Why The Physics Community Is A Historical Laughing Stock

We just enjoy the entertainment of kooks like yourself foaming at the
mouth......as you have just done here.

"The Last One In" wrote in message
...
YOU SHILLS SURE LIKE TO TALK TO YOURSELVES ALOT.

THIS IS LIKE A SHILL MASTURBATORY THREAD YOU EACH LUBE UP THE OTHER
COCK-A-MAMIE SHILL EXCUSE TILL YOU ALL EXPLODE IN A SHOWER OF SHILL GOO.

TOO FUNNY
"animal" wrote in message
...

John P. wrote:
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message

An examination of this video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
reveals that the collapse of WTC 7 started at second 17 and completed
at second 23. That is a total of 6 seconds.
snip

Although visual evidence proves otherwise. It is only through the intellect
of a 10 year old that one arrives at erroneous conclusions.

No minor fires can do that, _ONLY_ synchronized explosions can.

Major fires obviously can do it. The lack of any explosions - visual or
audio, indicates any theory suggesting explosives were used is without
merit.

I call forum members' attention to the Scholars for 911 truth website
at:

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org

Bob Fritzius

In article ,
says...
YOU SHILLS SURE LIKE TO TALK TO YOURSELVES ALOT.

THIS IS LIKE A SHILL MASTURBATORY THREAD YOU EACH LUBE UP THE OTHER
COCK-A-MAMIE SHILL EXCUSE TILL YOU ALL EXPLODE IN A SHOWER OF SHILL GOO.

TOO FUNNY
"animal" wrote in message
...




LOL, so how many cups of foam were produced today?

I like an all caps rant, it takes it one notch up on the kookscale.

I'll give you an 8 on it.

BDK

wrote in a message

Major fires obviously can do it. The lack of any explosions - visual or
audio, indicates any theory suggesting explosives were used is without
merit.

I call forum members' attention to the Scholars for 911 truth website
at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org

Been there. Watched them on C-Span.

It was funny the first few times, but the jokes there have run their course
and no longer amuse me.

Do yourself a favor and look at the members of the Scholars for 9/11 truth.
Count how many engineers are in that group. Look at all of their degrees and
ask yourself how that knowledge might help them to provide any type of
expert opinion on the topics at hand.

John P. wrote:
wrote in a message

Major fires obviously can do it. The lack of any explosions - visual or
audio, indicates any theory suggesting explosives were used is without
merit.

I call forum members' attention to the Scholars for 911 truth website
at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org

Been there. Watched them on C-Span.

It was funny the first few times, but the jokes there have run their course
and no longer amuse me.

Do yourself a favor and look at the members of the Scholars for 9/11 truth.
Count how many engineers are in that group. Look at all of their degrees and
ask yourself how that knowledge might help them to provide any type of
expert opinion on the topics at hand.

John,

I did that!

Scholars for 911 truth currently has 78 full members (FM) (that's
people with PhDs or academic positions, etc.) and 156 associate
members (AM).

Here's a summary of the names I found. (This list has more
professions than engineers, but forum members should be able
to see how these people's expertise might be relevant to the
WTC "incident."

The list itself is at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html

Architects (FM) - Elden
Architects (AM) - Ashley Douglas

Aviation/Aeronautics (AM) Herbst Stanish

Construction/Demolition (AM) Witham

Criminal Justice (FM) - Reynolds
Criminal Justice (AM) - Mitchell

Engineers (FM) - Blevins Griscom Petit Wood

Engineers (AM) - Bilk Columbo Duncan Fritzius Funk Gallagher Jerdoman
Knudson Landis Maguire Masden Mayeux Monaghan Moskin Muga Oliver
Pritchard Ross Schmidt Wickstrom Winfrey Wrenn

Former Military (FM) - Bowman Fetzer Nelson
Former Military (AM) - Fikes Gass Razer

Intelligence/Defense (FM) - Andregg Buelow Zeigler
Intelligence/Defense (AM) - Gibswon Madsen

Industrial (AM) - Guerard Hastings

Mathematicians (AM) - Boyer Dewney Henry
Mathematicians (AM) - Dombrowski Gerst Holwell Howard

Physicists (FM) - Farrer Grimmer Johnson Jones
Physicists (AM) - Carmen Dudzik Fenton Hull Larres Meyer Mitrzyk Newton

16 full members, 21 percent of total
46 associate members, 29 percent of total

Bob Fritzius

On 6 Aug 2006 05:52:11 -0700, "
wrote:

John P. wrote:
wrote in a message

Major fires obviously can do it. The lack of any explosions - visual or
audio, indicates any theory suggesting explosives were used is without
merit.

I call forum members' attention to the Scholars for 911 truth website
at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org

Been there. Watched them on C-Span.

It was funny the first few times, but the jokes there have run their course
and no longer amuse me.

Do yourself a favor and look at the members of the Scholars for 9/11 truth.
Count how many engineers are in that group. Look at all of their degrees and
ask yourself how that knowledge might help them to provide any type of
expert opinion on the topics at hand.

John,

I did that!

Scholars for 911 truth currently has 78 full members (FM) (that's
people with PhDs or academic positions, etc.) and 156 associate
members (AM).

Here's a summary of the names I found. (This list has more
professions than engineers, but forum members should be able
to see how these people's expertise might be relevant to the
WTC "incident."

The list itself is at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html

Architects (FM) - Elden

And what exactly is an "Architect, Communicator"?

Architects (AM) - Ashley Douglas

It's Eric Douglas and he's a proven conspiracy wacko.

Aviation/Aeronautics (AM) Herbst Stanish

Construction/Demolition (AM) Witham

Criminal Justice (FM) - Reynolds
Criminal Justice (AM) - Mitchell

Engineers (FM) - Blevins Griscom Petit Wood

Engineers (AM) - Bilk Columbo Duncan Fritzius Funk Gallagher Jerdoman
Knudson Landis Maguire Masden Mayeux Monaghan Moskin Muga Oliver
Pritchard Ross Schmidt Wickstrom Winfrey Wrenn

Former Military (FM) - Bowman Fetzer Nelson
Former Military (AM) - Fikes Gass Razer

Intelligence/Defense (FM) - Andregg Buelow Zeigler
Intelligence/Defense (AM) - Gibswon Madsen

Industrial (AM) - Guerard Hastings

Mathematicians (AM) - Boyer Dewney Henry
Mathematicians (AM) - Dombrowski Gerst Holwell Howard

Physicists (FM) - Farrer Grimmer Johnson Jones
Physicists (AM) - Carmen Dudzik Fenton Hull Larres Meyer Mitrzyk Newton

16 full members, 21 percent of total
46 associate members, 29 percent of total

Bob Fritzius

wrote in a message

Do yourself a favor and look at the members of the Scholars for 9/11
truth.
Count how many engineers are in that group. Look at all of their degrees
and
ask yourself how that knowledge might help them to provide any type of
expert opinion on the topics at hand.

John,

I did that!
Scholars for 911 truth currently has 78 full members (FM) (that's
people with PhDs or academic positions, etc.) and 156 associate
members (AM).

Here's a summary of the names I found. (This list has more
professions than engineers, but forum members should be able
to see how these people's expertise might be relevant to the
WTC "incident."

The list itself is at:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html

Architects (FM) - Elden

Tom Eldon earned his Bachelors degree from Carnegie Melon University.... in
Photography.

Architects (AM) - Ashley Douglas

Neither has a degree in architectural Engineering

Construction/Demolition (AM) Witham

No info found to confirm or deny his credentials in this area.

Engineers (FM) - Blevins Griscom Petit Wood

Blevins - Bioengineering
Griscom - Physics and engineering of Optical Materials
Petit - Aeronautics, astrophysics, engineering
Wood - Civil and Structural Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, Materials
Engineering Science, Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University

OK... good work. It would seem there *are* some people with relevant degrees
that have joined the SFT movement.

I was wrong.

.... and I'd further agree with you that there are some seemingly unrelated
degrees that could be relevant - such as photography (for analyzing
photographic evidence)

Perhaps those with relevant degrees will help the rest of the group grasp
some of their more obvious errors.

John P. avait soumis l'idée :
"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message

An examination of this video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
reveals that the collapse of WTC 7 started at second 17 and completedat
second 23. That is a total of 6 seconds.

Funny how a 6 second clip of the collapse shows the collapse taking 6
seconds. Of course, if you watch the entire collapse, from the beginning,
when the mechanical penthouse falls into the building, then you find it
actually tool at least 13 seconds.

http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c2...NewsReport.flv

WTC 7 collapse starts at about 3:24 and ends around 3:37. 13 seconds.

lol sorry, 3:32 to 3:38.
Cant stay it starts to collapse at 3:24. Although there is some
movement at 3:24, it is followed by 8 seconds of nothing. The fall
starts at 3:32 allright and ends at 3:38. Your vid proves the point you
wish to counter.

It can be easily shown that this building collapsed in the same time it
would take an apple to fall from the roof of this building and hit the
ground - a freefall.

It can be easily shown... but, we're looking for it to be accurately shown.
If the latter is done, you get 13 seconds and nothing near free fall speed.


The 10 year old intellect can easily deduce then that WTC 7 must've
freefallen, further deducing that the ENTIRE STRUCTURE MUST'VE
COLLAPSED SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Although visual evidence proves otherwise.

or blindness caused by belief. your vid shows a building standing until
3:32 when it starts tumbling down at freefall speed according to the
calc above.

It is only through the intellect
of a 10 year old that one arrives at erroneous conclusions.

No minor fires can do that, _ONLY_ synchronized explosions can.

Major fires obviously can do it. The lack of any explosions - visual or
audio, indicates any theory suggesting explosives were used is without merit.

Vandar avait énoncé :
wrote:

Vandar wrote:

Schoenfeld wrote:


John P. wrote:


"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message



An examination of this video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
reveals that the collapse of WTC 7 started at second 17 and completedat
second 23. That is a total of 6 seconds.

Funny how a 6 second clip of the collapse shows the collapse taking 6
seconds. Of course, if you watch the entire collapse, from the beginning,
when the mechanical penthouse falls into the building, then you find it
actually tool at least 13 seconds.


Denying reality won't make it go away.

Don't let that stop you.


Your link does not work for me, and here is ANOTHER showing 6 second
collapse (use sound for precision timing).

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...88991907845273

And here's one showing the 13 second collapse John referred to:
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/...html#building7
You want the one titled "CBS video of Building 7 collapse".


Rather than finding refuge in fantasy, bother to examine that video you
cite and and observe the 6 second freefall collapse, just like the
other videos show, just like controlled demolition predicts.

So you plan to just ignore the penthouse collapse repeat the same **** over
again?

penthousE? that's the tiny bit from the top that moves 8 seconds before
the building starts collapsing for real?
lol
you guys are real believers

quintal wrote:

Vandar avait énoncé :

wrote:

Vandar wrote:

Schoenfeld wrote:


John P. wrote:


"Schoenfeld" wrote in a message



An examination of this video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
reveals that the collapse of WTC 7 started at second 17 and
completedat
second 23. That is a total of 6 seconds.


Funny how a 6 second clip of the collapse shows the collapse taking 6
seconds. Of course, if you watch the entire collapse, from the
beginning,
when the mechanical penthouse falls into the building, then you
find it
actually tool at least 13 seconds.



Denying reality won't make it go away.


Don't let that stop you.


Your link does not work for me, and here is ANOTHER showing 6 second
collapse (use sound for precision timing).

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...88991907845273


And here's one showing the 13 second collapse John referred to:
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/...html#building7
You want the one titled "CBS video of Building 7 collapse".



Rather than finding refuge in fantasy, bother to examine that video you
cite and and observe the 6 second freefall collapse, just like the
other videos show, just like controlled demolition predicts.


So you plan to just ignore the penthouse collapse repeat the same ****
over again?


penthousE? that's the tiny bit from the top that moves 8 seconds before
the building starts collapsing for real?

Yes. What do you think a structure on the roof of a building is called?
That "tiny bit" wasn't that tiny.