God how I LOVE it when you make your own argument against yourself. You just said that c4 burns, autoignition is burning, not exploding. Thanks for making my point even stronger. Hell this is easy, I really just gotta let you guys argue against yourselves, you make statements that totally contradict your earlier posts. Oh and you know absolutely NOTHING about explosives. you probably can't even tell me how you make c4 explode. Hint: there is no fire involved.c'mon Im sure you can read some wikipedia or something and come back with yet another failed attempt to explain your theory. You also said that you could find me buildings that fell into themselves, but you haven't backed up anything you say with anything
resembling facts.

Here is a definition for autoignition, just so you don't try to erroneously use it again sometime in a conversation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature

__________________
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself.

There is fire involved. Heat and concussion. Either by electronic or conventional black powder. Shock, and heat, go boom. I would think a munitions expert such as yourself would know that...

You understand the difference between making a declarative statement and and interrogative one? I asked for someone to let me know something I was clearly unaware of. You make it out like I stated it wasn't possible. I asked. Let me demonstrate.

"Can someone tell me an ordinance that does not explode in an inferno?"
Question. Cannot be correct or incorrect.

"Hint: There is no fire involved"
Statement. An incorrect one.

Glad I could clear that up for you. So are you going with C4 or thermite?


You were correct and I concede the notion that fire alone will not do it... which was my original IMPLICIT assertion. I am big on intellectual honesty, and it was my misunderstanding that intense fire alone will do the trick.

However a jet ramming into it will.

Don't remember saying that... but here.

http://www.kmov.com/video/topvideo-i...ml?nvid=344558

Just curious... have you ever been to a controlled demo? I remember it being very loud. Gargantuan booms heard for miles.

Since you are the resident munitions expert... what explosive, in tons, which is capable of bringing that building down doesn't make any noise or flash?




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wfpRO9bTfo

Does that look like it is falling at the rate of gravity into its own footprint? Eerie innit?

LOL and THEN you link buildings that aren't even steel reinforced, both of your links are of small( less than 10 stories) masonry (brick) buildings. There is no resemblence to a 47 story steel structure, like comparing apples and screwdrivers. So far you have proven my point even more..thanks

Oh and the second link doesn't look like free fall to me, looks like there is some resistance there as you can plainly see the whole building doesn't fall straight down, not in either of your links. Pure rubbish. You might wanna stop before the hole you have been digging for yourself gets too deep to climb out of. Olosto learned this point a few posts ago.

Your right I am a munitions expert, I was a combat engineer in the Govt service and have blown up many things with many different types of explosives. Wanna know what kind of item can cut through steel and weaken a building so severely and it does not go boom? Its called Thermite and its extremely easy to make out of totally easy to get and LEGAL supplies. Hell I can make Thermite in my garage, its very easy to do, just need rust and aluminum and a small piece of magnesium to get the process to start. You should look into it sometime and learn something new today.

Heat is not fire, if it were, your stove would have flames coming out of it when you cooked, cuz like you said heat is fire. Now my stove has these hot glowing electrically operated coils in it, there is never a fire.


One more thing, if you watch the videos you can CLEARLY hear the explosions go off before the building starts to blow, also you forgot about all the people that swear they heard explosions before the buildings fell. Not to mention the Janitor guy Rodriguez who was the only survivor and he clearly states that there were explosions even before the plane hit.

__________________
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself.

So now your saying that there were explosives inside that were activated by a Jet hitting it with concussive force and the flames from the ensuing burn of the fuel? cuz if you are I'm not really sure what your arguing about, cuz basically your agreeing that the buildings were blown up.

FWIW It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong..+rep to you for that.

edit: I can't +rep you cuz i +repped you earlier on a different post, just imagine I gave it to you for now while I go find others worthy of praise.

__________________
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself.

I didn't realize that was the task assigned. I thought I was asked to show a building dropping in its own footprint naturally.

I have demonstrated that a car fire can weaken and collapse steel structures MUCH larger than the beams in the WTC.

I guess... I don't have any motivation to believe that which I believe and am trying to demonstrate. I don't mind digging a hole. If I am wrong... this is the only way I am going to noodle it. I am ok with the hole. I still haven't seen, in all this time (now granted I haven't argued this topic in YEARS so there are new things I am finding) which convinces me otherwise.

I addressed the ingredients of thermite a few posts ago. I know how it works. Show me a precision demo with thermite. Show me a drop of something big with thermite. It is my understanding (still not any maner of expert to be sure) that they use thermite to cut beams etc... they use munitions to drop. If I am incorrect, please show me. Frankly... all I know about explosives I learned from shooting eggs... lol

So fire doesn't create heat? I thought I said heat and concussion. A traditional blasting cap, as I am sure you know, uses black powder to create both conditions... without the fire it would not go. It seems like splitting hairs... but I will take it on your word that you knew that. I am frankly willing to just consider you an expert on the subject at face value. You certainly seem more educated in the subject than I, so I will, frankly, defer to your judgment on such, unless something just sounds wrong and I will look it up.

How does that work? How many people were in that building? One janitor hears explosions?

Are we now throwing out the thermite theory and going back to more typical ordinance? I just want to be clear.

I am saying if there WERE ordinance like C4, a lot of it would have gone off during the impacts it seems to me. You tell me.

Also if it was demo, somehow they were able to start the demo at the exact floors where the plane hit, because if you notice it, collappes at the point where the plane hit it. explain that

__________________

I have never seen a building demo'd top down and have no idea what it would do/look like... so I didn't bring that up.

The C4 won't ignite without high high energy imparted on it like a plane slamming into a building would do it. C4 is remarkably stable. It was used in Vietnam to cook MRE's. Just ignite the C4 and it makes a great little fire that lasts a while.

The point is that thousands of tons of explosives would be needed and there is just no way to rig those buildings with that amount of explosives period. If people wanna argue that fine but unless you show me conclusive proof, your just a nutjob.

Anyone ever work with thermite? Its a powder that is left open to the air for oxygen for the reaction. If a building were impacted my a plane, how are these delicate thermite casings going to stay put and actually work? No, if you look at a real demo you will see the amount of ground work it takes. Its just not possible

I rather be a jackass than a dumbass ... you should have pointed out the story was further down the page. But you still are showing a bridge that is made mostly of concrete with steel inside ... no where near the thickness of the steel used in those skyscrapers ... and the whole bridge didn't collapse ... only a section. Like with those buildings you posted collapsing ... it's not the same. They are constructed differently than those skyscapers ...


Folks this is the typical bushwhack response when ever they can't refute the evidence ... they claim the source isn't "credible" or "recognized" ... he can't say why they are not "credible" or "recognized" other than claiming that their some "basements blogging" ... notice since he has no way to refute Mr. Gage ... or any of those high ranking officials I posted that don't buy the "official story" he has to resort to ridicule ... notice the pretty picture? The best argument he can give is to show a guy with a tin hat ... now isn't that special?

Nope ... I simply proved that you said what you said ... nothing more.
Now notice here folks how he does that bushwhack spin a round ... keeps stating I'm wrong ... but has offered nothing to prove it. That's how they operate when they can't dispute the facts ... side step ... project own short coming to others ... and the turn around spin.

Oh no ... if a plane comes to close to a secure building like the pentagon or the WH jets are called in and in a hurry.
Check it out folks it's standard procedure ...
Private Plane Flew Too Close To The White House
...and as per standard operating procedure:
The fighters were scrambled from nearby Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland
and they intercepted the plane, escorting it out of the area, she said. Cessna 182 Flew Too Close To The White House...and as per standard operating procedure:
At 8:03 p.m., controllers were told that NORAD had scrambled
the two F-16's from the 113th Air Wing at Andrews

Bwaa ha ha ha ... folks this is an excellent example of when the bushwhack can't dispute the evidence with evidences of their own they simply claim the messenger is a liar! Bwaa ha ha ha ... doesn't say why they are lairs ... or what part of the 7 min video is a lie ... as you can see in my posts I've asked him several times to explain ... but instead he simply states that they are liars ... wow ... let give him a hand ladies and gentlemen for his brillant debating skills

You noticed how the bushwhack will lie ... then say ...no I didn't ... you did ... so what about the PM evidence? You still claim it to be credible? I address that in the 390 post ... the bullshit about Ashcoft was address ... the double talk about the bridge ... NORAD ... I could go on an on but all you folks have to do is check it out for yourselves if you haven't already.


Here's another bushwhacked ploy folks ... since he can't dispute any of the evidence he pretends that I can't speak the language ... yeah ... that really proves the information I've provide is wrong pretty pathetic in his spin attempt ... they follow the same MO ... if they don't have the facts ... make shit up and if that doesn't work ... project their short comings unto the opponet ... side step as much as possible ... you'd seen it in several of his posts ... "I'll answer your question when you answer mine" that sort of thing. It's like when "Bert" in the sitcom "Soap" thought he could make himself invisible and no one could see him ... that's how the bushwhack are. They snap their fingers and pretend that their bullshit is invisible ... but guys ... we can see you ... and your bullshit ... They really believe if they say it enough people will accept it as fact. They figure if corporate media and faux news can do it so can they ... but I keep telling them that don't fly here ... but they just have a problem believing that ... so I simply must keep using them as a clear example of how stupid their mindset can be.

See ... even though the proof is there in the posts ... they pretend it's not ... even though we've all seen it ... they pretend we did not ...

Here again he can't address the facts ... even in one 7 min. video ... he can't do that ... so since he can't he comes back to me and how I can "barely post" ... repeats again how he has address everything even though he hasn't ... then he attacks the messengers as "wing-nuts" ... never tells us why they are or what they said to make them that way ... only that they are ... see how they work folks when they don't have the facts to back them? Just spin, deny, and attack the messengers ... that really all they have ...notice that their leaders do that to on corporate media ...

Here again folks his focus is on me ... not Gage or the information he presented ... now he believes he can read my mind ... isn't is neat how they do the side stepping ... you know that's what they are going to do ... yet they continue to do it ... Bwaa, ha ha ha ... I love this guy!

See back to me again. I'm a "wackjob" ... I have an "attitude and problems with authority" ... that how the bushwhack and their leader operate folks. If you can't dispute the facts ... spin, attack the mesenger, and pretend they won the debate.

I would think it would distress you to have someone young kick your ass with facts and evidence. Perhaps you enjoy things like that ...


Ladies and gentlemen it's the famous bushwhack talking point "I can't prove a negative" ... let give the boy another hand


We have shown you proof ... back on page 19 ... and I believe page 34 I have pictures of the steel beams from the tower with precision cuts ... it's not our problem that you can't comprehend the obvious ...
I thought your wife told you to leave us alone ... bwaa ha ha ha!
Uncle Mike will be on the air soon so I'm going to grab some chow watch a great musical ... "Kiss Me Kate" ... then check out the rest of Uncle Mike on line.

Have a good one people ... some em' if you got em'

__________________
Our Beautiful Ladies ...
Keep Them Safe Keep Them SECRET!
911 ... inside job!