• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jesse Ventura Is A Lying Truther

505

Mildly Hostile
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
2,384
Reaction score
1,212
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

lol. I love how the dude posts his license when he calls Ventura a crock. The chopped picture on it of him and his girl is hilarious.
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent

lol. I love how the dude posts his license when he calls Ventura a crock. The chopped picture on it of him and his girl is hilarious.
Excellent video! That stuff (the video) SHOULD BE EVERYWHERE
 

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Thanks for the share. /me waves at my ex-Governor.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
32,745
Reaction score
21,604
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
The title assumes the possibility that there is a non-lying truther out there.... Enquiring minds need to know!
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Honestly, that test case doesn't really prove much of anything... It does prove the existance of nano-thermite, but the guy used a small thin layer of 'paint'... I'm sure it would depend on how it was applied... because, from experience, if you're applying a fireproofing 'spray' you put the stuff on pretty thick. I mean, like 2-3 inches thick, and over the whole beam.

So, they were both being mildly dishonest here, Ventura by ommission of the tests results, and the experimenter by using a type of strawman test... it doesn't really even come close to replicating the types of conditions of 9-11.

The overall point though is that they both had also made the case they were aiming for... Ventura to prove that nano-thermite is a real substance and the experimenter that steel beams burnt by thermite won't necessarily fail.
 

505

Mildly Hostile
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
2,384
Reaction score
1,212
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Honestly, that test case doesn't really prove much of anything... It does prove the existance of nano-thermite, but the guy used a small thin layer of 'paint'... I'm sure it would depend on how it was applied... because, from experience, if you're applying a fireproofing 'spray' you put the stuff on pretty thick. I mean, like 2-3 inches thick, and over the whole beam.

So, they were both being mildly dishonest here, Ventura by ommission of the tests results, and the experimenter by using a type of strawman test... it doesn't really even come close to replicating the types of conditions of 9-11.

The overall point though is that they both had also made the case they were aiming for... Ventura to prove that nano-thermite is a real substance and the experimenter that steel beams burnt by thermite won't necessarily fail.
Uh... lol? Really? THAT is what you get from the vid? haha.

Ok Mcfly. You guys are the ones that claim this **** was ULTRA THIN. Like NANO. But for some reason you now want the tester to slab on 2-3 inches of this "paint"? but still layer grey/red on a NANO scale. Are you out of your mind?

I grew up in a pretty small little town outside of los alamos (a already small town). We had a giant rock on the main corner coming into town where everyone would paint it for their friends/families birthdays, weddings, etc. I lived there for 16 years, and still go back to visit. We have been painting that rock for almost 50 years. A couple years ago someone vandalized it and broke a bunch of the paint off. It was estimated at that point to be about 3 inches thick.

But you want us to paint on layer by layer of nano thermite until we get to 2-3 inches thick, and THEN the test will be "comparable" to the conditions of 9/11. :lamo
 
Last edited:

505

Mildly Hostile
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
2,384
Reaction score
1,212
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The title assumes the possibility that there is a non-lying truther out there.... Enquiring minds need to know!
I still hold a little hope in reserve that many of them are just poor chums getting duped. Those ones still have a slight chance of escaping terminal stupidity.
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Uh... lol? Really? THAT is what you get from the vid? haha.

Ok Mcfly. You guys are the ones that claim this **** was ULTRA THIN. Like NANO. But for some reason you now want the tester to slab on 2-3 inches of this "paint"? but still layer grey/red on a NANO scale. Are you out of your mind?

I grew up in a pretty small little town outside of los alamos (a already small town). We had a giant rock on the main corner coming into town where everyone would paint it for their friends/families birthdays, weddings, etc. I lived there for 16 years, and still go back to visit. We have been painting that rock for almost 50 years. A couple years ago someone vandalized it and broke a bunch of the paint off. It was estimated at that point to be about 3 inches thick.

But you want us to paint on layer by layer of nano thermite until we get to 2-3 inches thick, and THEN the test will be "comparable" to the conditions of 9/11. :lamo
There is a public art installation outside of Amarillo that has 10 cadillac cars buried head first in the earth. People have been painting them for upwards of 20 years. Maybe 3 inches of paint made it on some parts.

Still, it would have to be on the horizontal beams only.

Thermite is for the birds.
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Uh... lol? Really? THAT is what you get from the vid? haha.
Yes... that's an unbiased viewpoint of the video...

Ok Mcfly. You guys are the ones that claim this **** was ULTRA THIN. Like NANO. But for some reason you now want the tester to slab on 2-3 inches of this "paint"? but still layer grey/red on a NANO scale. Are you out of your mind?

Distinction time : The MATERIAL itself was super-thin... but nobody COULD know how thick it was put on, but IN MY EXPERIENCE, when you are putting on fire-proofing material, a rubberized fire-proofing material would be about half an inch thick, where the asbestos replacement style fire-proofing (made of glue and paper with a little bit of fiber glass) that goes on 2-3 inches thick... I'll get a picture of it to show the differences.

Also, just because the 'rubberized' fireproofing CAN be painted on with a brush, it's FAR MORE efficient to install it with something like an airless compressor.

I grew up in a pretty small little town outside of los alamos (a already small town). We had a giant rock on the main corner coming into town where everyone would paint it for their friends/families birthdays, weddings, etc. I lived there for 16 years, and still go back to visit. We have been painting that rock for almost 50 years. A couple years ago someone vandalized it and broke a bunch of the paint off. It was estimated at that point to be about 3 inches thick.

But you want us to paint on layer by layer of nano thermite until we get to 2-3 inches thick, and THEN the test will be "comparable" to the conditions of 9/11. :lamo
No... why do you guys have this requirement to spin information so blatantly before responding??? It's epidemic amongst anti-truths.

Not, paint layer after layer, seriously... do you use something like a toothbrush to mop flloors? You're going to use the proper tool for a proper job... and going off the assumption that the people instaling the nano-thermite were clueless as to what was in the product they were working with that they would treat this 'fireproofing job' as any other fireproofing job... where the product is going on the walls ceilings and columns to make a fire and smoke proof seal... to do that, they would be putting on a thick layer.

I, however, am also being realistic in saying that Ventura also had to deceptively make his case... when the fact is that neither had truly been conclusive in the presentation.
 
J

JoeWoodall

I think it's funny how people like to criticize Ventura's military service, yet most who do have never served. He was UDT, not a SEAL, but they are closely related. I had one guy tell me, "well I heard his DD214 doesn't have him being a SEAL or being in combat". My first response to that was, "show me your DD214", before you criticize a man's military career, attain one yourself. Also, I've heard Ventura in his own words say he's never been in combat, and for him to be blasted for not being in combat is disgusting. A member of our military service doesn't have a choice if he goes to combat or not, it's his superiors, give me a break. I'm a veteran, and I'm proud of the people who have given time of their lives to serve this nation in the armed services. Jesse Ventura has more military experience than the majority of the American population that haven't served a day in their lives.
 

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I think it's funny how people like to criticize Ventura's military service, yet most who do have never served. He was UDT, not a SEAL, but they are closely related. I had one guy tell me, "well I heard his DD214 doesn't have him being a SEAL or being in combat". My first response to that was, "show me your DD214", before you criticize a man's military career, attain one yourself. Also, I've heard Ventura in his own words say he's never been in combat, and for him to be blasted for not being in combat is disgusting. A member of our military service doesn't have a choice if he goes to combat or not, it's his superiors, give me a break. I'm a veteran, and I'm proud of the people who have given time of their lives to serve this nation in the armed services. Jesse Ventura has more military experience than the majority of the American population that haven't served a day in their lives.
Being closely related does not mean the same thing.

He was STRICTLY a UDT and was never a SEAL.

He routinely and consiustently tries to pass himself off as a SEal which is a lie and makes him a fraud.

This is common among many people in two ways. first some claim to have military experience when they never served.

Second some people serve then exaggerate to make themselves look like more than they are.

He is the later and eitherkind of liar is equally disgusting.

Ok so he has SOME military experience this does not excuse the lies and fraud.
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Welcome back after your little sojourn B'man ... you haven't missed much, as you seem to be really the only regular truther poster here, so without you we have all been as quiet as wee church mice.

:peace

Honestly, that test case doesn't really prove much of anything... It does prove the existance of nano-thermite, but the guy used a small thin layer of 'paint'...
Wrong B'man ... Van Romero was testing "super" not nano.

"Super" thermite is another mythical compound which sounds better in fantasy than reality.

Super thermite is supposedly just ordinary thermite mixed with some POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE and maybe COPPER SULPHATE.

But here is the rub B'man, although KMnO4 is not in itself explosive or combustable it will enhance such ... BUT it is also liable to SPONTANEOUSLY combust or explode when in contact with any flammable or explosive substance ... meaning it is NOT stable enough to be used in any kind of "paint" used for some years later deliberate act.

http://www.inchem.org/documents/icsc/icsc/eics0672.htm

And here is the next one B'man, copper sulphate is very reactive with water, and would hasten the rusting of iron in contact with it ... making it a most unlikely chemical to be used in direct contact with steel or iron where it is possible to be present to water in the atmosphere.

http://www.inchem.org/documents/icsc/icsc/eics0672.htm

But please do feel free to explain exactly how (not by your own personal feelings and ideas of how it MIGHT be done ... but by using the reality of science in the real physical world) it could be stabilized enough to remain in contact with a reactive substance such as thermite (of whatever flavour) and not react ... please do !!!

I'm sure it would depend on how it was applied... because, from experience, if you're applying a fireproofing 'spray' you put the stuff on pretty thick. I mean, like 2-3 inches thick, and over the whole beam.
And what exact difference would it make to this imaginary paint, does it somehow increase the energy output by being applied thicker ???

The correct answer will be a ... no, B'man !!!

So, they were both being mildly dishonest here, Ventura by ommission of the tests results, and the experimenter by using a type of strawman test... it doesn't really even come close to replicating the types of conditions of 9-11.
Wrong again, Ventura deliberately lied, which show dishonesty, and yet he claims to be this noble warrior fighting for "truth" ...much like his outright lie of being a Navy SEAL.

What is it that leads you to believe so many people whom willingly engage in distortion, omission and blatent lying ???

Why do you not have ANYBODY on your side whom is honest about their ability, expertise and authority to speak on this ???

Why is the Twoof Movement full of such lies ???

Van Romero, on the other, hand, conducted a simple experiment to prove that even applied as a paint it would STILL have no-where near enough heat energy to cut through beams of that size ... thickness does not count.

His experiment stands on its own merits ... it does NOT have to reflect the actual conditions of 9/11, the molecules in steel will react in exactly the same way irregardless of how a test is done or in real life !!!

The overall point though is that they both had also made the case they were aiming for... Ventura to prove that nano-thermite is a real substance and the experimenter that steel beams burnt by thermite won't necessarily fail.
See above ... it was not nano anything.

But please do explain B'man what the term "nano" means to you ???

What difference does being "nano" make ???

I can tell you categorically no-where near as much as you seem to believe !!!

For some inexplicable reason you seem to feel that the compound by being ground even smaller gets more powerful ... that is patent nonsense.

Nano just means smaller ... that the molecules have been ground finer. but it has exactly the same energy potential as before, it cannot somehow magically become more powerful by being smaller.

It has EXACTLY the same energy density as before, but by having greater surface areas, by being smaller it presents more surfaces then it WILL ignite easier, giving a faster reaction ... that is it !!!

It doesn't change it by being super, thuper, thuper-duper or nano ... it is still just thermite ... and it is NOT an explosive and can NOT cut sideways ... ever !!!

So B'man what exactly would thermite do ... why would you require it ... oh! don't answer for I remember this one ... it was "invented" by Jones et al to cover up for the fact that ordinary explosives could not have been used as there was ZERO physical, seismic nor audio evidence to support it ... so this mythical, magical compound was brought into play ... :roll

But none of this takes away from the very biggest question B'man ... which I am sure we would all appreciate your considered expert answer to ... as thermite (of whatever flavour) is an incendiary which is governed by GRAVITY ... please explain EXACTLY the method, the methodology and the means to get it to cut sideways ???

None of you hypothetical ramblings please, of what you "think" they would do or how it "could" be achieved ... but something more along the lines of real world application stuff ... if you believe this so much, then you must be able to find corroborating information to support it, we do live in a real world and all problems therefore require real world solutions.

But please, not Jones' pathetic wee video of a tiny, thin, slender, wee rod being cut by a proportionally HUGE canister of thermite directed across it ... please, not that for it does not wash !!!

Something a bit more credible and applicable to real world usage regarding such large structural members as the WTC columns ... something more real than some stupid and idiotic little set up ... please !!!

11 Settembre: Technical details on thermal cutting of steel

The Bogus Science Of 'Explosive Super Thermite'

 
  • Like
Reactions: 505

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
", before you criticize a man's military career, attain one yourself. Also, I've heard Ventura in his own words say he's never been in combat, and for him to be blasted for not being in combat is disgusting.
No-body is criticizing his military career nor that he never saw active service, but that he DELIBERATELY lies about an expertise and position he does NOT have ... there IS a difference !!!

He is touting his position as a SEAL to help garnish authority for his 9/11 claims ... and that is dishonest, for he was not and never was a SEAL ... and which shows immense dishonour to those that have served honestly ...

Stolen Valor

That makes his appeals for authority false ... for it is a deeply, deeply deliberate outright lie ... fact !!!

He impugns his own career by embellishing it ... and is something that those of us whom have had military careers hold him in real disgust for, as well as diminishing it when he openly admits to steroid misuse ... drugs known for their devastating effent on brain function.

" Researchers have also observed that users may suffer from paranoid jealousy, extreme irritability, delusions, and impaired judgment stemming from feelings of invincibility."

Steroids (Anabolic-Androgenic) - InfoFacts - NIDA
 

Ned Racine

Banned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
588
Reaction score
41
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Ventura's Act is getting a bit stale. He knows his quirkiness (disguised as Raw Honesty) is essentially only finding acceptance by those susceptible to the 9/11 Truth BS in whatever form.
 

OscarB63

Farts in Elevators
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
26,526
Reaction score
9,462
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The title assumes the possibility that there is a non-lying truther out there.... Enquiring minds need to know!
they're not lying. in their deluded little brains they actually believe. lying involves intent to deceive.
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Ventura's Act is getting a bit stale. He knows his quirkiness (disguised as Raw Honesty) is essentially only finding acceptance by those susceptible to the 9/11 Truth BS in whatever form.
Stale ... too mild by far Ned, is this guy even sane really ???


Guess he will be shown as a nutter after this ... come 1st January 2013 !!!

He is a knuckle-trailing Neanderthal with scrambled egg for brains ... why anyone listens to a word he says is beyond me !!!
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Stale ... too mild by far Ned, is this guy even sane really ???


Guess he will be shown as a nutter after this ... come 1st January 2013 !!!

He is a knuckle-trailing Neanderthal with scrambled egg for brains ... why anyone listens to a word he says is beyond me !!!
Is this supposed to be a parody or is this supposed to be real?
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Welcome back after your little sojourn B'man ... you haven't missed much, as you seem to be really the only regular truther poster here, so without you we have all been as quiet as wee church mice.
Actually, all I did was add a thanks... my contribution in this thread otherwise is a few weeks old... It's been somewhat painful to read the discussions without adding my 2 cents, but I'm not really going to be getting into 9-11 issues very much. (especially with the latest releases and comments related to the video of the firefighters describing how the main lobby of building 7 exploded and collapsed on them and the related 'debunking'... but I really don't want to get into the long and drawn out debate over the day of 9-11)

Nice to know that I'm missed on the topic... it's actually pretty hard to raise other issues that don't tie into 9-11 on some level, that's why I've been having difficulty starting new threads.

Wrong B'man ... Van Romero was testing "super" not nano.
Oh... maybe I misunderstood, and since I first posted that I did learn that there's probably about 50 different concoctions of explosives / high level incendiaries that can be made into sol-gels, and this just illustrates the importance of free and open investigation of this issue... especially when videos like : YouTube - CBS Report On 9/11: Ground Level Explosion Caused WTC To Collapse! are coming out. At the very least, NIST should have performed the test for explosives to be able to say conclusively that there were no explosives, rather then the justification which amounts to 'we didn't test for explosives because it would have been too difficult' or 'because the buildings collapsed at the floors that were impacted'... I forget the specific reasoning, but it was along those lines.

And what exact difference would it make to this imaginary paint, does it somehow increase the energy output by being applied thicker ???
The difference I was referring to was more like how you can put your hand into the flame of a candle for about half a second before it will start to burn you... so, the extra material would serve to extend the burning time in order to accomplish the objective reasoning behind it being there, whether it was explosive (2X TNT will provide at least 2X the explosive force), or incendiary to heat the steel further. (assuming that this stuff being in the building was accurate of course)

Wrong again, Ventura deliberately lied, which show dishonesty, and yet he claims to be this noble warrior fighting for "truth" ...much like his outright lie of being a Navy SEAL.
But the scientist ALSO lied by performing a test that he KNEW would not be sufficient to destroy the steel... which was my point. As for Ventura's military career, I don't know the details and enough about military specifics to really comment deeply, so I would just pose it as a question :
Is it possible that Ventura as UDT might have been working WITH SEALS teams directly?? I mean in the sense that you might have a squad of soldiers on the frontlines working directly with a squad of artillery (probably a bad example, but I'm mostly ignorant on military affairs beyond certain basic understandings)

What is it that leads you to believe so many people whom willingly engage in distortion, omission and blatent lying ???
I don't put Ventura's work as any sort of 'gospel'... and I did make effort to give a nuanced position in this matter. Also, there are people that are blatant liars on either side of the fence, so, as per usual I'm an advocate for discernment, separating the truth from the lies to the best of my abilities.

Why do you not have ANYBODY on your side whom is honest about their ability, expertise and authority to speak on this ???
There's no simple answer to that... THERE ARE, however, MANY with credentials that do speak within their expertise, and anytime they are mentioned, every attempt to slander their character is made... just to specify a single factor of this.

Why is the Twoof Movement full of such lies ???
I would ask the same of the 'F.olks A.ccepting G.overnment S.tories' as well

Van Romero, on the other, hand, conducted a simple experiment to prove that even applied as a paint it would STILL have no-where near enough heat energy to cut through beams of that size ... thickness does not count.
Yes, he did conduct a simple experiment, using his approximation of what was found, applied a small amount to a small section of a much larger beam. BUT, to give an analogy of how his experiment gets into flawed territory, would be like taking a 9mm pistol and shooting an elephant and when it continues to charge at you make the conclusion that elephants are bullet proof... so, in the same way, by ONLY using a small amount on a small section of a single beam, when even those pushing that it was this type of sol-gel that was found have no qualms of saying that it would require several TONNES of the stuff to take down the building. So, had the guy used a heavy gauge steel stud and applied the same amount and it STILL didn't cut through, I'd have no choice but to shut up on that issue.

My overall point was that BOTH were lying and NEITHER made their case.

His experiment stands on its own merits ... it does NOT have to reflect the actual conditions of 9/11, the molecules in steel will react in exactly the same way irregardless of how a test is done or in real life !!!
Yes, his experiment stands that there are different concoctions that can still fall under the category of thermite... but if he was so confident in the results, he should have made a better test scenario. That's all I'm saying.

But please do explain B'man what the term "nano" means to you ???
It's a matter of scale. Take the difference of coffee and espresso... (there may be more differences, but as far as I know) Coffee beans get ground up so that the water filters through turning the water into coffee... this would be like 'macro' thermite. But with Espresso the beans are ground up into super-fine particles (I think also the water gets pushed through with more pressure, but not important), and so MORE of the caffeine gets released from the beans when the water passes through because the smaller particles means that there is a greater surface area for each particle to dissolve the caffeine and flavor into the water. So the same with the particles of the materials for the chemical reaction... the smaller particles allow for a more efficient reaction, potentially so much more efficient that it borders on explosive (as is my understanding from the papers I've read on the subject)

What difference does being "nano" make ???
^^^

I can tell you categorically no-where near as much as you seem to believe !!!

For some inexplicable reason you seem to feel that the compound by being ground even smaller gets more powerful ... that is patent nonsense.

Nano just means smaller ... that the molecules have been ground finer. but it has exactly the same energy potential as before, it cannot somehow magically become more powerful by being smaller.

It has EXACTLY the same energy density as before, but by having greater surface areas, by being smaller it presents more surfaces then it WILL ignite easier, giving a faster reaction ... that is it !!!

It doesn't change it by being super, thuper, thuper-duper or nano ... it is still just thermite ... and it is NOT an explosive and can NOT cut sideways ... ever !!!
I've read a number of papers on the subject, and the findings of these papers discussing sol-gels SUGGEST differently... That as you decrease the size of the particles you exponentially increase the rate of the energy release.... but I'm not gonna stress over this any longer because it involved going to such great lengths to get the papers, and then finding the referenced papers going back to the late 80's... and I don't expect it would change the position anyway, so I'll just agree that we disagree for this particular issue.

Which, I'm no longer even fully convinced by stephen jones and Harrit's paper... first, their choice of reviewer (with pay to publish policy) was a politically poor choice, but I don't know if that was done out of necessity or choice. Also, the particular tests performed, as has been noted, were not the ideal techniques... HOWEVER, as they say there are many ways to skin a cat, so I'm not in doubt that they DID find SOMETHING, I'm not convinced that what they claim it as is accurate, I don't doubt they found something explosive... or possibly like a fuse to the real charge... I don't know.

If it was a demolition made to appear as a collapse due to fire, they utterly failed at that in building 7 because there were explosions going off BEFORE either tower collapsed in the main lobby. And a structure CANNOT, as in PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to collapse within 3% of free-fall acceleration for at least 17 measured stories WHILE simultaneously performing the 'work' of destroying the structure and pulverizing the concrete.

The 60% of free-fall in the towers, is STILL a fair bit faster then the verinage demolitions, which I've personally measured which accellerate at about 40% of gravity, and that's with the buildings mostly rigged to collapse. HOWEVER, it's 'believable', if not for the other oddities noticed that are not supportable.

So B'man what exactly would thermite do ... why would you require it ... oh! don't answer for I remember this one ... it was "invented" by Jones et al to cover up for the fact that ordinary explosives could not have been used as there was ZERO physical, seismic nor audio evidence to support it ... so this mythical, magical compound was brought into play ... :roll
I'm sorry, but there's PLENTY of unexplained explosion sounds going on... it's all be 'debunked' as 'natural' loud sounds, but whatever... to answer the question : either; as a fuse to ignite the proper explosions, as the explosions themselves, or some combination...

But none of this takes away from the very biggest question B'man ... which I am sure we would all appreciate your considered expert answer to ... as thermite (of whatever flavour) is an incendiary which is governed by GRAVITY ... please explain EXACTLY the method, the methodology and the means to get it to cut sideways ???
I've seen devices made to 'project' thermite sideways... it's on youtube somewhere... but like I said earlier, the size is exponentially inverse to the speed of energy release when it starts getting into nano-scales.

But please, not Jones' pathetic wee video of a tiny, thin, slender, wee rod being cut by a proportionally HUGE canister of thermite directed across it ... please, not that for it does not wash !!!
I didn't know that was jones' attempt...
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Is this supposed to be a parody or is this supposed to be real?
It's one of those :
here are the people making their case, you make up your own mind.

By the same logic you could say that pigmies that worship rocks and twigs are a parody, but if you're actually one of those pigmies it would be quite real.

We don't even know for certain if the date attributed is definitively the same date that we associate to it... and even if it is the correct date, it doesn't mean an end, anymore then the end of our calender year is the end of time... all you do is start back on Jan 1 the next year... that's pretty well what you would do with the mayan calender.
 

Ned Racine

Banned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
588
Reaction score
41
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
It's one of those :
here are the people making their case, you make up your own mind.

By the same logic you could say that pigmies that worship rocks and twigs are a parody, but if you're actually one of those pigmies it would be quite real.

We don't even know for certain if the date attributed is definitively the same date that we associate to it... and even if it is the correct date, it doesn't mean an end, anymore then the end of our calender year is the end of time... all you do is start back on Jan 1 the next year... that's pretty well what you would do with the mayan calender.

I though you weren't getting into this much anymore (???)
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
16,986
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
:flames:Burn baby burn! Disco Inferno!!:flames:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 505
Top Bottom