Surface-to-air missile engagements with large systems (not MANPADS) are frontal or near-frontal engagements. A tail chase is a rotten way to bring down a plane. The system is driven by computer, which is connected to the tracking radar---which is looking toward the direction of attack, not over its shoulder. About the only human control available is to select a target and commit to engage. No "punching in of coordinates." (I once worked on the propulsion and system [guidance] engineering for the U.S. ROLAND 2 anti-aircraft missile.)

The idea that it was an accidental shot is, frankly, ridiculous. Not helped by the Ukrainian initial attempt to declare it a Russian missile (disproven by the serial numbers found), and the feeble suggestion that it was a runaway. The Poles know better. They were keeping circumspect until it developed there was no benefit from it. It is interesting how the Poles announce themselves as Ukraine's best ally, but in all other respects they seem to despise Ukraine.

It's beginning to look like your best bet for eternal life is to be declared dead by Ukraine (repeatedly).

Kind of old news. This was known within days of the event. It was circumstantially impossible for it to be a mistaken shot or a Russian missile.

There was no way it could have been a "misfire". Russian air attacks were coming from the south and south-east. Any intercepting missile would have had to been fired in that direction. The missile in question had to be fired in the direct opposite direction (north-west) to land in Poland.

MSM relies on people not knowing where anything is.

I think the history is that Ukrainians (a people, not a nationality) lived in that region of Poland (Galicia) originally. Similar to the inhabitants of Transylvania originally being in Austria-Hungary, not Romania.

Basically, regarding the U.S., I agree. I have family in Africa, however, so the matter has some closeness for me. And whoever and however anyone looks at us, we should observe some decorum in how we look at others.

And what did you hear? My telepathy is worth shit, these days.

I'm not sure at all that the media "hate" Kamala Harris. She is an obvious doofus, and most in the media probably (and correctly) think they are smarter than her, so there will always be the snobbery and unconscious racism of the liberal pseudo-intellectual. But they tolerate her as a necessary means to an end. I don't see any animus toward her guiding forces. I think the environment is "we don't have to like her in order to follow orders." She is so craven and dependent, she will follow her orders, too. So, she is "theirs" in any meaningful use of the word.

Okay. I can accept that. But, in future, please be more aware of how things can seem and what the proper attributions are. Africa has its problems, to be sure, but we don't have the right to look down on their problems when ours are at the level of planet-busting.

No numbers, so you are still arm waving. I am familiar with the combustion energy of aluminum because of its use in large solid rocket boosters. The propellant is about 30% aluminum powder.

Pyroclastic clouds are hot ash made buoyant by the hot air entraining it. Volcanoes produce them, not explosives. I notice the continual oscillation between blaming "explosives" or "thermite." Explosives are not thermite, and thermite is not an explosive. Explosives generate large volumes of gas. Thermite generates a large amount of heat (from combustion of aluminum---which you should think abou,t if you want to pooh-pooh the energy available from aluminum combustion). More arm-waving. And I am beginning to suspect that these architects were in over their heads with this analysis.

What is there about "shattering, crumbling, and spalling" that is not "pulverization"? Reduction to dust is an outcome, along with all kinds of bits and pieces that cannot withstand the collision environment of a massive collapse. There would never be a stack of concrete pancakes. That would be the most amazing development of all. (A structural simulation of the WTC7 collapse showed an asymmetric process that involved the twisting and separation of the steel columns. Unless the floor slabs were intended for a hydroelectric dam, this would be like crushing a soup cracker.)

If clouds of dust proceeded from all three towers, the thing they had in common was a rapid chain-reaction compressive overload, and all the concrete breaking up upon impact with each other and with the ground.

Melting is a matter of temperature. You don't have to melt all the steel in order to melt steel. How do you think we melt it in the first place? We combust carbon-based materials.

I can see that you resist paying attention. I pointed out earlier to you (I think it was you...these detached fragments of thread destroy a sense of continuity) that gravity provided essentially all the energy necessary to pull down the Towers. The jet fuel was in copious supply, over 11,000 gallons for a full load (about 70,000 pounds). This does not include an unknown amount of aluminum vapor that may have combusted at much higher flame temperature. It only takes a temperature of 1100 F to reduce the strength of structural steel to 30% of its room-temperature value.

You really don't know what you are talking about. You are waving your hands and making assertions based only on your supposition, not on any hard information. Once the column-bearing strength of a damaged floor has been reduced below the structural margin, a compressive shear collapse is immediate, propagating from column to column at about 5,940 feet/second.

BitCoin et al. have geometrically growing requirements for electric power. This is not "sustainable." It will only be a matter of time before BitCoin requirements compete with cities, regions, nations, and the entire civilized world. For what? The maintenance of an electronic Chinese juggling act? It produces nothing of value.

1. They are "Nigeriens" not "Nigers." Your racism is palpable.

2. They are expelling a colonial power. We should be the last to criticize, especially since we have nothing to brag about in our "civil society" where the sexes have become components of fruit salad, children are aborted, people are inoculated with death, and God is ignored.

3. In light of (2) above, we would be best advised to mind our own business.

So much for theory. Objectively, it is on a par with a rust that kills all grains and a plague that kills all beef, pork, and chickens, and a shortage of power that darkens all lights and ceases the use of refrigeration. The fact is that THERE IS NO GOOD IN BITCOIN, and there is no virtue in supporting it.

I'm not interested in "Major Lowery" if you can't express his argument in a sentence. It shows me poor understanding on your part.

We will know the end only by Christ's appearing. Anything else is false prophecy, and you should know that. What do you think we need to be "aware" of, if the foretold sign has not appeared?

No, it is not treason. It is nefarious and probably against some law, somewhere, but that is it. Treason is defined by the Constitution very specifically and we do no one any service by making wild allegations outside of that definition. ("He's spitting on the sidewalk. That's treason!") It is the sort of over-the-top exaggeration that flags "Just walk by" to any bystander. It doesn't stop you from describing the truth, which is disgusting and unpatriotic enough to point blame.

If Biden and Harris are "ours," I've got some schizophrenic feral cats I can sell you. Of course it is a move that could benefit the cabal; they know the liabilities of a gangrened limb.

BitCoin (and its like) are all imaginary money. They are less real than Monopoly money, which is at least physical and subject to the law of supply and demand. BitCoin is also an addiction to an ever-growing demand for computational---and thus electrical---power, which is inherently finite. Instead of being an avatar of resources, it is a necessary and increasingly massive consumption of resources, for no value produced.

1. As for solar power, the vision is extravagant and ignorant. It, too, is a prolific consumer of resources and one cannot obtain power except from rectenna arrays that would be the size of cities. The photons are free; everything else is phenomenally expensive, and biased toward urban population concentrations. (Not to mention that nuclear powerplants are less expensive and more compact.)

2. A "smart grid" has nothing to do with being smart (ever tried to talk to an AI robot about a customer complaint?) and everything to do with being controlled (back to the AI robot, and its limited choice menu). Calling it "smart" is pure, gaslighting salesmanship. One is a fool to take it at face value.

3. So, this may not be the End Times? Surprise, surprise. We were told by Christ Himself that we would not know until His advent. Why are we so obsessed with believing in Bible prophecy---but refuse to take Christ's word for it? Better to have peace in accepting Christ than to become frantic rats scurrying in fear and apprehension. Only the former will save us.

Talk of aluminum was to point out sources of heat (and potential temperatures) in the conflagration. Your claim about the energy available from the aluminum is arm waving; it would be interesting if you actually were able to produce numbers. And it would be beside the point, because the main energy involved in the destruction of each of the Towers was gravitational potential energy. Failure of concrete in compression leads to fragmentation, shattering, crumbling, and spalling. I've seen this in a materials testing laboratory. No mystery that a cloud was produced. What are we talking about, now? The Twin Towers or WTC7? I've seen structural wreckage from both. If you are going to call it a pyroclastic cloud, you can hardly deny its origins in a combustion environment. Otherwise, it is simply a cloud. I've seen that, too (Mount St. Helens eruption).

My apology. Bad mental transfer. I've been laboring under a regime of very high blood pressure and it interferes with my concentration. In any case, the point was that the flame temperature of available combustibles was adequate to melt steel and produce the tiny spheres.

There may not be much to do. The special case is aluminum catching fire. It is extremely energetic (used for rocket fuel) and would ordinarily not be present---unless an airplane crashes into your building. I don't see that there is much that can be done. The materials in use are arguably suitable and well-performing. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-temperature-strength-d_1353.html

Not burning with a profusion of aviation fuel and the prospect of burning aluminum vapor. The flame temperature of kerosene is 2,093 deg C. But the flame temperature of aluminum (vapor, in oxygen) is 3,732 deg C. That ups the ante considerably.

Nothing funny in the topic, but it reminded me of the popular rock group, Emerson, Lake, and Palmer. I used to joke by asking "Who is Emerson Lake---and what does he embalm?" (Emerson Lake, embalmer)

Somehow, I can't get back to the original thread and have lost the stream of consciousness. I don't know how to answer.

The examples before us are the Twin Towers and WTC7. The Twin Towers were anomalous from the standpoint of a lot of fuel being available to feed the fires, along with the potential of burning aluminum vapor, which is far more exothermic. WTC7 did not have burning airplanes to deal with, but it did have internal carbon-based fuel and a disabled extinguishing system, and took a prolonged time to develop a crisis.

I'm not a skyscraper architect, so I am unacquainted with other cases, but these are quite unique. It does open up a significant vulnerability in the way we construct skyscrapers. There may be no practical defense. (Or we build tall buildings as ziggurats or pyramids.) I think it would be rational to make sure that approach and departure corridors to airports do not go over urban high-rise building districts.

Yes. But I recall the strategy was to keep the AFU already near Kiev from reinforcing the Donbass. Small difference.