Once again , it is time to expose the lies and hypocrisy of “truthers.”  Recently, I had a new “truther,” who I will cal “Truther E”, do a granny hit and run on my forum dedicated to exposing their lies. One thing “Truther” E did was essentially say that I should at least have some respect for those who lost loved ones in the attacks. The following photo is my response to “Truther” E:

 

 

Another thing “Truther” E said is that he lived 10 minutes outside of DC on 9/11 and he never saw any plane, tail etc.

There are several problems with this. 1) 10 minutes outside of DC is NOT the same as in DC, plus he wasn’t necessarily anywhere near the Pentagon when the plane hit. 2) As we see here, eyewitnesses SAW the plane hit. In addition, there were plenty of plane parts both on the Pentagon lawn and inside the Pentagon. As we see here, most of the plane went INSIDE the Pentagon. The site in question provides eyewitness accounts of people who hauled the plane parts out of the Pentagon, including the hub of an airplane wheel about 3/4 of the way down the page.

As for the size of the hole in the Pentagon, this site points out, correctly, that a speeding aircraft slamming into is NOT going to leave an exact outline of itself. The site further points out that, as many eyewitnesses, who SAW the plane hit, stated, the plane crashed and skidded along the ground before hitting the Pentagon. In this case, the wings, which are designed to be as light as possible, would have already been disintegrating before hitting the building but still caused significant damage to the Pentagon ( reference).

Oh, and before any “Truther” says that disintegration means the wings wwere no longer there, that is false. Here is the definition of disintegrate, according to Merriam Webster:,

”  Full Definition of disintegrate

1. transitive verb

   1:  to break or decompose into constituent elements, parts, or small particles

   2:  to destroy the unity or integrity of

2. intransitive verb

   1:  to break or separate into constituent elements or parts

   2:  to lose unity or integrity by or as if by breaking into parts

   3:  to undergo a change in composition <an atomic nucleus that disintegrates because of radioactivity>”

In short, despite the fact that the wings disintegrated, the entire mass of the wings would still be there as per the Law of Conservation of Mass, which,as any physics book will tell you, states that , ” Matter can neither be transormed nor destroyed, only transformed. That means regardless of the change in matter, the MASS (which is the amount of matter) NEVER changes.   Since the mass of the wings would still be there, albeit no longer attached to the planes, the wings ( or, more accurately, pieces of thee wings), would still be going at the same speed the plane was when it hit. To put it another way, “truthers” need to quit taking physics lessons from Roadrunner cartoons. Also, the Pentagon is in VIRGINIA, not Washington DC.

 

 

 

Oh, and  before “”truthers” say the wreckage was planted there, seeing as how everyone was gaping at the Pentagon ( plus it was the middle of rush hour) that would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to do without getting caught, unless the Starship Enterpise beamed the wreckage there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Next, we have “Truther” B, who readers will remember from a previous article

He is continuing the “truther” lie that Silverstein deliberately demolished WTC 7 and admitted to it on live TV. His source is Veterans Today , which as I pointed out in a previous article, is a source that is NOT known for accuracy or honesty. In point of fact, they are less accurate than your average tabloid, and that’s insulting tabloids.

The Veteran’s Today article in question claims Silverstein desgined a new WTC 7 in April of 2000 and even provides a video. The problem is the video clearly starts in the middle of the speech, meaning it was taken out of context, as “truthers” tend to do.

As I mentioned in one of my earliest articles, “truthers” point to the fact that Silverstein insured WTC 7 against terrorist attacks as proof that he was aware it would be attacked. The problem is that the WTC was attacked by terrorists in 2003, so it is not only expected but also logical to insure it against terrorism. Only a complete idiot or a “truther” ( oh, wait, that’s the same thing) wouldn’t have done so.

In addition, if the “truther” claim was right ( which it isn’t), that would mean that Silverstein admitted to insurance fraud on live television. Why would ANYONE admit to committing insurance fraud on live TV. The dumbest people on the face of the earth aren’t THAT dumb. Hell, even “truthers” aren’t THAT dumb.

Oh, and we have this quote from Silverstein found here: ” I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.” And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

Even “truthers” admit Silverstein was talking to the fire department, so the 2 possible interpretations are, 1) ” We’ve had such a terrible loss of life that it would be a good idea to get the firefighters out of there,” or 2) ” We’ve had such a terrible loss of life that it would be a good idea to blow up my building.” Logic ( something that escapes “truthers”) dictates that the first interpretation makes a lot more sense.

Once again, we see that “truthers” run away from facts faster than Bill Clinton dropping his pants around an intern.

 

 

 

 

 

Readers will remember “Truther” B from a previous article.

He is still expounding on the nuke theory ( despite the fact that even “truthers: have debunked it).  In addition, he alternating between claiming steel turned to dust or steel vaporized, which proves he is lying as he is contradicting himself. Last time I checked, dust was solid and vapor was gas. The fact remains that the steel did NEITHER of the two things he claims. It simply fell into a cloud of dust and debris. The fact is ANY time a building collapses, it’s going to kick up dust and debris.

His source is Veteran’s Today, which is NOT known for being an accurate or reliable source and the article simply repeats claims that I shot down in an earlier article.

I will, of course, recap- again, the order I address them in is not necessarily the order the article made the claims:

 

First, the claim that barium and strontium are never used in buildings are false.   As Fellow Debunker 5 pointed out, barium is used in steel and cast iron and may also be used as rat poison, and strontium is used in cathode ray tubes, such as those in computer monitors and TVs.

Second we have the claim that thorium and uranium should never be found in building rubble, which is also a lie. Thorium is often used in electronic equipment, specifically for coating the tungsten wires in said electronic equipment (reference).

Uranium is used in smoke detectors ( source).  Hmm, an office building couldn’t possibly have electronic equipment or smoke detectors in it.

Rather than digging through the rest of it, the sources can be found in one of my earlier articles, so here we go for the rest:  lithium can be found in cell phones in the form off lithium niobate and can also be found in various types of batteries, lanthanum can be used for lighting, optical fibers, etc, Yttrium can be used to produce the color red in TV picture tubes, tritium is often used in  exit signs and may also be used as a paint polymer, and last but not least, chromium can be a component of steel, as well as being a wood preservative among other things.

There is also the fact that ALL nuclear explosions will produce radiation and an electromagnetic pulse. A nuclear blast without either one of those is PHYSICALLY impossible.

When challenged as to where the EMP wasm “Truther” B’s response was to request someone show us the effect of an EMP, when it is fairly common knowlegde- at least to those of us who understand real world physics- that an EMP, while harmless to humans, will fry ANY electronics in the area.

“Truther” B’s response was any camera would do. However, as Fellow Debunker 5 pointed out, that’s NOT true. An old mechanical camera would not be affected by an EMP, however, a modern digital camera would be. Fellow Debunker 5 also points out, correctly, that it has been scientifically proven that ALL nuclear blasts emit a strong EMP, which plays hell with any electronics.

While EMP’s will fry electronics, it’s quite obvious that all “truther” statements are half-baked.

 

Readers will remember “Truther” B from my previous article.

 

Recently, he provided this YouTube video of just ONE NYC firefighter, Rudy Dent to “prove” controlled demolition in the case of the Twin Towers and WTC 7.

The problem is that, as we see here, there are about 10,200 uniformed firefighters in NYC, as well as 3300+ paramedics, EMTs, etc.   just going by the uniformed firefighters alone, 1 out of the 10,200 comes to a whopping 0.01%.  With the number of uniformed firefighters, I could probably find one that says he saw GWB fly the planes into the  buildings himself, then hold a press conference afterwards in the middle of the burning building, and that the flames were holographic and it was an android reading at Emma E Booker Elementary School in Florida.

In short, all “Truther” B has managed to prove is that every group has it’s fair share of nut jobs with a political agenda.

 

Oh, and Master Yoda has some advice for “truthers”

 

“Truther” B, from yesterday’s article, is continuing to display his ignorance in a continuing exchange with Fellow Debunker 9, this time with respect to gravity.

When Fellow Debunker 9 pointed out that astronauts in space are weightless in space, “Truther” B’s response was that they’re not affected  by gravity and are also travelling very fast.

Just one problem: If they were not affected by gravity, they would fly out of orbit. Gravity is what KEEPS things in orbit, whether it’s an artificial satellite or the moon in orbit around the earth or the planets around the sun.

 

As we see here, and as any physics book will tell you, anything in orbit IS still affected by gravity and is actually FALLING towards the earth. It’s just doing so with sufficient momentum to avoid hitting the ground or, as this site puts it, ” Douglas Adams was right; “Flying is simple. You just throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

 

“Truther’ B’s claim is a clear violation of Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation which as we see here,( and as any physics book will tell you) states that “every body in the universe is attracted to every other body with a force that is directly proportional to the product of the bodies’ masses and inversely proportional to the square of the bodies’ separation.”

The equation is often written as Fgravity =G (M1M2/ r^2), where G is the universal gravitational constant, 6.67 x 10^-11 N x m^2/ kg^2, M1 and M2 are the masses of the objects in question and r^2 is the distance between two objects.  It also demonstrates why “Truther” B’s claim is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

Clearly, “truthers” don’t realize the gravity of their ignorance.

 

 

It is once again time to demonstrate that “truthers” are made of tungsten, actinium, potassium, oxygen, and sulfur.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Readers will remember “Truther’ B from an earlier article.  Like most “truthers,” he still insists on using Roadrunner Cartoon physics instead of real world physics, yet he calls everyone else’s grasp on physical reality into question. Suffice it to say a “truther” questioning someone’s grip on physical reality is like Ted Kennedy questioning someone’s sobriety.

In an exchange between “Truther”B and Fellow Debunker 9 ( also from an earlier article), “Truther” B demonstrates his ignorance.

First, ” Truther” B provides the following picture purporting to be melted rock at Ground Zero:

 

 

However, as Fellow Debunker 9 points out, that is merely solidified concrete slurry.

“Truther” B then continues with the “melted steel” lie, but as we see here the molten stuff was SLAG, not steel.  Slag is the byproduct, or, in other words, the waste product of steel smelting and slag is a mix of silicates and oxides ( source).

As this site clearly indicates, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER of molten steel. What “truthers” claim is molten steel happens to be red hod SOLID steel. Hint, if it’s solid, it’s NOT molten.  The aforementioned link mentions that the molten metal if any, may well have been aluminum from the planes as aluminum melts at  660 degrees Celsius or 933 degrees Fahrenheit, which is well below the temperature jet fuel burns at, between 980 and 2200 degrees Celsius ( 1253 to 2473 degrees Farhenheit).

While “truthers” are technically correct that the melting point of steel, 1425-1540 degrees Celsius ( 1698- 1813 degrees Fahrenheit), they conveniently ignore the FACT that steel loses it’s structural integrity at between 700-820 degrees Celsius ( 973 – 1093 Fahrenheit), which was well within the temperatures recorded in the WTC.  Furthermore, red hot steel will burn in air or in the presence of steam ( reference) The source of air wouldbe quite obvious- the big gaping holes in the sides of the building and it’s not unreasonable to assume there was some steam present too as there would be plenty of sources of water to be converted to steam- toilets and other plumbing in the restrooms comes to mind. Logic dictates that the Twin Towers would have had lots of restrooms seeing as how someone who works on, say, the 80th floor, is not going to want to go all the way down to the bottom floors just to use the restroom.

This quote from the previously cited link sums it up perfectly: ” That all being said, a 767 Family plane can carry up to 90,000 liters of fuel in its hull. It is estimated the two planes had about 28,000 Liters left in their tanks which is spread all over the hull from the wings to the fuselage (for ballast and balance control). The crash and shredding of the plane hardware caused the fuel to ignite almost instantly. Since it was not a controlled burn it is likely to hit the highest end of the combustion scale at its core, causing simultaneous ignition of anything around that was combustible and causing severe damage to load bearing pillars.”

Fellow Debunker 9 then correctly stated that when the building came down, all the potential energy (stored energy) was converted to kinetic energy ( energy of motion). He also correctly pointed out that, per the First Law of Thermodynamics, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In simpler terms, the energy required to put the towers up equals the energy required to bring them down.

As an aside, there are other times of energy in addition to kinetic and potential energy. There is also heat energy, and mechanical energy.  A common unit for energy is the Joule, and per the First Law of Thermodynamics, regardless of the types of energy you have on each side of the equation, if you have 200 Joules on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 200 Joules on the right side of the equation.

Fellow Debunker 9 also correctly pointed out that the steel was not melted, it was ” chemically eroded by a combination of oxygen and sulfur acting on the steel and accelerated by heat,” or, in layman’s terms, it was rusted.  As any chemistry book will tell you, heat is a catalyst in many chemical reactions.

“Truther” B then wanted to know how you can destroy all that matter with minimal force, while conveniently ignoring the FACT that per the Law of Conservation of Matter, Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This is why chemical equations MUST be balanced. For example, if you have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the right side of the equation.

Of course “Truther” B is the same one who insists you can’t move more with less, and when I pointed out that levers and pulleys are one way of doing exactly that, he made the ridiculous assumption that I was saying the WTC was brought down with levers and pulleys when even a 3rd grader could figure out I was simply offering one example. Then again, when it was pointed out that a person, who is less massive than a car, can push the car, his lame response was that ” the car has wheels.” Never mind the fact that, A)  The wheels ADD mass to the car, and B) it does NOT change the FACT that a car has more mass than a person.

 

Once again, we see that any statement made by “truthers” is comosed of arsenic, indium, iodine, and neon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Readers will remember “Truther” B from my previous article.

Recently he posted this YouTube video by Pilots for 9/11 “Truth.”

Before I continue, it should be pointed out that Pilots for 9/111 “Truth” have already been caught lying as this quote I provided from Fellow Debunker 5 from a previous article says: ” Actually no, the first lie is the location of the gate. They show gate D26 at the end of the terminal, however if you go to gofox.com and the Dulles airports website and look at the concourse map you will see it’s down away from the end more opposite of gate D23.

Now another issue with this is that to show the correct path they overlaid the entire photo (transparent) over the original which gives it a double image and makes landmarks a bit hard to make out. Then they placed an image of the concourse they had over it. That image seemed to be place a little to the south.

Now when I took that image and cut out the supposed path and moved it the starting point appeared over the concourse about where gate D26 appears on the two concourse maps I found. Allowing for a margin of error and the fact that the line used is very wide (representing about 50 yards in width) I would say that this is a non issue.”  The other lie is also addressed in the aforementioned article.

Back to the video, they state that Flight 175 hit the South tower at about 510 knots ground speed, which is about 586 miles per hour. However, they also claim this is an impossible speed.  The problem is, that it is NOT an  impossible for a Boeing 767.

As we see here, the air frame for the Boeing 767 is rated at about 0.86 of Mach 1, which is the speed of sound.  The speed of sound at sea level is about 761 miles per hour or 661 knots.  0.86 of 761 miles per hour is 654 mph or 568 knots.

In addition, the same site states that the planes actually hit the towers at between 500 and 560 mph, or between 434 and 486 knots.

Basic math shows the problem. No matter who’s figures you’re using, the impact occurred at speeds of between 94 and and 154 miles per hour ( 82 to 134 knots) LESS than the speeds the air frame is rated for.

Before anyone brings up John Lear’s statement, as we see here, his justification is that ” Considering that 560mph is 145mph faster than its recommended maximum operating speed…”  Hint: Maximum recommended maximum operating speed does NOT mean impossible.

The site further points out that the maximum operating speed is decided by Boeing and the operator and is NOT a performance limit – it’s simply for passenger safety and to reduce wear and tear on the plane.

This quote by Neil DeGrasse Tyson sums it up perfectly:

 

It is once again time to demonstrate that “truthers” are made of lithium, argon, and sulfur.

 

 

 

Readers will remember “Truther” B from a previous article.

He is continuing to claim there were nukes used at the WTC in spite of the fact, that, as I mentioned earlier, even “TRUTHERS” have debunked it ( reference).

He recently provided this link from Veterans Today, which, as Fellow Debunker 4, from an earlier article, is not known for being a reliable or honest source.  Furthermore, if you look closely, you will notice that one of the authors of the article is Press TV,  which is the English-language version of Iran’s state-run media. In other words, the article is knowingly using a source hostile to the US to “prove” a point.  Not exactly a stellar example.

However, another debunker, who I will refer to as Fellow Debunker 9, shot that claim down rather effectively with this link, showing that the culprit was actually asbestos, not nukes.  Fellow Debunker also points out, correctly, that there were no traces of nuclear radiation. The only radiation found was normal background radiation.

Furthermore, we are still asking “Truther” B the following question, which he has yet to answer:  If nuclear weapons were used, where the electromagnetic pulses ( EMPs)?

When Fellow Debunker 9 asked “Truther” B where the nuclear radiation was, ” Truther” B provided this link in an attempt to “prove his point.  However, the link did NOT prove squat. All it said is that  he National Institute for Occupational Safety ( NIOS) added fifty types of cancer to the list of diseases that affected 9/11 victims and would be federally funded.  It also cited a 2011 report showing that  theWTC  rescue workers and exposed civilians had more cases of mental and physical illness than the general population, which is what you’d expect.

“Truther” B also cites Jim Fetzer, who he claims is a friend of his.  The troublee is Jim Fezter is a PHILOSOPHER of science, which as we see here, is more general and theoretical.  The fact remains that Fetzer has ZERO experience in the field of nuclear physics.

When both Fellow Debunker 9 and Blooddraken ( also from an earlier article)  continue to press “Truther” B about the lack of nuclear radiation and EMPs, he just goes into the “truther” tap dance.

Fellow debunker 9 correctly points out that nukes give off radiation, which is only common sense as they rely on radioactive elements, such as uranium or plutonium to operate, as I pointed out earlier

Fellow debunker 9 also correctly pointed out that in order cover up something like nuclear radiation, the entire government, medical profession, and the media would have to be involved and he further pointed out the obvious fact that the more people you have involved in a conspiracy, the better the chance that someone will let something slip.

“Truther” B just cannot answer the question of where the EMP was if nukes were used. In addition, there is NO POSSIBLE WAY we would have seen anything on TV after the first impact if nukes were used as EMPs, while harmless to humans, fry electronics.  As Blooddraken pointed out, a nuclear blast without an EMP is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.   As we see here it’s been known since we started testing nuclear weapons in the 1940s that they would produce an EMP. Simply put, while you can have an EMP without a nuclear blast- a solar flare, for example– you CANNOT have a nuclear blast without an EMP or radiation.  It’s just PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

As we can clearly see, “truthers” are full of carbon, radium, and phosphorus.

 

 

Readers will remember “Truther” A from a previous article.

Recently, he provided this link, which he claims “proves” “truthers” correct.  The aforementioned link provides a YouTube video showing a controlled demolition in China, but is comparing apples to oranges.  For one thing, you clearly hear the INSTANTANEOUS  boom that results from explosives in controlled demolition. However, the site says thermite was used.  The problem is, as I have mentioned in a previous article , thermite is NOT an expolsive- it’s an incendiary, and, as you see in this YouTube video, makes a CRACKLING sound.

The link “Truther” A provided claims that the Twin Towers were brought down by a “banana peel” demolition that starts at the top or the middle.  The problem is that controlled demolition is NEVER done from the top or the middle- it ALWAYS starts at the bottom.  The video in the link has the camera aimed at the middle of the building, but if you watch clearly, you can see there were clearly explosives at the bottom of the building as well. Of course, it’s not that surprising that “truthers” would purposely rig the video.

Brent Blanchard of Protec, who has 20 YEARS of experience in controlled demolition, does an excellent job explaining why the “truther” claims are lies.   He correctly points out that controlled demolition is ALWAYS done from the bottom down to maximize the force of gravity, which gives the best results, although supplementary charges may be placed on upper floors for better control.  However, Blachard points out that the initial collapse of the towers started where the planes hit.

In addition, Blanchard further points out that in order to correctly place cutter charges, you would have to tear the building apart to get to the core columns, and the only two possibilities of getting either thermite or explosives into the building without getting caught are IMPOSSIBLE as it would require either placing the charges in advance or placing them in the time between impact and collapse.

As for WTC 7, as Brent Blanchard points out, it was pelted by debris from the collapsing North Tower, resulting in a huge hole carved in it’s side plus it caught fire, not to mention the debris was coming from hundreds of feet above it, which means the debris was hauling some butt when it slammed into WTC 7.

Before “truthers” provide us with their picture of what they claim is an undamaged WTC 7, the pictures “truthers” use are of the NORTH side of WTC 7 when it was the SOUTH side that was damaged.

The original link then links to this article from AE911Truth claiming that Popular Mechanics ignores the demolition of the destruction of the Skyride Towers from Chicago’s 1933 Worlds fair using thermite.  However, this is apples to oranges, as there is NO comparison between a ride and a building.  That and AE911Truth , and specificallym it’s founder, Richard Gage, has admitted controlled demolition is beyond his training and experience, as we see here.

Then again, this is the same Richard Gage who, as I mentioned previously,  said that’s why they used thermite, a silent explosive- never mind the fact that 1: Silent explosives are PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE- that and even if they weren’t ( which they are), you could NOT HEAR THEM, and 2: Thermite is an INCENDIARY, not an explosive.

There is another problem too, and it PROVES “truthers” are contradicting themselves, and therefore, by definition, LYING.

Here it is in 4 points: 1: Only “truthers” say the steel melted, 2: “Truthers” say fire can’t melt steel, 3: “Truthers claim thermite was used, and 4: Thermite is an INCEDIARY, and as we see here, one definition of an incendiary ( which would clearly be the category thermite falls into) is ” a substance or weapons ( as a bomb) used to start fires.”   This makes it quite obvious that “truthers” are contradicting themselves.

Getting back to the skyride, the two towers at either end were 628 ft( 191 meters) tall ( source).

WTC 1 and 2 were 1,368 ft( 417 meters) and 1,361 ft ( 415 meters), respectively ( reference).  That makes the Twin Towers about twice as tall.

Furthermore, as we see here, it took 1500 pounds of thermite to bring down a 628 tower, so logic ( something that escapes “truthers”) dictates that you’d need MORE than that to bring down the Twin Towers and WTC 7.

The original link from “Truther” A shows a video of a car engine being burned by thermite. However, this site  shows the EXACT SAME VIDEO, and does the calculations for the amount of thermite required just to put a small hole in a SMALL car engine and correctly points out that you would need TONS of the stuff to bring down the Twin owers.  As a matter of fact, as I mentioned in a previous article, Richard Gage himself admitted that you’d need several tons of thermite to bring down the WTC.  Exactly how are you going to get several tons of ANYTHING, let alone thermite, into two 110-story buildings and one 47-story building that are occupied 24/7?  Have Harry Potter do a summoning charm?

 

 

In addition as I pointed out in a previous article,every single element that Gage ( and “truthers” in general) claim prove thermite are, in point of fact, elements that are normally used in the construction of a building.  One example, of course, being titanium, which is used as a paint pigment ( source).

There’s also the fact that as we see here,thermite burning tends to be chaotic (source).

“Truther” A’s source goes into detail about nanothermite and claims that the findings in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal was peer-reviewed and withstood the scrutiny of experts.  However, as I pointed out here, this is a lie.  For one thing, the aforementioned journal tends to be very sloppy with their peer review process and accepted a computer generated nonsense paper ( source).

11-settembre goes into even more detail as to why the claim of nanothermite is false. The biggest problem that 11-settembre points out with the nanothermite ( although they also point out that the so-called “unusual elemebts aren’t unusual at all), is that the chemical used to soak the samples, methyl ethyl ketone ( MEK), tends to react with aluminum, so using it to find aluminum in the samples is problematic to say the least.

Clearly, “truthers” are living proof of Einstein’s statement, ” The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it’s limits.”

 

 

It’s time once again to expose “truthers” for the morons they are- and include a REAL WORLD physics( and maybe chemistry ) review as well, even though “truthers” run away from facts faster than Ted Kennedy from an AA meeting.

Readers will, of course, remember “Truther” A, who, even for “truthers,” is dumb.

Recently, ” Truther” A sent me this photo from this site, which claims that the woman in question, Beverly Eckert was killed in a plane crash just 6 days after she asked Obama to investigate 9/11 and that Obama bought her plane tickets.  The  ONLY part that is true was that she died in a plane crash. First of all, there is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that Obama bought her plane ticket. Yes, Obama met with her and he mentioned her just after the plane crash that killed her ( source), but that does NOT prove he bought her plane tickets.  Any other president would have probably done the same thing.  As we see here, Beverly Eckert was the founder of an advocacy group for the families of 9/11 victims ( she lost her husband in that attack) and to avoid the mistakes that led to 9/11.  Oh, and mistakes do NOT equal a conspiracy.

Anyway, as we see from this article, it’s presumed that heavy ice caused the crash as the crew had  been discussing a heavy ice buildup on the nose and wings within 30 minutes of the crash. Let’s not forget that the East coast was ( and I believe still is, to a degree), getting slammed by severe winter weather ( yes, I know it’s technically spring, but Mother Nature doesn’t read the calendar).

Before anyone brings up that thee plane’s automatic de-icer system was on ( reference), that still does NOT prove a conspiracy for the following reasons: 1: Just because it was on doesn’t mean it was working- and before anyone says they could have ( and probably did) run it through a systems check before leaving, that doesn’t prove anything either.  Even something as simple as a loose connection can cause a false green ( or red) light, and 2:  Given the severe weather conditions ( even if there was no storm, it’s still cold at the altitudes planes fly at), it’s quite possible for even a fully functional de-icing system to get overwhelmed.  Hmm, so let’s see, an ice build-up on the plane in severe winter conditions- gee, I wonder what the odds of that are?

Now, to review some of the other stuff that “Truther” A and “Truther” B ( from previous articles)  have both made claims about.

First, we have a Youtube video  provided by “Truther” A in which I debunked several claims by Richard Gage in an earlier article.

I will just do a quick review of the basics.

First of all, Gage’s claim that there was no gradual deformation associated with collapse is false. Marc Morial, president and CEO of the National Urbam League, Architect Bob Shelton, and FDNY Lt. Robert  Bohack, who, unlike Gage, were actually there, say otherwise.

Gage also claims that the spheres, which were composed of iron, aluminum, fluorine and manganese are never found in buildings and therefore prove that thermite was used.  This is a lie, and not just because thermite is an INCENDIARY, not an an explosive.  Iron, as we see here, iron is a component of steel- in fact, it’s the main component of steel. Hmm, finding iron, the main component of steel in a steel-framed building- go figure.  Manganese is also a component of steel ( reference).  Aluminum is frequently used to make door and window frames ( reference), something I’m sure the WTC had a lot of as two 110-story office buildings will require a lot of doors, and therefore a lot of door frames as no doors would make entering and exiting the building problematic, to say the least, unless the Starship Enterprise beamed them in and out.

 

 

As for the fluorine, it’s often used as a refrigerant in air conditioning systems and in electrical insulation ( reference).  There’s a pretty good chance that there was an AC in the WTC, and I’m fairly certain there was a lot of electrical insulation in there.

Of course, ” Truther” A is also the same person who insists that had the tail section of flight 77 sheared off, it should have simply plopped down on the Pentagon lawn rather than following the rest of the plane in, in CLEAR VIOLATION of Newton’s 1st Law of Motion, the Law of Inertia, which, as any real world physics text will tell you, states, ” An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion, unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.”  In short, even had the tail section of the plane sheared off, it would have STILL FOLLOWED the rest of the plane in as per Newton’s 1st Law.

Oh, and before “truthers” want to know what the unbalanced force was on the Twin Towers, that would be the planes. The answer why is quite simple.  Newton’s 2nd Law, which any physics book will tell you, is force – mass times acceleration, written as F = ma.

Now, acceleration, in physics terms, is defined as a change in velocity over time and even a millisecond is still time. Furthermore, acceleration can be positive or negative.  Obviously, the planes had mass, and it doesn’t take an Einstein to know that a plane slamming into a building at about 400 MPH is going to experience a rather abrupt change in velocity.

Of course, “Truther” A IS the one, who when asked who Newton was, said, ” Wasn’t his first name Fig?”

Next, we have  ” Truther” B ( also from an earlier article)

“Truther” B also has no understanding of the laws of physics, although he claims he does. He thinks that the airplane should have left an airplane-shaped hole in the Pentagon, or, as he puts it, ” Like objects make like holes.”  Of course, this only happens in Roadrunner cartoons.

 

Of course, “Truther” B also claimed it’s physically impossible to move more with less, which even a third-grader knows is false. After all, my car has more mass than I do, yet I’m still able to push my car. “Truther” B’s lame response to that was, ” the car has wheels.”  That does NOT change the FACT that the car is more massive than I am, or the FACT that the wheels actually ADD to the mass of the car.

Then when I pointed out to “Truther” B that you can indeed move more with less, and asked him if he had ever heard of levers and pulleys, he claimed I was suggesting that the WTC was brought down with levers.  Anyone with half a brain- which automatically eliminates “truthers-” knows I said no such thing and was merely giving one example of how one could move more with less.

“Truther” B  posted this article, claiming neutron bombs, which would be a type of nuclear bomb.   The aforementioned article

claimed that barium, strontium, chromium, thorium, uranium, lithium, lanthanum, yttrium, and tritium ( an isotope of hydrogen) all “prove” nuclear weapons because those elements should never be found in buildings.  Of course, as usual, the ” truthers” are lying.

Barium is often used in steel and cast iron  ( hmm, another component of steel in a steel-framed building- imagine that) and is also used as rat poison. It’s not inconceivable that a 30-year -old building could have a rat problem. Strontium, of course, is often used in cathode ray tubes, which things such as a computer monitor have.  It’s a safe bet that an office building will be chock full of computers.

Chromium may also be a component of steel, as I mentioned in one of my earliest articles.

Thorium can be used for electronic components ( reference), and uranium is often used in smoke detectors ( source).  Hmm, there couldn’t possibly be any electronic components or smoke detectors in any office building, could there?

Lithium is found in batteries ( source).

Lanthanum is used in glass, video cameras, cameras, etc. ( reference).

Yttrium can be used to produce the color red in TV tubes ( source)

Tritium ( which is a hydrogen atom that has 1 proton and 2 neutrons in it’s nucleus rather than the usual 1 proton and zero neutrons), can, as I mentioned in an earlier article, be found in exit signs and can also be a paint polymer.

 

Now, for one of my earliest articles, Steven Jones claimed that of the following list of elements found the WTC debris by a USGS survey,  Silicon, Calcium, Magnesium, Sulfur, Iron, Aluminum, Carbon (organic and carbonate), Sodium, Potassium, Titanium, Manganese, and Phosphorus, four of them, Sulfur, Potassium, Titanium, Manganese, “prove thermate ( reference).

 I will go down the list, but will skip anything I have already listed in this article.

Silicon, aluminum, calcium, magnesium, and sodium are often used in glass fibers ( reference).  Hmm, there couldn’t possibly be any glass fibers in windows, could there? 

Gypsum, a component of drywall contains sulfate ( which is 1 sulfur atom combined with 4 oxygen atoms) and calcium.

Concrete contains calcium, aluminum hydroxide, silicon, potassium, etc (source).

As I mentioned earlier in this article, manganese is also a component of steel.

last but not least, we have titanium, which is often used as a pigment in paint.  There’s all four of the “unusual elements” accounted for and they are all elements that would be used in the normal construction of a building.

Clearly, any claims made by “truthers” are composed of boron and sulfur.

e·vap·o·rate

Readers will remember ” Truther” B from a previous article.  Well, he is currently going on about nuclear weapons being used at the WTC despite the FACT that, as we see here, even “TRUTHERS” have debunked that claim.

“Truther” B provides the following Youtube video which purports to be after demolition. Just two problems: 1, the obvious fact that there WAS NO DEMOLITION, and two, it’s just a picture with no sound. That and the debris clould took a long time to clear.  There are many other problems with the claims of nuclear weapons, which I addressed in earlier articles here,here, and here.   “Truther” B cannot figure out that a nuclear blast with neither an electromagnetic pulse ( EMP) nor radiation is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

Now, let’s switch over to “Truther” A, also from a previous article.  At one point, ” Truther’ A claims to have seen old 1940s movies where they said, ” Pull it” when referring to the explosive demolition of a building.  There’s just two problems: 1: Movies, especially 70 year old ones, are NOT real life, and two, as we see here, demolition experts such as Brent Blanchard of Protec,    Jon Magnusson of Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Ron Dokell, retired president of Olshan Demolishing Company, and Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc.  In point of fact, the same site provides the following quotes from Brent Blanchard, and Mark Loizeaux, respectively: ”   We have never once heard the term ‘pull it’ being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a building, and neither has any blast team we’ve spoken with. The term is used in conventional demolition circles, to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment (excavators, bulldozers etc) to ‘pull’ the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement. This author and our research team were on site when workers pulled over the six story remains of WTC6 in late fall 2001, however we can say with certainty that a similar operation would have been logistically impossible at Ground Zero on 9/11, physically impossible for a building the size of WTC7, and the structure did not collapse in that manner anyway.

In the weeks following 9/11, several Protec building inspectors and staff photographers, including this author, were contracted by demolition teams to document the deconstruction and debris removal processes at Ground Zero. These processes included the mechanical pull-down of the remains of the U.S. Customs Building (WTC 6) and various other activities occurring simultaneously throughout the site,” and ”  Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. adds that the only way he can imagine the term being used is in reference to a process where the legs of a structure are precut and attached to cables, and then large machines are used to literally pull the building to the ground.”

Simply, put, only ‘TRUTHERS” are making the claim that “pull it” refers to explosive demolition.  “Truther” A makes the claim that when they used the plunger to set off explosives, the term “pull it” was used.  The trouble is, one does NOT pull the plunger to set the explosives off, they PUSH it.

Here are some other statements ” Truther” A makes in a futile effort to “prove” his claims.

He states that it was physically impossible for Flight 77 to hit the Pentagon, while ignoring the facts, such as numerous people saw the plane, not to mention the airplane debris all over the Pentagon lawn.

Next, ” Truther” A claims that the government said the planes caused the Twin Towers to evaporate. Not true- they said DISINTEGRATE.  Those are two different terms.  First, we have the dictionary definition of “evaporate, found here: ”

 [ih-vap–uh-reyt]  Show IPA

verb (used without object), e·vap·o·rat·ed, e·vap·o·rat·ing.

1.

to change from a liquid or solid state into vapor; pass off in vapor. Synonyms: vaporize.

2.

to give off moisture.

3.

to disappear; vanish; fade: His hopes evaporated. Synonyms: evanesce.

verb (used with object), e·vap·o·rat·ed, e·vap·o·rat·ing.

4.

to convert into a gaseous state or vapor; drive off or extract in the form of vapor: The warm sunevaporated the dew.

5.

to extract moisture or liquid from, as by heat, so as to make dry or to reduce to a denser state: toevaporate fruit.

6.

to cause to disappear or fade; dissipate: His involvement in the scandal evaporated any hope he had fora political career.”

Next, we have the dictionary definition of disintegrate, found here: ”

dis·in·te·grate

 [dis-in-tuh-greyt]  Show IPA

verb (used without object), dis·in·te·grat·ed, dis·in·te·grat·ing.

1.

to separate into parts or lose intactness or solidness; break up; deteriorate: The old book is graduallydisintegrating with age.

2.

Physics.

a.

to decay.

b.

(of a nucleus) to change into one or more different nuclei after being bombarded by high-energyparticles, as alpha particles or gamma rays.

verb (used with object), dis·in·te·grat·ed, dis·in·te·grat·ing.

3.

to reduce to particles, fragments, or parts; break up or destroy the cohesion of: Rocks aredisintegrated by frost and rain.” 

  As you can see, there is a difference, and as for the definition of disinegrate, there is NO SIZE RESTRICTION on parts that a whole can be broken into.

       Then again, ” Truther” A is the same moron who thinks that if the tail section of Flight 77 had sheared off, it sould have just plopped down on the Pentagon lawn instead of following the rest of the plane in, in CLEAR VIOLATION of Newton’s First Law of Motion, aka The Law of Inertia, which any physics book ( or Web site for that matter) will tell you states, ” An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.”

       Oh, and before any “truther” says there was no unbalanced force at the WTC, yes there was- the planes.  Yes, the planes did indeed have force as Newton’s 2nd Law which is often expressed as Force = mass times acceleration or F = ma.  Clearly the planes had mass. Now, as any physics book will tell you, acceleration is defined as a change in velocity over time ( and no, there is no restriction on time- even a split-second counts). Logic dictates that a plane slamming into a building at 400 to 500 MPH is going to experience a rather abrupt change in velocity over a very short period of time, therefore, per Newton’s 2nd Law, the planes had force.

       Of course, “Truther” A later proved that he knows nothing about REAL WORLD physics. When Fellow Debunker 4 asked ” Truther” A, ” Who was Newton,”  “Truther” A’s response was, ” Wasn’t his first name fig?”

       As we can see, one question you should NEVER ask a “truther” is, ” How stupid can you be?”  They take it as a challenge.   Einstein must have had “truthers” in mind when he said, ” Two things are infinite. The universe and human stupidity… and I’m not so sure about the universe.”