Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #521075
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: How fire works for the ignorant |
| Date | 2015-09-14 17:05 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <3cbjcc-0v1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <mt4min$a00$1@dont-email.me> <rsdhcc-afo.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <mt6gul$pm6$1@dont-email.me> <pm7jcc-9f1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <mt6tp8$hed$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they >>>>>>> stay burning afterwards? >>>>>> >>>>>> They did, delusional fuckwit. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hell, normal office fires keep burning strong even after a building >>>>>>> collapses because of fire but that was not the case with WTC1, WTC2 >>>>>>> or WTC7. >>>>>> >>>>>> No fire continues to burn "strong" after a building collapse and the >>>>>> flow of air is reduced, delusional fuckwit. >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip remaining delusional raving> >>>>> >>>>> Have you seen this video ? >>>>> After you watch it, would you care to try again ? >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> And what does this video have to do with the physics of fire? >>>> >>>> While a building is standing, the rooms withing contain lots of air >>>> to support a fire and if windows are broken, such as happens when >>>> an airplane goes through them and there is a subsequent explosion, >>>> air is free to enter the fire area. >>>> >>>> After a building collapses, most of the air source goes away. >>>> >>>> Take some firewood and make a jumbled stack and a neat stack by criss- >>>> crossing the wood so there are lots of air passages and light both. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Response: Top 7 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Debunked >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os8mXNTTRrA >>> >>> >>> The video above already deals with your falacies, obfuscation, and >>> misdirection. >> >> Nope. >> >>> If you want to talk about campfires and how the contents of an office >>> can burn for days when there is a limited amount of fuel. >> >> Limited amount of AIR, fuckwit. > > > > Huh? With a plane sized hole ? and a fire couldn't get air ????? The hole disappears when the building collapses into a pile of rubble, fuckwit. -- Jim Pennino
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 12:16 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 14:09 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 13:38 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:51 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:31 -0500
Re: Rocky's legal woes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:57 +0000
Re: Rocky's legal woes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:16 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:40 -0500
Re: Rocky the stalker jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:27 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:24 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:21 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES + more on his BIG LIES) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 08:09 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES + more on his BIG LIES) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:38 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:34 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:39 -0500
Re: More Rocky delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 21:17 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:44 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-15 01:27 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 21:05 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-16 14:06 +0000
Re: Broken airplanes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 18:04 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 14:05 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 10:51 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:02 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:05 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:25 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 10:28 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 11:31 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:14 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 17:47 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:04 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 23:46 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:22 -0700
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 10:19 -0400
Re: smoke and fire jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:29 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-09-13 14:27 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-13 11:34 -0700
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 13:43 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:53 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:59 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:24 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 22:43 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:50 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:21 -0500
Re: Rocky's delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:29 +0000
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:25 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid Wills is FULL OF SHIT ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 09:35 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Roger "Rocky" Wittekind is caught in ANOTHER lie.) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:43 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Roger "Rocky" Wittekind is caught in ANOTHER lie.) noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 10:48 -0700
Re: Rocky doesn't understand fire jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:26 +0000
9/11 debunkers, debunked - Re: Rocky doesn't understand fire "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:35 -0400
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 16:00 -0500
Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-13 23:29 +0100
Re: Rocky denies reality jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:39 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:36 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 09:11 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 16:03 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 12:48 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 12:50 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 17:05 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 20:43 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 21:15 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 09:47 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:13 -0500
Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 18:24 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-15 15:32 -0700
Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 20:42 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 22:36 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 19:57 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 00:13 +0000
Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 20:43 -0400
Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 01:20 +0000
csiph-web