ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th September 2016, 07:59 PM   #321
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
Are you really claiming that compressed air went through a door, into a shaft, down a hallway, etc, and out the window? That's what you think happened?

Compressed air seeks the path of least resistance and I know that as a fact. In fact, we had to send an Air Force C-141 to the boneyard after volcanic ash got into places within the airframe that we thought was airtight.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:01 PM   #322
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
These would have to be very durable vents. Explosion-proof vents.

How did squibs of compressed air get to the outside if this building?


Squibs Video

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2s6ghu
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:02 PM   #323
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
There is an interesting feature of buildings like the WTC. They're called exterior walls.

There also is already air on those floors, so when air comes in, where does the air go that is already there?
You seem to be talking about static pressure. I'm not convinced that any window on any floor, more less every window save one, can contain the static pressure required to eject the material in the videos.

Why would you assume that this is possible? It sure seems like an impossibility to me.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:04 PM   #324
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You seem to be talking about static pressure.

Just to let you know that I am still waiting for you to post those video time lines and failing to post those time lines will prove my point that no explosives were used to demolish the WTC buildings.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:05 PM   #325
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
Who do you think these dust plumes made it?


Photo 1: No Explosives Used

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/e...g?t=1263186335


Photo 2: No Explosives Used

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/e...g?t=1263186376

The question isn't whether or not dust can be ejected during a building collapse. The question is about where the dust and debris is ejected.

How does it happen a dozen stories away from the collapse?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:08 PM   #326
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
The question isn't whether or not dust can be ejected during a building collapse. The question is about where the dust and debris is ejected.

How does it happen a dozen stories away from the collapse?

I have shown you photos where dust plumes were ejected from windows as in this case.


Squibs Photo

https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMi...406_071438.jpg
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:09 PM   #327
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
The same way it did it here.


Photo: No Explosives Used

https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMi...93219a1052.jpg
Right, it's exactly the same, only different. What you're obsessing about is the debris ejected at the point of building collapse. I don't think anyone questions this, I certainly don't. My inquiry is a bit more focused.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:10 PM   #328
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You seem to be talking about static pressure. I'm not convinced that any window on any floor, more less every window save one, can contain the static pressure required to eject the material in the videos.
.

Speaking of videos, where are those video times lines that I have been asking for?
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:11 PM   #329
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
Right, it's exactly the same, only different. What you're obsessing about is the debris ejected at the point of building collapse.

Just to let you know that WTC buildings were not air tight after the impacts.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:12 PM   #330
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
How did squibs of compressed air get to the outside if this building?


Squibs Video

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2s6ghu
Can you point them out? I don't see any demolition squibs in any your images.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:18 PM   #331
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
How does the compressed air get from the stairwell to the window?
Excuse the **** out of me, but did I just read that correctly?
Is anyone really so scientifically illiterate that they don't know how air gets from a high pressure area to a lower pressure area?
Y'all ought to visit a planet with an atmosphere some day
We have breezes and wind down here...
__________________
"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
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:20 PM   #332
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
Can you point them out? I don't see any demolition squibs in any your images.

You are stalling! Where are those video time lines? Could it be that you don't want to post those WTC video time lines because the time lines prove no demolition explosives were used?
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:21 PM   #333
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
Can you point them out? I don't see any demolition squibs in any your images.

It is all there in the photo and you are stalling again!
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 08:23 PM   #334
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
Can you point them out? I don't see any demolition squibs in any your images.

Squibs are compressed air and I am very sure you have seen them in the photos that I have posted.

Now, quit stalling and post those video time lines or throw in the towel.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:03 PM   #335
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Excuse the **** out of me, but did I just read that correctly?
.
You read it correctly. The behavior of air follows very predictable rules. The question is which of these rules can be applied in a fashion that explains the observations.

We're looking for a more rigorous explanation than simply saying the wind did it. We want to know what wind did it.

Last edited by steveupson; 8th September 2016 at 09:06 PM.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:06 PM   #336
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 879
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
I don't doubt that those speeds are possible. I'm simply wondering how they occur somewhere else in the building.
So, does this answer put to rest the question if anybody's ever "done the math?"

Your answer should be yes
Seymour Butz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:07 PM   #337
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 879
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
These would have to be very durable vents. Explosion-proof vents.

Only in your CD delusions.

In the real world, not so much.
Seymour Butz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:10 PM   #338
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 879
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
We're looking for a more rigorous explanation than simply saying the wind did it. We want to know what wind did it.
Do you want me to provide a link, quote, etc from Bazant?

Cuz you shouldn't be asking this if you're curious and have done some research into my answer.
Seymour Butz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:28 PM   #339
Jrrarglblarg
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You read it correctly. The behavior of air follows very predictable rules. The question is which of these rules can be applied in a fashion that explains the observations.

We're looking for a more rigorous explanation than simply saying the wind did it. We want to know what wind did it.
The one that followed the red arrow in the diagram.
Jrrarglblarg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:43 PM   #340
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
The one that followed the red arrow in the diagram.
Doesn't seem to have a very firm grasp on cause and effect, does he?
__________________
"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
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 09:57 PM   #341
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by Seymour Butz View Post
Do you want me to provide a link, quote, etc from Bazant?

Cuz you shouldn't be asking this if you're curious and have done some research into my answer.
A link or a quote would be greatly appreciated. I can't find any information on this.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:05 PM   #342
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
A link or a quote would be greatly appreciated. I can't find any information on this.

What you need to do is to come up with what I asked for.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:07 PM   #343
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
The one that followed the red arrow in the diagram.
?

Which diagram?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:07 PM   #344
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You read it correctly. The behavior of air follows very predictable rules.9

Peculiar that you would say such a thing considering the questions you've posed. Are you playing a game?
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:11 PM   #345
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
What you need to do is to come up with what I asked for.
You're the greatest and the smartest and the most pleasant person on the entire intertubes and I'm just a know-nuthing scumbag and I apologize for desecrating the memories of the victims of 9/11.

Kay?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:19 PM   #346
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,347
Talking

Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You're the greatest and the smartest and the most pleasant person on the entire intertubes and I'm just a know-nuthing scumbag and I apologize for desecrating the memories of the victims of 9/11.

Kay?

There is a very good reason why you don't want to tackle the video time line challenge because you would have to admit to us all, that you cannot find evidence for CD explosives.

One Truther after another have failed to take on that challenge with the exception of one Truther and he made the mistake of taking on the challenge by posted a known hoaxed video. When I revealed the video was a hoax, he disappeared.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 10:53 PM   #347
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,082
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
... We're looking...
Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

I assume from the lack of knowledge, fluid dynamics is Greek to you.

The irony, the OP is about discussing an article done by 9/11 truth liars based on speculation. The paper is nonsense, the same as the imaginary squibs, not used on 9/11. The article is clearly based on speculation, a nice term for nonsense, lies and BS.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 11:20 PM   #348
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
I can understand why some people are a little fixated on me, wanting to figure out who I am since I'm new here. But I'm not really all that interesting. I think the subject matter that I'm trying to discuss is a lot more interesting than I am. Whether I know more or less than you think I know will not have any effect on the events that occurred during the collapse of the towers.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2016, 11:36 PM   #349
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 23,726
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
How does the compressed air get from the stairwell to the window?
It doesn't need to. It pushes the air ahead of it, which pushes the air ahead of that ...

If a garden hose is full when you switch on the tap, water will exit the end of the hose immediately, not when the water at the tap end makes it all the way to the open end.

This doesn't require any great scientific knowledge or calculations or cites or papers, just everyday experience; and at your age and with your claimed scientific background it should not come as a revelation. This is why people are accusing you of trolling - nobody can be as stupid as you appear to be.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 12:05 AM   #350
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,190
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
That's the problem.





How does the pressure cross the room? In other words, how is it contained during this journey?


This question is so strange it appears deliberately obtuse. A 200ft wide building is collapsing and, as floors pancake down, a portion of the air on each floor is forced down the buildings vertical shafts. The resulting overpressure spreads onto each floor below and bursts out of any weak points.



Does any part of that seem counterintuitive to you?
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 01:40 AM   #351
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 27,914
Well, you're all dancing to steveupson's tune, and so have I been. I think it's time to stop. This whole sequence has been a very successful attempt to reverse the burden of proof. steveupson, you've been asked to present your evidence that the ejecta are anything to do with explosives, and the best you've been able to come up with is that it looks that way to you. They don't look that way to any of the rest of us, so that's the end of it. If you want any more responses from me, present some real evidence or calculations rather than vague guesses. Until then, enjoy wasting your time.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 01:42 AM   #352
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,842
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
You read it correctly. The behavior of air follows very predictable rules. The question is which of these rules can be applied in a fashion that explains the observations.

We're looking for a more rigorous explanation than simply saying the wind did it. We want to know what wind did it.
Compressed air ductwork.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 01:47 AM   #353
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,422
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Well, you're all dancing to steveupson's tune, and so have I been. I think it's time to stop.

Troll feeding is a self sustaining - self reinforcing exercise.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 03:12 AM   #354
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,343
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
steveupson, you've been asked to present your evidence that the ejecta are anything to do with explosives, and the best you've been able to come up with is that it looks that way to you.
He's also said that nanothermite did it, but then that "[i]n order for a loud sound to be produced some energy would have to be transmitted into the air somehow. If the charge doesn't transmit energy into the air then you wouldn't hear it", and when confronted with the fact that in that case it would not be able to produce the ejections for the same reasons, all we got is crickets.

Which boils down to: he doesn't really have an explanation, but that's the only "smoking gun" he has and has to protect his belief.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:24 AM   #355
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
It doesn't need to. It pushes the air ahead of it, which pushes the air ahead of that ...

If a garden hose is full when you switch on the tap, water will exit the end of the hose immediately, not when the water at the tap end makes it all the way to the open end.

This doesn't require any great scientific knowledge or calculations or cites or papers, just everyday experience; and at your age and with your claimed scientific background it should not come as a revelation. This is why people are accusing you of trolling - nobody can be as stupid as you appear to be.
Right. A hose would be required. Without the hose, how would the water get from here to there?

The question isn't that complicated so I don't understand why you've accused me of trolling. Do you think that there was some kind of hose between the shaft and the window?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:29 AM   #356
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
This question is so strange it appears deliberately obtuse. A 200ft wide building is collapsing and, as floors pancake down, a portion of the air on each floor is forced down the buildings vertical shafts. The resulting overpressure spreads onto each floor below and bursts out of any weak points.



Does any part of that seem counterintuitive to you?
In order for this "overdpressure" to occur the air must be contained somehow. How was this pressure contained. The windows certainly aren't strong enough to contain it, so what is the containment vessel?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:43 AM   #357
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Well, you're all dancing to steveupson's tune, and so have I been. I think it's time to stop. This whole sequence has been a very successful attempt to reverse the burden of proof. steveupson, you've been asked to present your evidence that the ejecta are anything to do with explosives, and the best you've been able to come up with is that it looks that way to you. They don't look that way to any of the rest of us, so that's the end of it. If you want any more responses from me, present some real evidence or calculations rather than vague guesses. Until then, enjoy wasting your time.

Dave
I guess you either missed or are deliberately misinterpreting my question. I'm looking for any information at all on this question.

If there's no information one way or the other, then we should be able to agree that there's no information. Why would it be wrong to assert this fact, if it is indeed true, which I'm not claiming it is.

Just because I don't know of any rigorous explanation doesn't mean that none exists. Someone may have already worked this out and I just haven't seen it. In any case, why do you require some burden of proof beforehand? Isn't that thinking bassackwards?
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:46 AM   #358
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Compressed air ductwork.
If that's the case then this ductwork should be easy enough to identify. And yet...
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:48 AM   #359
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 27,914
Originally Posted by steveupson View Post
I guess you either missed or are deliberately misinterpreting my question. I'm looking for any information at all on this question.
No, you're not. You're imposing an asymmetric burden of proof, where you're insisting that the default explanation has to be explosives for no other reason than that you've called the phenomena "demolition squibs," and are then demanding rigorous and numerically accurate proof of any other explanation before you'll consider it as a competitor to your blind guess. The explanation you've already received is vastly more comprehensive than anything you've advanced to support the claim you implied right at the start and have continued to imply throughout, and all you're doing now is trying to sustain an argument from ignorance by seeking out new areas to be ignorant of. In that respect, at least, you're doing a great job.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2016, 04:51 AM   #360
steveupson
Thinker
 
steveupson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
He's also said that nanothermite did it, but then that "[i]n order for a loud sound to be produced some energy would have to be transmitted into the air somehow. If the charge doesn't transmit energy into the air then you wouldn't hear it", and when confronted with the fact that in that case it would not be able to produce the ejections for the same reasons, all we got is crickets.

Which boils down to: he doesn't really have an explanation, but that's the only "smoking gun" he has and has to protect his belief.
You must have missed my response to that objection. The squibs can be the result of malfunctioning, possibly due to improper installation. I think I said they could have been installed backwards.
steveupson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.