logo Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
2017-05-27 04:08:29 CoV Wiki
Learn more about the Church of Virus
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Do you want to know where you stand?

 1   General / Society & Culture / Re:The Red Pill  on: 2017-05-20 11:26:18 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by David Lucifer
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 2   General / Serious Business / Re:9/11 Redux – Studies pointing to the Controlled Demolition Theory  on: 2017-04-14 15:51:02 
Started by Fox | Last post by Fritz

Well Now ... a node to Hermit from a FB post. Keep those tinfoil hats handy because it just got real again. These are not a bunch of, dare I say it, fake news nut bars; thousands of material subject experts have weighted in on this:

Cheers Fritz


It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition

Source: reflection of mind
Author:  European Scientific Journal 47/4
Date:  2016


the lead:
http://reflectionofmind.org/official-european-scientific-journal-concludes-911-controlled-demolition

John Peterson | October 15, 2016 | Activism, News

15-years after the attacks on September 11th, the European Scientific Journal, a publication of theEuropean Scientific Institute (ESI), published an article titled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” in which they analyze the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The results of their findings continue to indicate that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and the fact that this controversial topic was covered by a publication that boasts aneditorial committee from reputable colleges and universities around the world (despite the article’s disclaimer), can be considered yet another small victory for 9/11 Truthers.


It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition
John Peterson | October 15, 2016 | Activism, News

15-years after the attacks on September 11th, the European Scientific Journal, a publication of theEuropean Scientific Institute (ESI), published an article titled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” in which they analyze the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The results of their findings continue to indicate that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and the fact that this controversial topic was covered by a publication that boasts aneditorial committee from reputable colleges and universities around the world (despite the article’s disclaimer), can be considered yet another small victory for 9/11 Truthers.

The study was written in collaboration by Steven Jones of Brigham Young University (now retired), Robert Korol of McMaster University – a Mechanical Design Engineer in the aerospace industry, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The highly-sourced study breaks down the scientific evidence while revealing the discrepancies in NIST’s official report, and we suggest our readers – especially the skeptics – read it in its entirety.

One of the most important testimonies on the collapse of the World Trade Towers that was brought to attention in the study comes from the head structural engineer of the towers, John Skilling. It is apparently not enough for skeptics to take the findings of thousands of architects and engineersseriously, but should a skeptic choose not to at least consider the expertise of one of the men who built the WTC towers, then they are purposefully remaining blind.

Every sort of catastrophe that can happen to a high-rise building has to be taken into consideration during the design and construction processes, including the impact of an airplane. According to a 1993report from The Seattle Times, the Trade Towers were analyzed years ago, after concern was raised over a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building. It was concluded at the time that the Trade Towers could withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.


It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition
John Peterson | October 15, 2016 | Activism, News

15-years after the attacks on September 11th, the European Scientific Journal, a publication of theEuropean Scientific Institute (ESI), published an article titled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” in which they analyze the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The results of their findings continue to indicate that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and the fact that this controversial topic was covered by a publication that boasts aneditorial committee from reputable colleges and universities around the world (despite the article’s disclaimer), can be considered yet another small victory for 9/11 Truthers.

The study was written in collaboration by Steven Jones of Brigham Young University (now retired), Robert Korol of McMaster University – a Mechanical Design Engineer in the aerospace industry, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The highly-sourced study breaks down the scientific evidence while revealing the discrepancies in NIST’s official report, and we suggest our readers – especially the skeptics – read it in its entirety.

One of the most important testimonies on the collapse of the World Trade Towers that was brought to attention in the study comes from the head structural engineer of the towers, John Skilling. It is apparently not enough for skeptics to take the findings of thousands of architects and engineersseriously, but should a skeptic choose not to at least consider the expertise of one of the men who built the WTC towers, then they are purposefully remaining blind.

Every sort of catastrophe that can happen to a high-rise building has to be taken into consideration during the design and construction processes, including the impact of an airplane. According to a 1993report from The Seattle Times, the Trade Towers were analyzed years ago, after concern was raised over a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building. It was concluded at the time that the Trade Towers could withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.

In a statement made to The Seattle Times by Skilling:

“We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen to the buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side, however back in those days people didn’t think about terrorists very much.” He continues, “Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane)would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed. The building structure would still be there. However, I’m not saying that properly applied explosives – shaped explosives – of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage. I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it.”

As stated in the study: “In other words, Skilling believed the only mechanism that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition.” It should be pointed out, as well, that a steel-framed high-rise building has never completely collapsed from fire. And yet on September 11, 2001, three buildings supposedly collapsed in this manner, one of which wasn’t even hit by a plane.

It was on this latter point that the authors concluded their study. They state:

“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists.”

This article (European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.

The article referred to in the lead.
http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/04/epn2016-47-4.pdf

 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 3   General / Serious Business / STAND UP FOR THE RIGHT TO CRITICISE ISLAM  on: 2017-04-11 21:04:01 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by David Lucifer
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/criticising-basphemy/

We risk gradually having an offence of blasphemy imposed on the west
"It is wrong to describe this as Islamic terrorism. It is Islamist terrorism. It is a perversion of a great faith.” This is what the prime minister said in parliament after the attack on Westminster Bridge that killed three tourists and a policeman. While I completely accept that the sins of extremists should never be visited on the vast majority of moderate believers, I am increasingly uneasy about how we handle the connection between religion and extremism. The ideology to which Khalid Masood was converted in prison may indeed be a perversion of Islam, but it is a version of it. We should not shy away from saying so.

After Nice, Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation wrote that saying such terrorism has nothing to do with Islam (as some do) is as dangerous as stating that it has everything to do with Islam. The terrorists in London, Paris, Brussels, Nice, Munich, Berlin, Würzburg, Ansbach, Orlando, San Bernardino, Sydney, Bali, New York, Bombay and many other places have been white, black and brown, rich, poor and middle class, male and female, gay and straight, immigrant and native, young and (now) older. The one thing they have in common is that they had been radicalised by religious preachers claiming to interpret the Koran.

Moreover, while a few sick individuals find within Islam justification for murder and terror, a far larger number find justification for misogyny and intolerance. We must be allowed to say this without being thought to criticise Muslims as people.

Islamist terrorism has become more frequent, but criticism of the faith of Islam, and of religion in general, seems to be becoming less acceptable, as if it were equivalent to racism or blasphemy. The charge of Islamophobia is too quickly levelled. Friday’s press release from Malia Bouattia, president of the National Union of Students, is a case in point. It failed to mention by name the murdered policeman Keith Palmer, and highlighted how Muslims “will be especially fearful of racism”. Race and religion are very different things.

I admire many religious people. I am prepared to accept that being religious can make some individuals better people, though, as a humanist, I also think it is possible and actually preferable to be moral without having faith. I am even open to the possibility that the best defence against extremism is a gentler version of religion rather than none at all — though I need to be convinced. But I think that, rather than there being good religion and bad religion, there is a spectrum of religious belief from virtuous, individualist morality at one end to collectivist, politicised violent terror at the other.

At one end are people who are inspired by faith to think only of how to help those in need. At the other are people who kill policemen and tourists, throw homosexuals off buildings, punish apostasy with death, carry out female genital mutilation and throw acid in the face of women who have stood up against the male code (there were 431 acid attacks in Britain last year).

In between, though, are positions that also contain dangers, albeit more subtle ones. There are people who would not commit violence themselves, but think women should be the chattels of men, wearing of veils is mandatory and that Sharia should reign. Then there are people (and here I include those in other Abrahamic faiths) who think homosexuality is sinful, contraception is wrong, evolution could not have happened and slaughtering animals by cutting their throats is more moral than stunning them. I do not condemn such beliefs as evil, but nor do I respect them.

On LBC radio last week the journalist James O’Brien said of those, like Masood, who have made the journey from faith to extremism: “Don’t we have to start mocking the early stages of that journey? People who believe that chopping off a child’s foreskin is going to make it easier for them to get into heaven. People who believe that eating fish on Fridays is somehow going to please their god.”

In 1979, some Christians took offence at Monty Python’s Life of Brian, a witty if mordant satire on the phenomenon of cults (and Romans). The Christians were angry but the Pythons did not go into hiding.Two years ago, in the wake of the murder of his fellow satirists at Charlie Hebdo, the late Australian cartoonist Bill Leak went further than simply saying “Je suis Charlie” and drew cartoons of the Prophet. As a result he was forced to sell his house and move to a secret location. That does not feel like progress to me.

In 2004, after the media was filled with discussion of how the Boxing Day tsunami was an “act of God”, I said to a friend, in all seriousness: the tsunami was not an act of God, but 9/11 was. I was consciously echoing Voltaire’s mockery of the argument that the destruction of Lisbon in an earthquake must be a punishment for the sins of its inhabitants. Would I dare say the same today about the events of last week, or would I pause now to consider how it would get me into trouble?

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali wrote recently of the “creeping Islamisation of communities” and called for an Islamic reformation to respect freedom of religion, abjure legal punishment for blasphemy or apostasy and agree that women should be free and equal in law. Yet, despite two decades of partly religion-inspired violence, those who call for an Islamic reformation, such as Mr Nawaz, or the ex-Muslim campaigners Sarah Haider, Taslima Nasreen and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, are increasingly vilified by many on the left.

Three days before the Westminster attack, the BBC’s Asian Network quite rightly apologised for asking “what is the right punishment for blasphemy?” shortly after an outspoken atheist had been hacked to death in Coimbatore, India, for expressing his views. There have been 48 murders of atheists in Bangladesh in recent years. Yet it is now more acceptable to attack “militant atheists” than militant theists. Blasphemy is back.

We can and must make an offer to the fundamentalist Muslims: abandon your political ambitions and become a religion as this has come to be understood elsewhere in an increasingly diverse and tolerant world — a private moral code, a way of life, a philosophy — and you will find the rest of us to be friends. But threaten the hard-won political, intellectual and physical freedoms now accorded to every man and woman, yes even and especially women, in our essentially secular society and you will be resisted and, pray god, defeated.

By: Matt Ridley
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 4   General / Society & Culture / Re:The Red Pill  on: 2017-02-18 11:35:29 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by David Lucifer
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 5   General / Science & Technology / Our rooftops are collecting stardust  on: 2017-01-25 22:30:26 
Started by Mermaid | Last post by Mermaid
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/no-urban-legend-our-rooftops-are-collecting-stardust/

[...]
To some extent, scientists are professional downers, the people whose job it is to respond to outrageously improbable stories with "well, actually..." But every now and again they manage to confirm something that lots of people wanted to believe anyway.

This is one of those stories.

For years, amateur astronomers have been suggesting that microscopic, spherical particles collected from their roofs are actually tiny meteorites, the dust that formed our Solar System fallen to Earth. Scientists took the claim at face value but ended up being the downers again, at least initially. As a recent paper on this topic describes it:

    A popular belief among amateur astronomers is that modern-day extraterrestrial dust can be collected on roofs in urban environments. Studies by Nininger (1941) reported large numbers of magnetic spherules collected in urban areas; however, later studies showed that the abundance of magnetic particles decreases away from urban areas, and that urban spherules are largely artificial in origin. Despite these studies, amateur collection projects in built-up areas have been common, even though most researchers in micrometeorites consider this occurrence an urban myth.

(The pun on the word "urban" there is their fault, not mine.)

One of those amateurs is a Norwegian artist and jazz guitarist named Jon Larsen, who created a group called Project Stardust. Larsen managed two impressive feats to get the issue revisited. One, he convinced people in Oslo to gather materials from their roof gutters (although, oddly, one sample also came from Paris). And not just a few—material came in from buildings that collectively possessed 30,000 square meters of roof.

The second feat was that Larsen got a small international team of scientists (Belgian and UK) to take this seriously.

Faced with about 300kg of roof debris, the authors separated the material using a combination of magnets and physical shape—micrometeorites are spherical because they melt during atmospheric entry and are shaped by the air. From that 300kg, the researchers isolated 500 particles, all just a few hundred micrometers across, that looked like they were micrometeorites. Forty-eight of them were chosen for detailed analysis.

All 48 of them appear to be genuine micrometeorites. They have levels of seven different elements that are similar to those in chondrites, a common class of interplanetary debris. The most common mineral is olivine, which frequently occurs in micrometeorites because it's easy to form during the rapid heating/cooling of atmospheric entry. Some of them have chemicals that are rare in Earth rocks, and most lack elements like sodium, which tend to boil off as they're heated. Three of the four internal textures found in known micrometeorites appear in this collection.

And in contrast to most of the micrometeorite samples we've collected in the past, these materials have only recently fallen to Earth. Commercial buildings in Oslo apparently clean their gutters every six years on average, and the oldest building that these came from is only 50 years old. The relative precision of these dates, combined with the also precise measure of roof area, allowed the authors to estimate that the Earth is struck by about six tonnes of micrometeorites every day. Put differently, every square meter of the Earth gets hit about twice a year.

Before you look at those numbers, get excited, and head up to the roof to grab your own little bit of stardust, it's important to keep this all in perspective. The research team had to sort through an average of nearly a kilogram of roof gunk just to find one object that was, typically, 300 micrometers across. But if that's worth it for you, by all means, head for the gutters.[...]
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 6   General / Society & Culture / Re:The Red Pill  on: 2016-12-31 11:55:09 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by David Lucifer
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 7   General / Philosophy & Religion / Re:The Reality Equation  on: 2016-12-06 04:36:52 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by Fox

Quote from: David Lucifer on 2016-12-01 15:06:40   
UFOs? crop circles? I recommend skepticism.


Ah, yes, there were extra-terrestrial implications in there as well. I should have noted/warned you of that caveat. Not that I buy into crop circles, but yet neither am I sufficiently qualified to really comment on them all. However, there are some amazingly complex patterns out there which I never actually quite realized until watching that video; which of course, and I completely agree with that a large dose of skepticism is necessary. The patterns in nature and the energy implications surrounding them are also quite interesting, but surely not our only options (if really options at all) for a clean and sustainable environment/world.
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 8   General / Philosophy & Religion / Re:The Reality Equation  on: 2016-12-01 15:06:40 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by David Lucifer

Quote from: Fox on 2016-11-30 06:18:30   

Perhaps I should have started a new thread on this instead, but has anyone here seen Thrive, and it's hypocritical implications? The Torus concept they use in the beginning, and it's patterns in nature, reminded me a little of this thread - http://www.thrivemovement.com/the_movie

UFOs? crop circles? I recommend skepticism.
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 9   General / Philosophy & Religion / Re:The Reality Equation  on: 2016-11-30 06:18:30 
Started by David Lucifer | Last post by Fox
Perhaps I should have started a new thread on this instead, but has anyone here seen Thrive, and it's hypocritical implications? The Torus concept they use in the beginning, and it's patterns in nature, reminded me a little of this thread - http://www.thrivemovement.com/the_movie
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

 10   General / Serious Business / Re:9/11 Redux – Studies pointing to the Controlled Demolition Theory  on: 2016-11-30 06:07:15 
Started by Fox | Last post by Fox
Thank-you Fritz for this addition. I have actually seen the video myself a while back, I had forgotten it relevance here. Quite thought-provoking indeed. Though what kind of jury we would need or require to seek justice on this, should it eventually and ultimately prove to be true, I'm not quite sure. Perhaps hard and irrefutable evidence for all this is one of the things that Edward Snowden or Wikileaks haven't revealed yet, and probably for good reason if it would (even possibly) happen to start or ignite a bloody revolution - something I'm sure we would all ultimately lose against any competent and brutish government, armed to the teeth.

Having said that though, perhaps they could just be waiting for the right time and moment to release such information, a time which would be advantageous to any mass public revolt against the government and it's elite masters. But of course, I'm not holding my breath - despite as wonderful as doing away with the current world order sounds right now. At this point, this is all merely curiousity with a healthy dose of scepticism.


Regards.
 Reply Reply with quote Notify of replies

Return to the board index.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Church of Virus BBS | Powered by YaBB SE
© 2001-2002, YaBB SE Dev Team. All Rights Reserved.

Please support the CoV.
Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS! RSS feed