In article ,
on Thu, 16 Mar 2006 08:13:33 GMT,
TRUTH attempted to say .....

Tank Fixer wrote in
k.net:

In article ,
on Mon, 13 Mar 2006 07:34:28 GMT,
Wake Up! attempted to say .....

Tank Fixer wrote in
k.net:

In article ,
on Mon, 13 Mar 2006 02:04:10 GMT,
Wake Up! attempted to say .....

Tank Fixer wrote in
k.net:

In article ,
on Sun, 12 Mar 2006 08:25:07 GMT,
Wake Up! attempted to say .....

"khobar" wrote in
news:30NQf.421$PE.346@fed1read05:

"Wake Up!" wrote in message
...
"khobar" wrote in
news:kZBQf.392$PE.376@fed1read05:

"Keith W" wrote in
message ...

"Wake UP!" wrote in message
...
Video of THERMITE REACTION at WTC on 9/11
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Thermite.htm


I've seen and used thermite and thats not it, by the way
you are aware that thermite isnt used to demolish
buildings
arent you ?

Yes he is, but that's the beauty of his conspiracy - since
thermite isn't used for demolition, no one would suspect it
being used. Har har har de har har.

Paul Nixon





As if that means anything, or has any bearing whatsoever. (I
guess to a reality denier it might.) Can thermite partially
evaporate steel? Yes. Could thermite cause the temperatures
that existed in metal at the WTC? Yes. Can thermite cause
metal
dripping like in the videos? Yes. Were those three items
present at the WTC? Yes. I love the way you deniers aren't
able
to take everything into context, and instead give silly
reasons
for each and every piece of information, so you can hold on
to
your absurd government conspiracy theory. LOL!!

Can a nuclear reaction partially evaporate steel? Yes. Could a
nuclear reaction cause the temperatures that existed in metal
at
the WTC? Yes. Can a nuclear reaction cause metal dripping like
in the videos? Yes. Were these three items present at the WTC?
Yes.

Oops...

Paul Nixon

Okay. Where's the evidence supporting that? Let's not forget
that
hundreds of people (many professors) read his paper. His
supporters are growing, not shrinking. And based of his evidence
at his Sept 22 seminar, he convinced 60 faculty members that
there
should be a new investigation.

Why all the evidence is in the proofs you keep posting !

And the investigation those faculty members think should happen ?
Why do I suspect they want to know how Dr Jones came to his
degree
in structural engineering


This is what they're calling for:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takea...ltl=1141667399

Jones' has a PhD in physics, so he should be qualified to determine
in the government's version of the collapses defy phsyics.

So he has no background in structural engineering ?
Nor the mechanics of matertials either I take it.

A degree in physics is just that.





Watch the video of the South Tower collapse below.



So you do not intend to discuss Dr Jones lack of training in
structural engineering or materials science.


What is there to discuss? It is already admitted. Jones' is a physicist
with a PhD.

That is nice that he has a PHD in physics.

That was not my point since he is neither an engineer nor materials scientist.
Two separate and only marginally related fields.

Since he has this PHD in physics is he qualified to say discuss oceanography ?

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.