Star Wars Beam Weapon and the WTC Bathtub

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...
The whole building (WTC 1 and 2) wasn't on fire you know!
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Perhaps you should get busy with your debunking site and explain these observations. I haven't seen any explainations that satisfy my curiosity.
Click to expand...

LOL! I don't know what to debunk anymore, you can't seem to make up your mind:cool:
Does carpet and furniture mean conspiracy or not? Honestly I don't know what you're saying anymore. Does paper mean good or bad. Paper and debris was flying out of the building all day.

A lot of the lower end stuff, missles, lazer beams, concrete core, no planes are considered too crazy even among mainstream CT'ers. I'm not sure sure it will be covered on the site.
 
Last edited:
TroofSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...

Of course, back in reality land, the steel wasn't melting until the sustained fires in the rubble, if I recall correctly. Did have steel warping due to heat-induced weakness, but not melting, which led to the collapse.

And, of course, it's not as if the entire building caught on fire.

Additionally, I doubt searching for filing cabinets was that high a priority at the time.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmm.

Maybe they built a secret invisible microwave oven around the Towers.

Hey, maybe the Towers were two massive secret microwave ovens. All they had to do was knock off the ventilation system after the planes had hit and bingo molten metal, exploding concrete and vaporised steel.

Now it that all makes perfect sense.

So did they BS? Did they sabotage the ventilation system in this dastardly plot?

What say you BS?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...
So...if the file cabinet weighs the same as a duck...
 
CurtC said:
Wow, I had never heard of that.

It makes me want to set up an account at the LC Forum and post my "theory" that there were no planes, only TR-3Bs that crashed on 9/11.

I'm sure that if these things spin fast enough to distort gravity, they could make them bend light to look like 767s.
Click to expand...


TR-3Bs, though rare, have been around for a while. Getting them to look like a 767 is a dificult proposition though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_TR3B
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...

What happens when you put metal in the your microvave. Quick hurry up and try it! LOL!! Start with a fork.
BTW ever watch brainiac, GREAT SHOW!
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=brainiac
 
Last edited:
I missed the "microwave" bit. If the R-9 space fighter was equipped with a microwave oven weapon, wouldn't it cook everyone in the vicinity not covered by overhead metal?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if the metal got very hot, the main heating action is only on certain types of molecule:

A microwave oven works by passing microwave radiation, usually at a frequency of 2450 MHz (a wavelength of 12.24 cm), through the food. Water, fat, and sugar molecules in the food absorb energy from the microwave beam in a process called dielectric heating. Many molecules (such as those of water) are electric dipoles, meaning that they have a positive charge at one end and a negative charge at the other, and therefore rotate as they try to align themselves with the alternating electric field induced by the microwave beam. This molecular movement creates heat as the rotating molecules hit other molecules and put them into motion. Microwave heating is most efficient on liquid water, and much less so on fats and sugars (which have less molecular dipole moment), and frozen water (where the molecules are not free to rotate). Microwave heating is sometimes explained as a rotational resonance of water molecules, but this is incorrect: such resonance only occurs in water vapour at much higher frequencies, at about 20 gigahertz. Moreover, large industrial/commercial microwave ovens operating at 915 MHz also heat water and food perfectly well. [2]

A common misconception is that microwave ovens cook food from the "inside out". In reality, microwaves are absorbed in the outer layers of food in a manner somewhat similar to heat from other methods. The misconception arises because microwaves penetrate dry nonconductive substances at the surfaces of many common foods, and thus often deposit initial heat more deeply than other methods. Depending on water content the depth of initial heat deposition may be several centimeters or more with microwave ovens, in contrast to broiling (infrared) or convection heating, which deposit heat thinly at the food surface. Depth of penetration of microwaves is dependent on food composition and the frequency, with lower microwave frequencies penetrating better.
Click to expand...
The effects on metal are quite different, it isn't because it gets really hot that you don't put metal in a microwave:

Tin foil, aluminium foil, ceramics decorated with metal, and products containing other metals can cause sparks when they are used in a microwave. Microwaving small, smooth, solid metal objects without pointed ends (for example, a spoon) can sometimes be safe, and usually does not produce sparking (putting a spoon into a liquid also helps prevent superheating). Forks, however, will readily produce sparks when placed in the microwave. This is because while it acts as an antenna, absorbing microwave radiation just like other metal objects such as the spoon, tines of the fork will act to concentrate the electric field formed at the tips. This has the effect of exceeding the dielectric breakdown gradient of air, about 3 megavolts per meter (3×106V/m), causing sparks to form. This effect is somewhat analogous to the effect of St. Elmo's fire.
Click to expand...
Finally, as mentioned previously, any metal or conductive object placed into the microwave will act as an antenna, and its electrons will thus be thrashed back and forth through the object (a high frequency alternating current) causing some ohmic heating to occur. The extent of this heating effect will vary depending on the size, shape and conductivity of the object.
Click to expand...
It is a common myth that metallic kitchen equipment, like kitchen forks and knives, can somehow repel the microwaves back into the magnetron and cause it to catch fire. This concern is unfounded as there are apparently no cases of such an incident occurring, and is implausible considering the entire cooking box where microwaves are injected is made of metal.
Click to expand...
All quotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven
bolding mine
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Here are the principal data that must be explained:

The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain (free fall speed "collapse")
Click to expand...

They were destroyed in a way that defies the laws of physics ?

If that's what you contend, I suggest you don't understand how they were destroyed. Chances are, the laws of physics were NOT, repeat: NOT violated on that day.

The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers
The rail lines, rail cars and tunnels had only light damage
The WTC mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Bros. Road Runner and friends
Click to expand...

Evidence ? And : significant how ?

The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on our comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition
Click to expand...

Hint: no explosives.

The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up, unlike WTC7
Click to expand...

Exactly how is this significant ? I mean, UNLESS you assume a controlled demolition, why is it strange, seeing as how 1 and 2 were hit at the top and 7 at the bottom ?

The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth
Click to expand...

Where did it crash, then ? Mars ?

File cabinet with folder dividers survive
Click to expand...

How is this strange ?

Office paper was densly spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side burning cars.
Click to expand...

Key word: alongside. They weren't IN the burning cars, were they ?

Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, plus a cylindrical arc into Bankers Trust and into Liberty street in front of Bankers Trust
Click to expand...

Hint: falling debris from ABOVE. They tend to create vertical holes. Also, the holes you show are anything BUT round.

All planes but top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes after WTC 1 had been destroyed
Click to expand...

Again, how is this strange ? Wouldn't YOU want to prevent further attacks ?

Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers
Click to expand...

Strange ? Wasn't this the subject of a rather odd thread a few weeks back ? Didn't someone explain very clearly how vehicle fires are unpredictable ?

The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub.
Click to expand...

A posteriori speculation. It's like saying the pilot who struck the Pentagon hit that particular section on purpose.

Twin Tower control without damaging neighboring buildings, in fact all seriously damaged or destroyed buildings had a WTC prefix, and no others.
Click to expand...

That's a lie: at least one building is slated for demolition, or at least isn't used since that day. Also, it was the WTC COMPLEX. You'd expect the buildings there to have a WTC prefix.

The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared
Click to expand...

Nice wording. However the fact that parts of buildings were left standing isn't surprising. In fact, it contradicts your contention that the buildings were desintegrated, and that they were neatly demolished.

The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the mass, unlike that of WTC7
Click to expand...

Speculation. You have no numbers for that, and the only number we have, 1.5 or 1.7 million tons, you doubt. Ergo, you cannot make any claim.

Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars,
Click to expand...

See above.

instant disappearance of people by "unexplained" waves,
Click to expand...

Say what ?

a plane turning into a mid-air fireball and electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction,
Click to expand...

Sources ? As far as I know, there was nothing even remotely similar to an EMP there. If you're talking about simple power loss, it seems reasonable, given the nature of the event.

the sound of explosions
Click to expand...

Again, explosions aren't necessarily made by explosives.

The possibility that a technology exists. Since invention of the microwave for cooking in 1945 and laser beam in 1955*, commercial and military development of beam technology has proceeded apace, so use of high-energy beams are likely
Click to expand...

This alledged likelihood, in addition to beign debatable, does not, in and of itself, explain this event if :

A) It is inconsistent with the observed event
B) Is not supported by evidence
C) Said event is explained by a much simpler theory
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.
Click to expand...

Another experiment: Put various objects in a burning steel high-rise building. Wait until collapse. Inspect debris. Hummmmmm...

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...

Isn't it fun when you can just make those claims without evidence ?
 
TroofSeeker said:
instant disappearance of people by "unexplained" waves,
Click to expand...

The R-9's Wave Cannon was modified to include an uplink to the transporter system of Baran's ship, allowing him to quickly beam things up by shooting them.
 
I bet that filing cabinet was found in the undamaged subway station beneath the towers...it was, wasn't it?;)
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Excellent science question, Bronze Dog. Why do we have all this melting steel, yet paper sits around unburned? Experiment: Put various objects in your microvave oven. Metal gets very hot. Food cooks from the indide out. Paper doesn't. Hmmmmmm.

There was only one file cabinet found, out of two twin towers.
Click to expand...

So, why don't you try this little experiment? It's painfully obvious that you haven't, because the most prominent effect of metal in microwave is a whole lot of electrical sparking...



So, if it was a microwave beam weapon, where in any of the videos (which you insist are the only acceptable evidence, remember) does it show the absolutely huge electrical sparking that must have occurred? Nowhere? Gee, I wonder why......

This is why we ask you to come up with actual, testable, theories for how your alleged "disintegration" occurred. A few simple tests, and we can see that your "theory" has no merit. Next please. And this time, why don't you try coming up with a few tests of your own? I'm getting tired of doing the thinking for you, and I'm sure everyone else is too.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Gravy, it is beyond the pale to kill innocent kittens in protest against those with whom you have a scientific disagreement.
Click to expand...
I don't have a scientific disagreement with you, TS, because you haven't made any scientific arguments. I have an ethical disagreement with you. I don't like it when people lie about the events of 9/11. If you're not lying, then you're delusional. Which is it?

87904558d6428eff8.jpg

​


The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on our comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition
Click to expand...
They must be kidding! That building was blown to Kingdome come!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom