Anatomy of a Shill

1d1eaa in post: 499395

In the last bread, anon said the following in response to this post: >>499071

The photos are being reposted here.

''Yes a break in procedure caused it. First off, the heliports are not made from aluminum. Second of all, Have you EVER in your lifetime been anywhere near a natural gas fire that is burning? Ever wonder why there are towers or large booms hang off the side of production facilities? It's because when high volumes of gas that is flared for any reason, it keeps the intense heat away from equipment....

A laser from space did that??? That's the best one I've heard yet.''

1. Anon claims that "the heliports are not made from aluminum." Really? Because that leaves steel and steel melts at over 2500 degrees fahrenheit. Idiot.

1. Anon asks Ever wonder why there are towers or large booms hang off the side of production facilities? It's because when high volumes of gas that is flared for any reason, it keeps the intense heat away from equipment. You mean hanging off the side the way the helipad was? 'Idiot

1. Anon claims it was natural gas that caused the hole. What source of natural gas managed to pinpoint its heat underneath the helipad (that was hanging off the side so that couldn't happen) and not completely torch everything around it?

1. Anon asks if I've ever been around a natural gas fire that is burning, as if he's going to disqualify me somehow. The answer is yes, I have. I've been in more than a few oil fields and when the gas pressure goes up the burn-off pipes were throwing a flame 50-60 feet in the air. Makes quite a bit of noise. It really kind of varies depending on how much water they're pumping into the ground.

I regularly use acetylene and oxygen to cut steel and it burns one hell of a lot hotter than natural gas mixed with air. Years ago I had a small foundry and about once a month I fired it up and melted cast iron. I had another (commercial) furnace that I used for melting aluminum. I'm not a metallurgist, but I actually know quite a bit about melting metal.

The problem with your argument, anon, is the burning temp of natural gas (methane) in air at high pressure is actually lower than if it's properly mixed with air to maximize the oxygen content. With an optimal mixture natural gas burns at about 3500 degrees fahrenheit. In a high pressure environment the flame is actually spread way out for lack of oxygen. That means the heat is spread out.

The next problem is heat transference in air and an open flame radiates its heat in all directions. Which is why torches direct the flame to a specific point. Distance is likewise critical and the actual flame has to be on the metal in order to get maximal heat transfer. If the application of heat isn't concentrated the metal conducts the heat outward. When it finally melts, the melting is symmetrical to the point of the heat radiating outward in a circular fashion.

In order for your argument to work in the real world governed by physics, the entire area of the helipad had to have been completely burned to a crisp and the entire helipad should have showed evidence of massive heat.

That didn't happen.

I was informed the helipad was made of heavy aluminum 7075 plate sitting atop a steel structural support. Aluminum (and their alloys) conduct heat a lot better than steel, but either way, the asymmetrical hole with straight lines in that helipad with the dripping molten metal at the edges is the prima facie evidence that extremely high heat was directed at that helipad and melted that plate, from the top. Evidence of top down heat is the molten plate over the structural supports below, which would have blocked and absorbed heat coming from the bottom up.

Next look at the heat distortion pattern on the helipad. According to your theory that heat distortion is impossible.

This is simple physics. The claim that an out of control natural gas fire managed to somehow get underneath the helipad that was hanging off the rig so that couldn't happen and manage to be concentrated enough to melt a hole in the plate without doing any damage to anything else around it is preposterous.

>>499957

Anon, it's OK. Most people are idiots and your argument was idiotic. Preposterous. See the photo here: >>499914 and the one on the right here: >>499642

1. Where did the natural gas come from?

2) How did it get underneath the helipad?

3) How did it get concentrated enough to melt that hole with such straight lines?

4) Why didn't anything else get burned up when that happened?

This issue is extremely relevant to this board for two reasons

First, the evidence of the use of direct energy weapons is completely contrary to the narrative. If you're not already aware of Dr. Judy Wood, you seriously need to take a couple of hours and watch her examination of the evidence presented for 9/11.

When you comprehend the magnitude of the evidence that she reviews, you will begin to understand just what Q is up against here. Until you understand that, how the hell do you think you can come to grip with mind control? Educating normies is not possible unless you are able to point to clear cases of things that cannot be explained by the narrative. The Deepwater Horizon is an excellent example because unlike 9/11, normies are not emotionally invested in it.

Second, evidence for anything must be examined in the real world, rather than simply dismissed the way you did. You claim I took you out of context but all I did was examine your claim of how that hole got melted in the helipad. It failed. That is the way we must examine the evidence of everything we look at here because shills are everywhere trying to do exactly what you just did.

So, I'll take you at your word that you're not a shill. Educate yourself, the world is not what it seems