-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What's The Difference?
- Thread starter poncho
- Start date
Puncho, I have a theory that YOU were behind the Trade Towers' collapse. You were working for Al Quaeda at the time, and now you're working for ISIS, which you probably call ISIL. What do you have planned now? Waiting for the next 6.5 quake in the Bay area, then igniting your charges in the Golden Gate Bridge, then claiming they were set by Trump or Rubio to make obama look weak on terrorism while the populace really thinks it was the earthquake? What's your plan for blowing up the Statue of Liberty? Is the Rose Bowl and 100,000 fans going up this New Year's Day, or next? (if it's next, no one will be there; the game won't be til the 2nd).
Why should anyone bother taking the time to provide rational answers for you when we all know you won't accept them anyway? It's pointless to argue with a nutcase, and I'm sorry, anyone who seriously believes that there was a plot orchestrated by Bush and Cheney to blow up the towers is a nutcase. All of us who live in the real world instead of your paranoid fantasyland recognize how completely insane that notion is. That you clearly do not tells anyone reading this thread everything they need to know about you.
For the benefit of any of the rest of you who might think there actually is something to what Poncho says, just do a quick Google search on anything he has posted and you can find responses using genuine facts that debunk every point completely. Poncho knows all of this information, but it doesn't fit his predetermined verdict that Bush and Cheney murdered 3000 Americans to have an excuse to start a war, so it goes in one ear and out the other. As I said in the other thread, we should feel sorry for the Ponchos of the world and pray for them. They are one extremely unhappy lot.
For the benefit of any of the rest of you who might think there actually is something to what Poncho says, just do a quick Google search on anything he has posted and you can find responses using genuine facts that debunk every point completely. Poncho knows all of this information, but it doesn't fit his predetermined verdict that Bush and Cheney murdered 3000 Americans to have an excuse to start a war, so it goes in one ear and out the other. As I said in the other thread, we should feel sorry for the Ponchos of the world and pray for them. They are one extremely unhappy lot.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I didn't know you asked me that question.
What do I believe about the Holocaust? I believe what the evidence shows. The evidence shows that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews. Same reason I believe the three WTC buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition on 9/11. That's what the evidence shows.
I don't see what the Holocaust has to do with the destruction of the three WTC buildings on 9/11 other than you are trying to setup some narrative that deflects and distracts from the fact that in order for the "official conspiracy theory" to be true "19 Muslim terrorists" would have had to suspend the laws of physics to accomplish the complete destruction of those three buildings at or near free fall speed.
Let me ask you a question. Do you really believe that attacking me personally makes the impossible possible?
PART 1 - This was taken from a Dutch tv show that was investigating the events of 9/11. An expert on controlled demolition, Danny Jowenko, was asked to review the video of a building collapse. He did not know that WTC 7 collapsed on Sept. 11 at approx. 5:40 pm. As he watched the collapse, he did not have any doubts that the building was brought down by controlled demolition. It was then revealed to him that the building was part of the 9/11 events. He was shocked but stood by his original assessment that the building was brought down with explosives. So, the question that needs to be answered is: How can a 47 story building completely collapse into its own footprint in less than 7 seconds?
PART 2 - DANNY JOWENKO'S PROFESSIONAL OPINION ON THE COLLAPSE OF WTC 7.
PART 3 - DANNY JOWENKO'S PROFESSIONAL OPINION ON THE COLLAPSE OF WTC 7.
Last edited:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Note to the reader. What Walguy is doing here is setting up a strawman to knock down, Nowhere have I accused Bush and Cheney of blowing up any buildings or murdering anyone. His argument if it can be called an argument at all relies solely on character assassination and a desperate appeal to emotion rather than any rational refutation of the evidence I have provided.
Expect these types of strawman arguments and personal attacks to become more regular and shrill as I continue to show how outrageous the government's "official conspiracy theory" truly is.
Last edited:
poncho
Well-Known Member
https://books.google.com/books?id=x...cs+thermite&pg=PA657&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=true
Popular Mechanics reported on thermite used to cut steel in demolition? That's weird.
Thermite Grenade Cuts Through Steel
Demonstration of a thermite grenade manufactured by ALS Technologies, Inc., a Bull Shoals, AR.-based less lethal and defense logistics company. Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide that produces an exothermic oxidation-reduction reaction known as a thermite reaction. If aluminum is the reducing agent it is called an aluminothermic reaction. Most varieties are not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time. The thermite is simply a mixture of metal, often called the "fuel" and an oxidizer. Its form of action is thought very similar to other fuel-oxidizer mixtures like black powder.
http://www.military.com/video/ammunition-and-explosives/grenades/the-thermite-grenade/983538042001
Thermite Grenades - Intense Heat
Special hand grenade is used to destroy weapons, bunkers and vehicles.
Thermite grenades are one of the most destructive weapons used by the U.S. military.
Molten Iron
A wide variety of hand grenades are used today by the U.S. military. Hand grenades are loosely defined as any anti-personnel device that explodes on release. The M67 is the current fragmentation or “frag” grenade used by American and Canadian soldiers. However, the most destructive hand grenade used by U.S. soldiers is the thermite grenade.
A powerful incendiary device, thermite grenades produce intense heat through a chemical reaction. Thermite is known as a "pyrotechnic composition" that burns intensely when ignited. When detonated, thermite grenades produce molten iron from a violent reaction of the weapon’s thermite filler. Some thermite grenades have been known to burn at temperatures of nearly 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The extreme heat makes thermite grenades good for destroying weapons caches, bunkers and vehicles. Thermite grenades are capable of burning through an engine block in seconds.
Continue . . . http://usmilitary.about.com/od/weapons/a/thermite.htm
The military has thermite grenades capable of burning through an engine block in seconds? That's weird.
Wonder why National Geographics and Myth Busters didn't ask Uncle Sam for a thermite grenade instead of going to all that trouble to prove thermite couldn't melt through steel? Maybe they didn't want to prove thermite could melt through steel?
Nano-thermite
Production
A method for producing nanoscale, or ultra fine grain (UFG) aluminium powders, a key component of most nano-thermitic materials, is the dynamic gas-phase condensation method, pioneered by Wayne Danen and Steve Son at Los Alamos National Laboratory. A variant of the method is being used at the Indian Head Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. Another production method for nanoaluminium powder is the pulsed plasma process developed by NovaCentrix (formerly Nanotechnologies).[9] The powders made by both processes are indistinguishable.[10] A critical aspect of the production is the ability to produce particles of sizes in the tens of nanometer range, as well as with a limited distribution of particle sizes. In 2002, the production of nano-sized aluminium particles required considerable effort, and commercial sources for the material were limited.[3] Current production levels are now beyond 100 kg/month.
An application of the sol-gel method, developed by Randall Simpson, Alexander Gash and others at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, can be used to make the actual mixtures of nanostructured composite energetic materials. Depending on the process, MICs of different density can be produced. Highly porous and uniform products can be achieved by supercritical extraction.[3]
Ignition
Nanoscale composites are easier to ignite than traditional thermites. A nichrome bridgewire can be used in some cases. Other means of ignition can include flame or laser pulse. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is developing super-thermite electric matches that use comparatively low ignition currents and resist friction, impact, heat and static discharge.[1]
Continue . . . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite
Explosibility of nanoparticles
Looking at the third measure of likelihood of explosion occurrence, minimum ignition temperature, researchers have found that it decreases with decreasing particle size – thus increasing the likelihood of explosions with nanosized particles over larger particles.
For instance, nanosized aluminum has been found to ignite at a rather low ignition temperature of approximately 900 K, which is below aluminum's melting point, as a result of the oxidation of the aluminum. By comparing the ignition of thermites prepared with nano- and micrometer-sized particles, researchers found that micron powder ignited at 610°C, while the nanopowders already ignited at 100°C.
The fact that nanomaterials have different properties than their respective micrometer-sized counterparts – due to very high specific surface areas and high reactivities – results in lower ignition and melting temperatures and faster burning rates. For aluminum nanoparticles, these changes become more significant at a particle size less than 10 nm.
Continue . . . http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=24650.php
Nanoscale thermite is easier to ignite than regular old thermite? Maybe even with a flame? Like maybe the flame caused by burning jet fuel? That's weird.
What will they think of next?
Last edited:
You haven't said it in so many words, although you have implied that there is something suspicious about Marvin Bush appearing in one tiny corner of the narrative. That would not be suspicious to you unless you believed George W was at the center of the plot. But if the towers were brought down by controlled demolition, as you deliriously insist they were, someone had to be behind it. If it was NOT those at the highest level of government who were behind it, then those at the highest level of government would have wanted to prove who was behind it to deflect blame away from themselves. Even more importantly, who except those at the highest level of government would have been able to orchestrate all the bypasses of security that would have been required? You have not explicitly named Bush and Cheney here, but the existence of such a plot as you believe in almost necessarily would have to involve them. This is no straw man. You have publicly accused Americans in positions of power of plotting to destroy the towers and attack the Pentagon, killing several thousand other Americans in the process and permanently devastating of the lives of the family members and friends that those victims left behind. That is absolutely despicable in the absence of the most conclusive and unopposed proof. Which, of course, you believe you have and are demonstrating with your silly videos and pictures that have been debunked over and over for 14 years. Which is why believing what you do makes you a 24 karat nutcase. I do commend you for stating that you accept the truth of the Holocaust. Many of your fellow 'truthers' are also Holocaust deniers, and I'm glad you're apparently not among them. All that shows, however, is that there is nothing in your current severely warped worldview that demands Holocaust denial. If there were, you would reject all that evidence and embrace the ridiculous arguments Holocaust deniers do, just as you reject all the real evidence about 9/11 and embrace the 'truther' arguments, which also have no basis in the actual facts of that case.
I really do pray for your soul, Poncho. You are a seriously sick person, and I truly hope that someday you will get the help you so desperately need. But part of caring about someone is telling them the truth. I would be doing you no favor by trying to 'play nice' with you here. You need to hear the truth about yourself, even though you are psychologically unable to accept it right now. Maybe someday the Lord will find a way to reach you, and you will look back and thank me and others like me in your heart for telling you the unvarnished truth when we had the chance.
Zaac
Well-Known Member
I remember watching the towers collapse. I did some work with demolition and implosion experts for a couple of years a long time ago. And I remember thinking, wow that looks like a well planned implosion. It takes A LOT to get a tall building to implode on itself and go straight down. I'm not saying someone planned this. But it certainly didn't look like a building collapsing from a normal fire. Granted there was jet fuel involved. But jet fuel by itself doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel. And fuel burning would have had to spread evenly over the floors of the crash to burn the inner and outer support beams to bring a building down like that. There would have had to be something else present which is what makes the thermite idea interesting.
Kevin
Active Member
I remember seeing the towers come down and thinking at the time that if it had to happen, it was wonderful that God directed their collapse in a way to minimize the collateral damage.
If those buildings had tipped to one side, just think of the damage that would have been done.
Maybe not in the correct context, but I will put it out there.
Genesis 50:20 (NKJV)
20 But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive.
If those buildings had tipped to one side, just think of the damage that would have been done.
Maybe not in the correct context, but I will put it out there.
Genesis 50:20 (NKJV)
20 But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive.
poncho
Well-Known Member
I haven't implied any such thing. Nor do I suspect George W. Bush of being at the center of the plot, It's no secret that he wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. IMHO if he played any role in the plot at all it would have been as a useful idiot and not a criminal mastermind. No offense meant to your hero Walyguy but the dude never gave any indication that he possessed the mental aptitude to play such a role.
One would assume so yes. One would also assume that the actual perpetrators could be revealed in a criminal investigation into the attacks of 9/11. But so far there hasn't been one. That's probably why we've been left to speculate about "who done it" for 14 years.
That does make one wonder why those at the highest levels of government were so adamantly opposed to any investigation at all doesn't it? By golly, I think you're starting to get the hang of this Walguy!
That's a good question but apparently you don't want that question answered unless it fits your paradigm. What other reason would you have for ruling out suspects before a real investigation has taken place?
As suspects. What's that saying the Bush administration and it's supporters became famous for during Bush's term in office? "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear". If they had nothing to hide they would have been the first ones to call for a thorough independent well funded investigation instead of fighting tooth and nail to delay, under fund and hamper the 9/11 commission that even the chair people on that commission said was set up to fail from the beginning.
They wrote a book about it. Here's a review by the NYT . . . http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/books/review/20Bamford.html
One has to wonder who's side you're on here. The victims and their loved ones who are still fighting with those in positions of power for the thorough independent well funded investigation those in positions of power have denied them for 14 years or those in positions of power?
Who's side are you on Walguy?
You're right all I have are the 11 characteristics of controlled demolition displayed in building 7. The evidence of destruction of a crime scene witnessed by the whole world. The evidence of a cover up by destruction of documents, the misleading statements made to the 9/11 commission by a host of people in positions of power, the refusal to take hundreds of eye witness testimonies into account, the outright refusal to hear or see any evidence that contradicts the official story, the concerted effort of the government and media to gag, demonize and or marginalize anyone that questions the official story or demand a thorough independent well funded investigation.
Not to mention the concrete solid incontrovertible facts that no one lost their job and some of those who did the worst job were promoted soon after 9/11.
In a sane world more interested in justice for the victims than protecting the careers and good name of those in positions of power and our own fragile world view that would be enough in and of itself to warrant a new thorough independent well funded investigation. But alas we don't live in such a world.
Note: Your rant that occupied this space was deleted as I see no reason to respond to the same personal attack more than once in a thread.
I'm glad you're glad.
I guess that just goes to show that maybe not everything you've heard about "truthers" is true. I do feel it needs to be said here that you don't seem to have any problem with protecting your own paradigm by rejecting evidence about 9/11 that isn't first government approved or corporate sponsored and embracing the "mainstreamer" tactics and arguments that seek to insult and ridicule your opponent into submission. But I guess there's a little insecure liberal in all of us that lashes out when our "safe space" is being threatened.
I appreciate the prayers and I agree that compassion does indeed sometimes call for some "tough love" like telling people the truth even though they might be unable psychologically to accept it. But there's always hope and that's why I'm going to keep you in my prayers also my friend.
Who knows maybe someday the Lord will fill your heart with as much zeal to seek justice for the millions of victims of the 9/11 attacks as you have for protecting the good name and reputation of people in positions of power.
Last edited:
Look up demolitions and watch the tall buildings which are destroyed. Then look up the World Trade Towers collapse and watch a view which shows the entire building (either of t hem) and watch how there is no smoke the bottom as the collapse begins, unlike the demolished buildings.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Notice the absence of smoke at the bottom of the building in the second video? Also note in the second video the debris fall straight down instead of being violently ejected laterally (600 feet) as we see happening in the videos of WTC 1 and 2. Also note how the debris (concrete) isn't pulverized into fine dust but hit the ground in rather large chunks.
Molten steel? What molten steel?
Last edited:
Zaac
Well-Known Member
There are different implosion techniques where you don't have to use explosives to blow out the bottom support. You can blow out the mid supports and collapse the floors above and then gravity brings down the rest of the buildings.
But if I'm not mistaken, there were plenty of first hand reports about underground explosions
Zaac
Well-Known Member
You beat me too it poncho. The demolition company I worked with was friends with the Loizeaux family. They do quite a bit of the large implosions around the country. Got to see a few of the top down implosions performed.
Watch the collapse starting at 3:00 here:
There is no smoke or other sign of an explosion at the bottom. As for any supposed "first hand reports of underground explosions," by whom and where were they? When Walter Lord interviewed Titanic survivors before publishing his 1955 book, most of them who got into the lifeboats claimed they were in the last one launched, which was not possible. That's how much competence is in "first hand reports" of people in emergency situations. [Puncho, what's you theory of who conspired to sink the Titanic?]
There is no smoke or other sign of an explosion at the bottom. As for any supposed "first hand reports of underground explosions," by whom and where were they? When Walter Lord interviewed Titanic survivors before publishing his 1955 book, most of them who got into the lifeboats claimed they were in the last one launched, which was not possible. That's how much competence is in "first hand reports" of people in emergency situations. [Puncho, what's you theory of who conspired to sink the Titanic?]