * *

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

They found the answers they were looking for.

Exactly.


Max

* * *

Stop with the equivocation. You know very well that that uruk was not saying that they started from a conclusion and worked backwards; but rather that they were looking for answers and they found answers.

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade

Stop with the equivocation. You know very well that that uruk was not saying that they started from a conclusion and worked backwards; but rather that they were looking for answers and they found answers.

Mr. Wolfshade,

You are experiencing - possibly for the first time - humor.

h - u - m - o - r


Try that one more time:

h - u - m - o - r


You see, humor is founded on surprise. Even Aristotle was aware of that.

Now, let me help you.

MAX-MIHOP says that a controlled-demolition plan, and a pre-engineered - a pre-scripted - narrative - were designed together - simultaneously - to create a unified portrait. (Nice use of greys!)

Anyone who understands principles of design understands what I am saying. (Not really. You have to be a total genius, but anyway...)


Now uruk, bless his little soul, does not see the teleology.

Of course I know that is not what he meant.

He knows that.

And you know that.


Everyone knows that.


Now, the tension between the two, creates a form of surprise.

That surprise is experienced as - by those with a brain stem attached to the cortical system - Class? .... Anyone?.....


That's right Frank.

Humor.

H - u - m - o - r.


Arkan, you're a funny guy.

A Mused Max


For more on the subject:

A Message From Max Photon to the Meritorious Engineers of the World - Mind Your DEQs
http://maxphoton.com/2007/06/16/teleology.aspx


(Moderators, I don't believe I've ever linked to this aritcle, so have mercy.)

* * *

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Mr. Wolfshade,

You are experiencing - possibly for the first time - humor.

h - u - m - o - r


Try that one more time:

h - u - m - o - r


You see, humor is founded on surprise. Even Aristotle was aware of that.

Now, let me help you.

MAX-MIHOP says that a controlled-demolition plan, and a pre-engineered - a pre-scripted - narrative - were designed together - simultaneously - to create a unified portrait. (Nice use of greys!)

Anyone who understands principles of design understands what I am saying. (Not really. You have to be a total genius, but anyway...)


Now uruk, bless his little soul, does not see the teleology.

Of course I know that is not what he meant.

He knows that.

And you know that.


Everyone knows that.


Now, the tension between the two, creates a form of surprise.

That surprise is experienced as - by those with a brain stem attached to the cortical system - Class? .... Anyone?.....


That's right Frank.

Humor.

H - u - m - o - r.


Arkan, you're a funny guy.

A Mused Max


For more on the subject:

A Message From Max Photon to the Meritorious Engineers of the World - Mind Your DEQs
http://maxphoton.com/2007/06/16/teleology.aspx


(Moderators, I don't believe I've ever linked to this aritcle, so have mercy.)

* * *

You're half right. Your were going for "c : something that is or is designed to be comical or amusing"*; in that, you fail; but you did manage to land, "a : that quality which appeals to a sense of the ludicrous or absurdly incongruous"* in the bulk of your posts rather well.

So glad you enjoy making jokes about accusing people of mass murder. Welcome to ignore, *******.

*http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/humor

[Max Photon]

* * *


JREF really ought to consider Nap Time*



*Nap Time is a registered trademark of Max Photon Worldwide Industries, an amalgamated conglomerate focusing on core businesses.

[uruk]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

MAX-MIHOP says that a controlled-demolition plan, and a pre-engineered - a pre-scripted - narrative - were designed together - simultaneously - to create a unified portrait. (Nice use of greys!)

Anyone who understands principles of design understands what I am saying. (Not really. You have to be a total genius, but anyway...)

{snip}

For more on the subject:

A Message From Max Photon to the Meritorious Engineers of the World - Mind Your DEQs
http://maxphoton.com/2007/06/16/teleology.aspx


(Moderators, I don't believe I've ever linked to this aritcle, so have mercy.)

* * *

Unfortunately that approach requires far more assumptions. I believe there was a guy named Occam who had a word or two to say about that.

[pomeroo]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Well, the IRS expects us to keep tax records indefinitely.

Just try telling an auditor you didn't need them any longer.


Let's try a different tack...

If your family members were murdered, and the murderer was still at large, how long would you like them to keep the evidence?





Well, it's been six years and there is still no WTC7 report (and, in case you didn't notice, it was a related event.)


How long do they take to investigate commercial airline crashes?


Studies could have and should have been conducted for decades to come.





uruk, I'm kind of slow.

When did the trial end?





From fire-affected panels from WTC2?

Sweet! Please post where. I will go ASAP!





Well I built a full-scale model of the towers, flew a couple of jets into them, and then looked in box columns, and sure enough, I found evidence of thermite!





Max Photon travels light.






Any thermite recipe in particular?





No problemo (since you don't seem to know your way around).

Check NIST FAQ #12





Yeah, that's because you're looking at N8.

(Are you at a pub or something?)





And?

Good grief, do you think I don't know where N8 comes from?

uruk, yet again, you are shadow boxing images in YOUR head.





Then start demonstrating that fact.





That is not what I asked e^n.


uruk, you are obviously intelligent, but you are consistently off track, thought I suspect you'll get more on track over time, because you are a decent fellow.

Regardless, I appreciate your participation, and welcome more.

Cheers!

Max

* * *

Uh, Max, we've noted that there is absolutely no evidence for your thermite fantasy. We've also noticed that you're not a scientist of any sort.
How long will your desperate attempt to pretend that "evidence" was destroyed continue? What agency tasked with finding out why the buildings fell has complained about a lack of steel samples?

Don't be shy, Max--show us your thermite evidence.

[Max Photon]

* * *


This paper by Dr. Frank Greening (Apollo20) is germane to this thread:

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster; (rev. June, 2006)


Apollo20 might have titled his paper:

Uncle Frank's Hydrogen-Helper:
Using Improvised Phreato-Thermatic Explosions to Knock Off WTC SFRM.


Max

* * *

[uruk]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

* * *


This paper by Dr. Frank Greening (Apollo20) is germane to this thread:

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster; (rev. June, 2006)


Apollo20 might have titled his paper:

Uncle Frank's Hydrogen-Helper:
Using Improvised Phreato-Thermatic Explosions to Knock Off WTC SFRM.


Max

* * *

Well his paper sounds a hell of alot more plausible than thermite deposited in column joints ignited by thermite dusted shock tubes.

Interesting to see what other scientist think of his paper.

[uruk]

Oh yea, I forgot to add that if the points brough up in the paper did happen, That would tend to support that there was no planned demolition of the towers. And reinforce the idea that that the plane crashes were responsible for the building collapses

[Drs_Res]

Hey Max,

Did you figure out the problem with your "Lasers" yet?

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by Drs_Res

Hey Max,

Did you figure out the problem with your "Lasers" yet?

The "problem" the good Doctor is bringing up is that laser light is not white.

My response is that the white flashes are not from the laser light itself, but from the ignition of the aluminum in the thermite-dusted shock-tube.

Max

* * *

[Unsecured Coins]

do you have a picture of a shock tube? I gotta see one

[Max Photon]

* * *

Here is an excerpt from Apollo20's paper:

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster.


Quoting B. Davy:

"...it is more than just a steam explosion that can result. The aluminum-water reaction [Max's phreato-thermatic explosion] that occurs with molten aluminum is highly exothermic, and will cause the aluminum to detonate with greater energy release than an equivalent weight of TNT."


Let that in!

• Collect 1kg of beer cans
• Melt them.
• Take a wiz on the concoction.

You'll get an explosion greater than from 1kg of TNT!

(Trust me, I've tried it.)


I find amazing that the flying aluminum beer cans that were Flights 175 and 11 had more potential energy stored in the aluminum than in an equivalent weight of TNT!

That is incredible.


It is also incredible that MILDEC had the audacity to exploit that energy source.

MILDEC's audacity can from their game theory findings that indicated that only a handful of people on earth would be able to see the jets' aluminum as an improvised explosive/incendiary device.


MILDEC knows how to use incredulity as a cloaking device. (This is related to MILDEC's knowing how to exploit Ockham's Razor as a cloaking device.)


Unbelievable-to-the-Max


P.S. Great paper, Apollo!

* * *

[Unsecured Coins]

so.... it wasn't jet fuel... it was urine!

Urethra!... er... Uleaka! oh man... I mean eureka!

[pomeroo]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

* * *

Here is an excerpt from Apollo20's paper:

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster.


Quoting B. Davy:

"...it is more than just a steam explosion that can result. The aluminum-water reaction [Max's phreato-thermatic explosion] that occurs with molten aluminum is highly exothermic, and will cause the aluminum to detonate with greater energy release than an equivalent weight of TNT."


Let that in!

• Collect 1kg of beer cans
• Melt them.
• Take a wiz on the concoction.

You'll get an explosion greater than from 1kg of TNT!

(Trust me, I've tried it.)

We do believe you. It may the only thing you've ever written that rings true.

Originally Posted by Max Photon

I find amazing that the flying aluminum beer cans that were Flights 175 and 11 had more potential energy stored in the aluminum than in an equivalent weight of TNT!

That is incredible.


It is also incredible that MILDEC had the audacity to exploit that energy source.

MILDEC's audacity can from their game theory findings that indicated that only a handful of people on earth would be able to see the jets' aluminum as an improvised explosive/incendiary device.


MILDEC knows how to use incredulity as a cloaking device. (This is related to MILDEC's knowing how to exploit Ockham's Razor as a cloaking device.)


Unbelievable-to-the-Max


P.S. Great paper, Apollo!

* * *

Lay off the brewskis, Doc.

[uruk]

You do know that the process that Apollo describes in his paper does not imply or suggest that any covert operation was involved.
It just simply states that all the ingrediants were present in the impact event to create and ad hoc thermite reaction (if you will) that added to the destructive energy of the impact and subsequent conflagration.

His paper would actually support the "offical" description of events. He is just pointing out something that the NIST may have missed.

[Unsecured Coins]

Originally Posted by pomeroo

Lay off the brewskis, Doc.

that's my kid, he's not drunk, he fell asleep in his high chair and I planted the bottles for the picture.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Unsecured Coin, pretty cute!

- - -

Speaking of phreato-thermatic explosions...

Just think, if a jet had 50 tons of aluminum, and if only, say, 10% were sufficiently powderized upon impact to ignite, and if water were present, then the explosive force from the aluminum would be greater than from 5 tons of TNT.

Note that this would only require 100 cubic feet of iron-oxide. (Just think of a sandbox, 10'x10' x 1' deep.)


Now in the world of BlackOps, is planting 100 cubic feet of iron-oxide impossible?


MaxNoir

* * *

[Mr. Skinny]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Note that this would only require 100 cubic feet of iron-oxide. (Just think of a sandbox, 10'x10' x 1' deep.)


Now in the world of BlackOps, is planting 100 cubic feet of iron-oxide impossible?

Not impossible, but pretty stupid to think that the aircraft could actually hit that sandbox with enough accuracy to create the reaction, IMHO.

I'd say throw that idea on your garbage pile of unreasonable theories, Max.

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by Mr. Skinny

Not impossible, but pretty stupid to think that the aircraft could actually hit that sandbox with enough accuracy to create the reaction, IMHO.

I'd say throw that idea on your garbage pile of unreasonable theories, Max.

Do we know the both the precision and accuracy with which a jet can be computer-guided to a target?


* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *


I wonder if a phreato-thermatic explosion with an equivalent yield greater than 5 tons of TNT would have knocked off any SFRM?


Max

* * *

[Mr. Skinny]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Do we know the both the precision and accuracy with which a jet can be computer-guided to a target?


* * *

Are you saying that the airliners were computer-guided to the target? Yes or No?

Don't you already have enough strange theories floating about, or are you proposing a new one?

[Max Photon]

Originally Posted by Mr. Skinny

Are you saying that the airliners were computer-guided to the target? Yes or No?

Don't you already have enough strange theories floating about, or are you proposing a new one?

Yes, I am saying the jets were computer-guided.

Good grief! We put a rover on Mars. Is computer-guiding a jet - like - Star Trek?


Anyway, while Mr. Skinny tries to get some three-dimensional ideas into his one-dimensional mind, can anyone comment on the precision and accuracy with which a jet can be computer-guided to a target?

• 0.001 meters?
• 0.01 meters?
• 0.1 meters?
• 1 meter?
• 10 meters?
• 100 meters?
• 1000 meters?

Ma +/- x

* * *

[Mr. Skinny]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Yes, I am saying the jets were computer-guided.

Good grief! We put a rover on Mars. Is computer-guiding a jet - like - Star Trek?


Anyway, while Mr. Skinny tries to get some three-dimensional ideas into his one-dimensional mind, can anyone comment on the precision and accuracy with which a jet can be computer-guided to a target?

• 0.001 meters?
• 0.01 meters?
• 0.1 meters?
• 1 meter?
• 10 meters?
• 100 meters?
• 1000 meters?

Ma +/- x

* * *

Holy *****' ell, Max. What an arrogant answer. When have I ever shown this degree of arrogance toward you? Do you think you make yourself look smarter by trying to make me look stupid?

Of course I'm aware that an aircraft can be flown without a pilot. The USAF has many remotely piloted aircraft that are used to tow targets, etc. They also have remote controled aircraft like the Predator which I'm fairly certain are capable of navigation by GPS systems.

Since my mind is so one-dimensional and yours is so 3D, why don't you provide us with the answer to your own question. Must we research everything for you?

Cheers!

Skinny

****

[Apollo20]

On December 1st, 1984, a Boeing 720 transport aircraft weighing 192,000 lbs and traveling at 151.5 knots (Yes knots!!), was part of a CID (Controlled Impact Demonstration) at Edwards Airforce Base in California. The remotely controlled aircraft was planned to impact the ground with a symmetric 1 degree nose-up attitude at a 17 f/s sink rate. In addition, so-called tank traps were set up on the ground to shear the wings off. As it turned out, the aircraft actually hit the ground slightly yawed and rolled (left-wing down) by 13 degrees, and the tank traps cut through an engine. Nevertheless, based on photographs I have seen, I would say the aircraft impact was within 10 feet of its planned target... And that was accomplished in 1984!

[A W Smith]

Originally Posted by Apollo20

On December 1st, 1984, a Boeing 720 transport aircraft weighing 192,000 lbs and traveling at 151.5 knots (Yes knots!!), was part of a CID (Controlled Impact Demonstration) at Edwards Airforce Base in California. The remotely controlled aircraft was planned to impact the ground with a symmetric 1 degree nose-up attitude at a 17 f/s sink rate. In addition, so-called tank traps were set up on the ground to shear the wings off. As it turned out, the aircraft actually hit the ground slightly yawed and rolled (left-wing down) by 13 degrees, and the tank traps cut through an engine. Nevertheless, based on photographs I have seen, I would say the aircraft impact was within 10 feet of its planned target... And that was accomplished in 1984!

10 feet?

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Max Photon]

* * *

Nice shot of the NIST Report.


Back to the topic...

Where are the herds of know-it-alls?

Here, I'll just make up a number, as enticement...


In 2007, computer-guided commercial jets can be brought to targets with both precision and accuracy of +/- 10 meters.


Anyone for 1m or less?

Anyone for 100m or more?


x ax Max ax x

* * *

[Mr. Skinny]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

* * *

Nice shot of the NIST Report.


Back to the topic...

Where are the herds of know-it-alls?

Here, I'll just make up a number, as enticement...


In 2007, computer-guided commercial jets can be brought to targets with both precision and accuracy of +/- 10 meters.


Anyone for 1m or less?

Anyone for 100m or more?


x ax Max ax x

* * *

Nothing new about that.

[pomeroo]

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Yes, I am saying the jets were computer-guided.

Good grief! We put a rover on Mars. Is computer-guiding a jet - like - Star Trek?


Anyway, while Mr. Skinny tries to get some three-dimensional ideas into his one-dimensional mind, can anyone comment on the precision and accuracy with which a jet can be computer-guided to a target?

• 0.001 meters?
• 0.01 meters?
• 0.1 meters?
• 1 meter?
• 10 meters?
• 100 meters?
• 1000 meters?

Ma +/- x

* * *

Have you read Apathoid's paper (available on 911myths.com, the section "Investigations, more") describing the enormous difficulties involved in attempting to fly Boeing 757s and 767s by remote control?

Of course I'm kidding, you silly goose!