.jpg)
"They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening."
-- George Orwell, 1984
-- George Orwell, 1984
I know I said that I was going to do a Weekly (C)Wrap-Up! but I got into a little 911 discussion with a friend and he seemed to get a little upset. He also pointed out something that I hadn't quite thought of before but I am going to leave that for a little later. First things first! I get a little pissed off when folks just dismiss what I am saying without first checking the evidence that I present. Nothing is more discouraging than doing some research presenting that research and have it ridiculed by someone who calls themselves a truthseeker who then refuses to look at the evidence that clearly refutes what he/she is saying. It is just like trying to talk rationally to Christians about Jeezus. They swear the bible is the word of god and not some men. Just like the truth movement is locked into the "official theory" and it's god Jones, but this is my crap and I am digesting...
If you haven't heard NIST just released it's final report on what happened to WTC 7 after 3 years of bullshitting and stalling. From WTC NIST.gov:
I highlighted the last part because that is what my most recent argument started with. There are no pictures or other evidence that show any proof of "rivers of molten steel"! NONE! Where was all of this molten steel and why didn't they get any evidence of it?!
The major thrust of my buddy's argument was the fact that 144 firefighters said they saw molten steel "running like lava down the channel rails", and they might have but I think a lot of it was suggestion more than 144 individuals actually seeing the molten metal, maybe they saw "glowing or rapidly oxidizing metal" or again the official line that was there were hot spots weeks after 911 was repeated so much that like everything else after a while it just becomes the truth...Speaking of those hot spots...From Check the Evidence .com
and here is the kicker:
Now this is the point where I correct my own mistake! A big part of my argument was this pic:
It was/is my contention that the above pic could not be firefighter's or “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”. The first line of reasoning is that if this was the hot core and molten steel was in the hole, the guy who is standing inside the hole had to be very uncomfortable to say the least and all the guy's that were looking in would have had their faces melted off. I went and did some more research and found the real explanation for the pic and Dr. Jones was way off and I had been lax in my research...From CheckTheEvidence.com:
It should be noted that there are NO pictures whatsoever of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.
If the ground is as hot as Dr. Jones and others have tried to contend then wouldn't the workers be melting from the steam?! Notice the orange "smoke" rising up? Hmmmm, the only thing that makes fumes like that are chemical fires!
Hmmmmm, seems the great Dr. Jones is not infallible and not above fudging a little of the details to fit his theory!
Another part of the argument which caused my buddy to say some kinda hurtful stuff about the evidence I presented and I am not mad at him or anything just a little disapponted and saddened that he has closed his mind to the real truth because he is determined that the "truth movements" theory is the only one and all else must be ludicrous, backed-up with voodoo science and/or me trying to make a name for myself. That part made me laugh. Why would I purposefully subject myself to this kind of abuse and ridicule if I didn't believe what I was saying and could back it up with real science not opinion and feelings or some lame explanations that wouldn't hold up in Peoples Court let alone any Federal court...
Here is some more evidence that my buddy called bullshit when I tried to explain that the cranes actually pulling the hot or molten metal out of the ground would not work in those conditions and I was referring to the following "cheeto pick" as Dr. Judy Wood put it...
Notice the thing that looks like a cheeto on the left hand side laying in the rubble. More of that oxidation or molecular dissociation in my opinion and lots of others that think outside the structure of some man or "official" story. Now the explanation I tried to use for this pic is the fact that whatever that crane is hoisting cannot be molten metal or that the machine could not even be sitting above temperatures that some claim reached 2700 degrees in some spots weeks after 911 and it is simply because it would not perform properly. From The Journal of 911 Research (drjudywood.com):
Dr. Jones claims that the temps of the slag in the pic with the crane hoisting the "molten steel" had to be about 846c according to the color of the slag, but...From CheckTheEvidence.Com:
Imma leave the rest for my next couple of videos especially the toasted cars almost a mile away from Ground Zero thingy. If you think that thermite or explosions alone, and planes were used that day you really need to wake up and stop leaving the evidence to be deciphered in someone else's mind but your own!
Explain these pics?!
Why did the front of these two vehicles burn and the backs where the gas tanks are, are intact? Look at the holes in the metal of the truck on the right. What caused that?
Why dosn't the paper all around the burning car burn?
Toasted cars at the Pentagon too and we all know a plane hit that building /snark!
You still think planes, jet fuel and some thermate did all this damage?! Over 7 blocks away in some of these pics? Yeah and I got a bridge in Brooklyn I am trying to sell! They hit us with some kind of new shit. Those towers both imploded and exploded at the same time, while cars seven blocks away burst into spontaneous flames and other anomalies! WAKE UP!
I have said it before and I will say it again, "arguing with those 911 truth movement guy's" is like arguing with Christians about Jeezus which brings me to my final point that I alluded to earlier and that I almost forgot to add. My friend I was having this discussion with said something about the 911 truth movement being christians and that is why I have a problem with them. To be totally honest that never crossed my mind but now that he brought it up and I think about it more that is just another reason not to trust the thought processes and reasoning of these people. These are the same folks that believe in Intelligent Design and Falling, the flat earth, the young earth, Adam and Eve and the talking snake and God wrote the bible. Didn't the neo-clowns hi-jack the religious cults in Amerika with all that Faith Based Initiatves crap?!?
What caused the big ass circular holes in WTC 5 and 6?
Science Says It's Impossible & So Do I
10-acious_D
The New Defenders Of The Truth & Nothing But...
If you haven't heard NIST just released it's final report on what happened to WTC 7 after 3 years of bullshitting and stalling. From WTC NIST.gov:
In response to the WTC tragedy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology conducted a 3-year building and fire safety investigation to study the factors contributing to the probable cause (or causes) of post-impact collapse of the WTC Towers (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7; expanded its research in areas of high-priority need such as prevention of progressive collapse, fire resistance design and retrofit of structures, and fire resistive coatings for structural steel; and is reaching out to the building and fire safety communities to pave the way for timely, expedited considerations of recommendations stemming from the investigation. MORE (if you can stomach it)!The newNIST official explanation from Raw Story...Wait for it...
According to a federal agency report released Thursday, a "new phenomenon" known as thermal expansion was directly responsible for the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7 on Sept. 11, 2001. (my emphasis)
This study, posed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology -- a federal scientific agency which promotes technical industrial standards -- marks the first 'official' government theory on the collapse.
The building's demise occurred some seven hours after the twin towers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, and has been the source of numerous conspiracy theories key to the "9/11 Truth" movement, most of which argue that the symmetrical, seven-second collapse was brought about by a controlled demolition.
Dr. Shyam Sunder, director of Institute's building and fire research laboratory, oversaw the government's three-year research efforts. The report aims to disprove the controlled demolition argument.
However, Richard Gage, founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a member of the American Institute of Architects, doesn't believe a word of the theory.
His group, which has swelled to over 400 architectural and engineering professionals, immediately responded to the Institute's claim in a press conference.
"Tons of [molten metal] was found 21 days after the attack," said Gage in an interview with a Vancouver, Canada television station. "Steel doesn't begin to melt until 2,700 degrees, which is much hotter than what these fires could have caused." MORE!
I highlighted the last part because that is what my most recent argument started with. There are no pictures or other evidence that show any proof of "rivers of molten steel"! NONE! Where was all of this molten steel and why didn't they get any evidence of it?!
The major thrust of my buddy's argument was the fact that 144 firefighters said they saw molten steel "running like lava down the channel rails", and they might have but I think a lot of it was suggestion more than 144 individuals actually seeing the molten metal, maybe they saw "glowing or rapidly oxidizing metal" or again the official line that was there were hot spots weeks after 911 was repeated so much that like everything else after a while it just becomes the truth...Speaking of those hot spots...From Check the Evidence .com
Assuming the official government thermal maps to be authentic, we know most of the molten metal disappeared less than two weeks after 9/11.
However, the US government thermal map images are likely doctored. As Dr Wood shows here and here, Zone F is the same area as this empty, damp hole in a FEMA picture filed 9/18/01. Where's the molten metal?
*Eyewitnesses / Statements*
Leslie Robertson - Structural Engineer / Designer of WTC:
On the Structural Engineers Association of Utah’s website, James Williams (SEAU President) described what Robertson said at an October 2001 conference: “as of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running”.
Robertson received millions of taxpayer dollars and could be considered a member of the Global Elite. Who do the Global Elite represent, us or themselves?
William Langewiesche - Only Journalist to Have Unrestricted Access to Ground Zero During Cleanup:
In his book “American Ground”, Langewiesche said: “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.”
Did Langewiesche see this molten metal himself, or is he repeating statements from others? Do the 9/11 perpetrators control the information the media puts out?
Ron Burger - Public Health Advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:
The National Environmental Health Association’s paper “Messages in the Dust” quotes Burger: “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helens and the thousands who fled that disaster.”
Burger is on a government payroll. Is he trustworthy? Burger’s statement was published in a government document. Is it trustworthy?
Ken Holden - Involved in Organizing Ground Zero Cleanup:
The 9/11 Commission Report quotes Holden: “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6."
Holden is on a government payroll and helped organize the cleanup of an inside job terrorist attack. Is he trustworthy? Is the 9/11 Commission Report trustworthy, or is it propaganda?
Guy Lounsbury - Member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing:
National Guard Magazine article written by Lounsbury (excerpt): “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.”
If the temperature was hot enough to melt the firefighters’ boots,
their feet would have been incinerated.
When water comes in contact with molten metal,
the result is a steam explosion:
Wikipedia quote (emphasis added): “A dangerous steam explosion can be created when liquid water encounters hot, molten metal. As the water explodes into steam, it splashes the burning hot liquid metal along with it, causing an extreme risk of severe burns to anyone located nearby and creating a fire hazard.”
A Google search reveals numerous government documents with warnings and safety information on this topic.
Rest assured, the Fire Department of New York knows not to spray water anywhere near molten metal!
Now this is the point where I correct my own mistake! A big part of my argument was this pic:
It was/is my contention that the above pic could not be firefighter's or “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”. The first line of reasoning is that if this was the hot core and molten steel was in the hole, the guy who is standing inside the hole had to be very uncomfortable to say the least and all the guy's that were looking in would have had their faces melted off. I went and did some more research and found the real explanation for the pic and Dr. Jones was way off and I had been lax in my research...From CheckTheEvidence.com:
This [above] image was included in Jones’ September 2006 paper with the caption “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”.
The image in Jones’ PDF (linked above) has “GEOEPOCHE 85” in the lower right corner, indicating it came from page 85 of a copy of the German magazine Geo Epoche.
Jones fails to properly source the photo. Geo Epoche is not mentioned anywhere in his paper’s references, so we don’t know what edition it came from.
However, the picture has been doctored. If the orange color was real the workers’ skin would have melted off their faces. As Dr Jim Fetzer said in comparison (paraphrased): “would you put your face over a boiling tea kettle?” That’s just a mere 212° F compared to Jones’ 1500°+ F orange image.
Here is the original photo, as archived on hereisnewyork.org. As can be seen, the workers are using search lights. They are not “peering into a hot core”:
It should be noted that there are NO pictures whatsoever of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.
If the ground is as hot as Dr. Jones and others have tried to contend then wouldn't the workers be melting from the steam?! Notice the orange "smoke" rising up? Hmmmm, the only thing that makes fumes like that are chemical fires!
Hmmmmm, seems the great Dr. Jones is not infallible and not above fudging a little of the details to fit his theory!
Another part of the argument which caused my buddy to say some kinda hurtful stuff about the evidence I presented and I am not mad at him or anything just a little disapponted and saddened that he has closed his mind to the real truth because he is determined that the "truth movements" theory is the only one and all else must be ludicrous, backed-up with voodoo science and/or me trying to make a name for myself. That part made me laugh. Why would I purposefully subject myself to this kind of abuse and ridicule if I didn't believe what I was saying and could back it up with real science not opinion and feelings or some lame explanations that wouldn't hold up in Peoples Court let alone any Federal court...
Here is some more evidence that my buddy called bullshit when I tried to explain that the cranes actually pulling the hot or molten metal out of the ground would not work in those conditions and I was referring to the following "cheeto pick" as Dr. Judy Wood put it...
Notice the thing that looks like a cheeto on the left hand side laying in the rubble. More of that oxidation or molecular dissociation in my opinion and lots of others that think outside the structure of some man or "official" story. Now the explanation I tried to use for this pic is the fact that whatever that crane is hoisting cannot be molten metal or that the machine could not even be sitting above temperatures that some claim reached 2700 degrees in some spots weeks after 911 and it is simply because it would not perform properly. From The Journal of 911 Research (drjudywood.com):
Let's take a look at what other hydraulics "experts" are saying about the operation of cranes like in the pic above and the next pic below:"Hydraulic fluid temperatures above 82°C (180ºF) damage most seal compounds and accelerate oil degradation. A single [emphasis added] overtemperature event of sufficient magnitude can permanently damage all the seals in an entire hydraulic system, resulting in numerous leaks. The by-products of thermal degradation of the oil (soft particles) can cause reliability problems such as valve-spool stiction and filter clogging."
Viscosity Value
Minimum Permissible Minimum Optimum Optimum Bearing Life Maximum Optimum Maximum Permissible Table 1. Correlation of operating viscosity values
with fluid temperature based on fluid viscosity grade
(6/16/07 accessed) Source
Dr. Jones claims that the temps of the slag in the pic with the crane hoisting the "molten steel" had to be about 846c according to the color of the slag, but...From CheckTheEvidence.Com:
Yet, mechanical engineering handbooks reveal hydraulics to fail at a fraction of the temperature of Jones’ slag:Now this is getting as long as one of them Weekly (C)Wrap-Up joints so I got one more piece of eividence that dosen't necessarily back up my conclusions and theories, but has a lot of relevence and that is this...From drjudywood.com:
Machinery Lubrication – “Hydraulic Equipment Reliability: Beyond Contamination Control”
Quote (emphasis added): “Hydraulic fluid temperatures above 82°C (180ºF) damage most seal compounds and accelerate oil degradation. A single overtemperature event of sufficient magnitude can permanently damage all the seals in an entire hydraulic system, resulting in numerous leaks. The by-products of thermal degradation of the oil (soft particles) can cause reliability problems such as valve-spool stiction and filter clogging.”
Machinery Lubrication – “ Symptoms of Common Hydraulic Problems and Their Root Causes”
Quote (emphasis added): “Fluid temperatures above 180°F (82°C) can damage seals and accelerate degradation of the fluid. This means that the operation of any hydraulic system at temperatures above 180°F is detrimental and should be avoided. Fluid temperature is too high when viscosity falls below the optimum value for the system’s components. The temperature at which this occurs is dependent on the viscosity grade of the fluid in the system and can be well below 180°F.”
Machine Design – “Predicting the life of hydraulic hose”
Quote (emphasis added): “Temperature range recommended for typical rubber hose spans about –40 to 212°F [212° F = 100° C]. Fluid or ambient temperatures outside these bounds impact service life. Plasticizers leach out of elastomers faster at high temperatures, though the rate depends on the actual temperature and duration. Heat-related failure is evident when the cover shows signs of hardening and cracking, and the hose shape takes on a permanent set.
Temperatures below recommended will also shorten service life. This problem is evident when the inner tube shows signs of stiffness and cracks. Specials are available for either extreme: Low-temperature hoses for service to –67°F and high-temperature versions for applications exceeding 300°F. [300° F = 149° C]”
Jones’ slag is over 845° C, yet hydraulic fluid systems fail above 82° C.
The recommended highest temperature for standard hydraulic rubber hoses is 100° C, with special heavy duty hoses available for temperatures above 149° C.
Given the vast temperature differences between the slag and the maximum operating temperatures for hydraulics, is it plausible for Jones’ photo to be real? The temperature of the slag is over 10 times greater than the maximum allowable temperature for hydraulic fluid systems.
Is the Next False Flag Attack on US Soil Near?
Andrew Johnson,
July 28th 2007
I write this piece having some feelings of guilt, which may seem silly or strange, but that is how I feel.
I was, on July 26th, scheduled to chat with a man called Ambrose Lane on a show called "We Ourselves", which goes out on a channel called “XM Channel 169 - The Power” ( http://www.xmradio.com/onxm/channelpage.xmc?ch=169). Ambrose has other unrelated shows on WPFW a Pacifica station covering the Washington D. C. metro area as far north as Baltimore and as far south as Richmond VA. Ambrrose's shows are archived at http://www.weourselves.org/show/index.html.
However, the call for me to go on the show on July 26th, at 8pm (BST), never came - and I wondered why. The following day, I found out. The Network "XM Channel 169" which hosted the "We Ourselves" show had cancelled it and fired the host (Ambrose Lane). This came as a shock to everyone and, as far as I know at the time of writing, XM have given Ambrose Lane no credible reason for their sudden decision.
In this article, I have tried to put together the main points that I was hoping to have discussed in the interview.
On the show, I was due to be speaking with Dr Judy Wood as well - about the latest evidence she has found which shows that an advanced but unknown type of Directed Energy Weapon was used to destroy most of the WTC complex ( http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam1.html). Over the last few months and weeks I have been in regular communication with Dr Judy Wood regarding her ongoing study and presentation of this evidence. There are a number of reasons for counting this as the strongest hypothesis - it explains the most evidence, such as:
You can see all the evidence laid out at http://www.drjudywood.com. MORE!
* Lack of large debris (most of the material the towers were made of was almost instantly "dustified," with only a few steel girders left and the steel was shipped to China statements seem to have been a cover story - as we have seen no evidence this shipping actually happened).
* Lack of molten metal (this is commonly spoken of and is mentioned in some 9/11 truth videos and testimonies, but there is no photographic evidence of its existence. Indeed, the photographs that Dr. Wood has shown us contradict the idea of its existence. For example, there is no steam explosion when rain fell on the area where molten metal was supposed to have been in the immediate period following the destruction of the WTC).
* The Bath tub was not sufficiently damaged by the enormous amount of debris which should have fallen into it and we know that Lower Manhattan was never flooded.
* Toasted Cars over a mile from the WTC.
Imma leave the rest for my next couple of videos especially the toasted cars almost a mile away from Ground Zero thingy. If you think that thermite or explosions alone, and planes were used that day you really need to wake up and stop leaving the evidence to be deciphered in someone else's mind but your own!
Explain these pics?!
 |  |
| Figure 39. Car 2723 was toasted inside and out... and then rusted. (9/12?/01) Source | Figure 40. This toasted interior of car 2723 was consumed except for the fire extinguisher. How does a car rust that fast on the inside? If it had been on fire, shouldn't we see a blackened-burned appearance? Instead, we see a tremendous amount of rust on the inside of the car. Why is that? (9/12?/01) Source: |
Why did the front of these two vehicles burn and the backs where the gas tanks are, are intact? Look at the holes in the metal of the truck on the right. What caused that?
Why dosn't the paper all around the burning car burn?
Toasted cars at the Pentagon too and we all know a plane hit that building /snark!
You still think planes, jet fuel and some thermate did all this damage?! Over 7 blocks away in some of these pics? Yeah and I got a bridge in Brooklyn I am trying to sell! They hit us with some kind of new shit. Those towers both imploded and exploded at the same time, while cars seven blocks away burst into spontaneous flames and other anomalies! WAKE UP!
I have said it before and I will say it again, "arguing with those 911 truth movement guy's" is like arguing with Christians about Jeezus which brings me to my final point that I alluded to earlier and that I almost forgot to add. My friend I was having this discussion with said something about the 911 truth movement being christians and that is why I have a problem with them. To be totally honest that never crossed my mind but now that he brought it up and I think about it more that is just another reason not to trust the thought processes and reasoning of these people. These are the same folks that believe in Intelligent Design and Falling, the flat earth, the young earth, Adam and Eve and the talking snake and God wrote the bible. Didn't the neo-clowns hi-jack the religious cults in Amerika with all that Faith Based Initiatves crap?!?
What caused the big ass circular holes in WTC 5 and 6?
Science Says It's Impossible & So Do I
10-acious_D
The New Defenders Of The Truth & Nothing But...
"Don't condescend me, man. I'll fucking kill you." -Brad Pitt as stoner -True Romance!
2 comments:
Post a Comment