Lucky you!
I have too much free time just now and can reply at length, and will.
On Jun 28, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
I'm with Dan on this one (!). That a fully-loaded 737 can cause, after
impact, buildings to fall down is not even remotely shocking.
This is an aircraft that carries enough jet fuel to cover a football
field to the depth of one foot with highly combustible fluid (do the
math; check me -- this is what I recall from working out the figs
myself about four years ago). What's amazing, in this light, is that
the buildings didn't fall before they did.
I'll call your bull-shite and raise you a sobering reality check.
I suggest you follow the writings/speeches of one Kevin Ryan, formerly
of Underwriters Labs who did the testing first on original steel 40
years ago and then the debris brought them by our betters in GovCo.
Not only was the building overbuilt - it one industry awrds at the time
for superior construction by the structural engineer, John Skilling.
To the point, this steel was simply NOT heated to the point of
deformity. Most of this fuel was ejected out the other side of WTC2,
yet it fell first!?!
What's more, the paint samples provided to prove this case simply could
not do so: they did not even make 500° - which is consistent with the
paper and furniture burning scenarios that had nearly burned themselves
out when the buildings collapsed. In fact, firemen who had climbed all
those stairs had even called down saying they could easily get them
{can't recall which building this was} under control! Steel buildings
have raged with larger infernos and burned 24 hours - yet no
collapse... again, this is apparently the ONLY time in recorded history
such a fire-collapse occurred.
One by one, this Kevin Ryan began to see rationale after hypothesis
after implausible assertions promulgated only to fall over in the light
of scientific investigation. To the point where John Skilling, the
structural engineer who designed this building, was demoted to
"anonymous" commentor on how the structure should not have fallen -
hardly the respect, or authority, one should afford such a prominant
figure in this project. Mr Ryan was fired from his leadership position
at safety-centric Underwriters Labs for simply raising questions about
the anomalies.
Here's the internal memo he sent to the CEO and got him fired:
http://www.rense.com/general59/ul.htm
Here's an hour long interview that highlights some interesting events
and results:
http://www.kpfa.org/cgi-bin/gen-mpegurl.m3u?
server=157.22.130.4&port=80&file=dummy.m3u&mount=/data/20060614-
Wed1300.mp3
As to the "thermate" idea: Sorry. Bullshit. If there were explosives
in the WTC, they were probably there illicitly, not planted as part of
a larger plot. Recall these were buildings housing hundreds of
businesses, not all of them necessarily wholly legit. (And, frankly,
the words of "a BYU scientist" are not enough to sway me. It was "a
BYU scientist" who claimed cold fusion was a reality back in the 80s.)
And even if there were explosives strapped to the structure, so what?
All that would show is that the conspiracy *among the Islamic
fundamentalists* was well-developed, to the point they were willing to
plant charges to ensure destruction. We knew they were
well-coordinated already. So what's the rhetorical point?
(Sorry, Rob.)
Excuse me while your statement peaks the ridicul-o-meter - a device to
measure things of a ridiculous nature. I understand the resistance to
face these facts, but sticking ones' head in the sand leaves one's
posterior rather exposed.
Pray tell, just how would *islamic terrorists* get routine access for
the extended periods needed to plant such charges? Did these crafty
fanatics really orchestrate the unusual and multi-week safety "drills"
that emptied out sections of the buildings leading up to the event?
Are you claiming that multiple business fronts were there to allow
access to detonators and these offices were neatly spaced such that
these explosions left steel beams no longer than 30ft - just the size
to be relatively quickly carted off by long-haul rigs? And somehow the
ownership, management, finances of these business could then not be
traced by this NSA-centric administration? Or, maybe you would be less
certain and downright uncomfortable knowing GwB's cousin was running
the security of those buildings - a tenure that ended days before this
event occurred?
Granted, this Brin-list is drawn from people with a stronger than usual
interest in fantastic leaps of imagination, but it appears we are
actually firmly in the reality-based community and hold scientific
rigor with more value than other quarters. If your not comfy with
BYU-centric scientists, perhaps a wider net of logical, questioning,
intelligent minds from the 911 Scholars for Truth might not be as
dismissible as the character dissections of Dr Jones you fling about.
http://www.st911.org/
- Jonathan Gibson -
www.formandfunction.com/word
BTW - I thought the unique thing about American culture is the
acceptance of remaking oneself and starting anew held value... seems
some like to toss babies out with bathwater...
Warren, a reasonable question: what's your test-tube credibility?
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
