RE: atheists and "conspiracy" theories
May 3, 2012 at 5:35 am
(This post was last modified: May 3, 2012 at 6:17 am by Creed of Heresy.)
(May 2, 2012 at 8:03 pm)Bgood Wrote: This is the only way the fires could have gotten hot enough to melt steel! Jet fuel on it's own would not cause skyscrapers to collapse all the way to the ground in complete rubble. Whatever you have to dispute this is B.S. that the Government is shitting out.
I. Have. Already. Refuted. This. With. Basic. Well-known. Commonly. Understood. Science. And. Fucking. Engineering.
Get. This. Shit. Through. Your. Head. I. Am. Tired. Of. Spelling. This. Out.
ONE. LAST. FUCKING. TIME.
MOLECULAR. COHERENCY. BASIC FUCKING PRECEPTS OF ATOMIC LAW. Heat = friction caused by movement. You don't need to heat steel up to a melting point IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY WEAKENED.
GOD FUCKING DAMMIT I'VE SAID THIS THREE FUCKING TIMES NOW, anyone with even the most elementary levels of knowledge in atomic process will understand this. How the fuck did you get clearance to come anywhere NEAR a multimillion dollar war machine like an F-16 when you don't even know that heat = molecular incoherency?! This is shit you learn in fucking high school science class! DID YOU NOT PASS HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE?!
Here, quit making yourself look like a mouth-breathing neanderthal and educate yourself: http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/se...ors_02.php
Quote:As temperature rises within the conductor, the vibration of the atomic structure increases, and so there are more free electrons being shaken loose from their orbits. This gives rise to more collisions with the electrons moving under the influence of the electric potential, making the flow of electrons towards the positive electrical potential more difficult. Therefore the resistance of a conductor slightly increases as its temperature rises.
Heat also causes a vibration within the atomic structure and this vibration "shakes loose" some of the more easily detached electrons allowing them to migrate randomly from atom to atom.
Just since I have to make it agonizingly, painfully, excruciatingly obviously clear to you: STEEL IS A CONDUCTOR.
ADDITIONALLY, a video that PROVES THAT JET FUEL FLAMES CAN WEAKEN STEEL.
And then you try to shit out some crap like "WHY DIDN'T THEY COLLAPSE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME?" Dude. Seriously. You are saying that they should have fallen down EXACTLY according to an EXACT time frame? You claim to "use empirical evidence."
Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride Wrote:You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Empirical evidence, if you ACTUALLY use it, breaks your argument like a wrecking ball through a watermelon: Dozens of variables being thrown into the equation, including building weight, location of the impact point of the jets, fuel levels in the jets, speed of the jets, mass, weight, and density of the jets [they were not the same model of jet], angles of impact, and even small shit like wind velocity and direction COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY FUCKING DESTROY any kind of predictable point in which the towers should have collapsed, so to say "WELL WHY DIDN'T THEY COLLAPSE WITHIN A SIMILAR TIMEFRAME?!" shows how utterly ignorant you are of anything resembling reality, scientific procedure, and ACTUAL EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. And you say you're proud of this? What, are you ALWAYS proud of the shits you take?? That explains a lot, actually.
Yeah, it was REAL hard for us "debunkers" to debunk this...
(May 3, 2012 at 12:24 am)Abishalom Wrote: So accepting the government's watered down version and considering any statement opposed to the "official" story as a "dumb statement" is your idea of "critical thinking?
No, you fucking nimrod, we accept the scientifically-established explanations universally accepted by any accomplished engineer or engineering student because they fit the fucking facts, and we oppose the people who argue against it because they're talking about shit that they don't even fucking know the first thing about!
