Jump to content

Pastor Hagee Scary


antix
 Share

Recommended Posts

I remember a few yrs ago I was reading a book by him on the end times and he started talking EMP weapons. He then mentioned that if one went off, all electron flow would stop for 3 months. I immediately threw the book away and said Idiot ! What is scary, I them looked him up on the internet and he is a mechanical engineer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a moron!

 

From: http://www.futurescience.com/emp/vehicles.html

Any statement concerning the effect of nuclear EMP on vehicles would depend upon details such as how your vehicle is oriented (in other words, which direction it is facing) with respect to the nuclear detonation. It would also depend upon the height of the detonation, the gamma ray output of the detonation, the distance and azimuth to the detonation, and the local strength of the Earth's magnetic field between your location and the detonation point.

It would also depend upon whether your car is parked outdoors, in a concrete garage, or in a metal garage. Obviously a metal garage is best, but concrete is somewhat conductive and will provide a little bit of protection compared to outdoors

 

.....vehicles were tested up to the level that some sort of upset occurred, then further testing was stopped on that vehicle. In most cases, after the initial upset occurred, the vehicle could be restarted. In most of the remaining cases where the vehicle could not be immediately restarted, a latch-up had occurred in the electronics, and the battery could be momentarily disconnected to "re-boot" the electronics, and the vehicle could then be restarted. This temporary electronic latch-up failure mode caused by EMP is something that almost never occurs in automobiles during a typical lifetime of operation.

(The bold highlight was part of the article and not added by me.)

I have heard all kinds of shit about EMP and nuclear weapons, over the years, Hagee's is one of the dumbest. Yes, EMP can be used to disable equipment and can be caused by a nuclear blast from an atomic bomb. However, electron flow does not 'stop for three months' otherwise we would all freeze to death for lack of heat from the sun! An EMP burst is a momentary disruption in electronic operated equipment, not lasting several months in duration. Our planet is bombarded daily from EMP from the sun and other sources in the universe/galaxy. If equipment are turned off when a nuclear bomb goes off, the equipment may be safely started after the blast--providing anyone is alive to restart the equipment.

 

I have worked with all kinds of 'engineers' and just because someone got the degree does not mean they also got the brains to do their jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

I will second that HereticZero, I've met a quite a few braindead ones. I had one try to tell me there was no way that a plane could've caused the twin towers to fall the way they did, and that it was dynamite. He used his credentials as a weapon, to say that because he was an engineer he had a voice to speak on such matters and I should just shut up and accept what he has to say as true, because he has a degree on it.

 

It's the same situation I had with a friend that tried to tell me I look bad with a unibrow (a very very faint one at that, that doesn't hurt my appearance any), he even tried using his beauty school degree as proof he knew! He studied what beauty was and I didn't! It's basically a form of "It's true because I said so, and you're too stupid/young/naive/etc...." arguement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the trade towers, I am a material's chemist and guess what: The temp og burning fuel is not enough to melt steel. That is true, however, it is more than enough to cause a phase change and severly weaken the steel. they never mention that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im one day going to write a book debunking half this end times shit, in regards to the EMP thing, its really only THAT leathel to extremely complex electronics, but cars and stuff will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im one day going to write a book debunking half this end times shit, in regards to the EMP thing, its really only THAT leathel to extremely complex electronics, but cars and stuff will be fine.

 

Anything with induction coils or transformers will have issues. But haggeee thinks it stops electron flow for 3 months. What a fucking idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

I have a general distaste for zionist nutbags. So I am glad I ditched listening to him really fast after I realized how awlful israel has been to its neigbors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

As for the trade towers, I am a material's chemist and guess what: The temp og burning fuel is not enough to melt steel. That is true, however, it is more than enough to cause a phase change and severly weaken the steel. they never mention that.

It only needed to melt it enough to make it malleable enough for the parts above to cause the towers to be top heavy. As shown in the video footage, they collapsed because of that weak steel, it collapsed. The top collapsing in is what began it, and the force of it falling caused the rest to come crumbling down. I didn't need to be a chemist, engineer, nor a physicist to see how that is possible. Anyone who has stacked up blocks as a kid, knows that if you build a tower, and then lift up the top block and drop it on the rest, the thing will tip depending on many different variables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If equipment are turned off when a nuclear bomb goes off, the equipment may be safely started after the blast--providing anyone is alive to restart the equipment.

The article you cited refers to cars, not electronic equipment such as computer systems. It doesn't matter if something is turned off if an EMP pulse hits it. It could fry it. You would need to protect it with shielding. There are entire wartime scenarios devoted to just this sort of attack. See in link.

 

As far as this Pastor's repeating of this, he of course betrays his lack of education in saying you can stop electron flow for three months. That's like saying you can reverse gravity for three months. All you need for electron "flow" is a difference of potential and a conductor. It's like saying you wouldn't have lightning for three months following a nuke, regardless of weather conditions! What could happen however is you could disrupt key infrastructure systems crippling an area for three months in order to make repairs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My grandpa is a christian, has been pretty much his whole life, and he'll be 92 in December. However, he also spent most of his life working as a civil engineer. He can still do trigonometric calculations in his head, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of any new bridge or construction by looking at it. Grandpa's always said that that there were other design flaws, apart from the use of steel, in the construction of the towers that also contributed to the towers coming down when the planes hit. As far as grandpa is concerned, those towers need not have come down, and the tragedy need not have been so great, if the towers had been constructed in a better manner. Ultimately, that tragedy was made worse by flawed design.

 

Which could also explain why that other building came down- it had its own design flaws that could not withstand the impact of the towers coming down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My grandpa is a christian, has been pretty much his whole life, and he'll be 92 in December. However, he also spent most of his life working as a civil engineer. He can still do trigonometric calculations in his head, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of any new bridge or construction by looking at it. Grandpa's always said that that there were other design flaws, apart from the use of steel, in the construction of the towers that also contributed to the towers coming down when the planes hit. As far as grandpa is concerned, those towers need not have come down, and the tragedy need not have been so great, if the towers had been constructed in a better manner. Ultimately, that tragedy was made worse by flawed design.

 

Which could also explain why that other building came down- it had its own design flaws that could not withstand the impact of the towers coming down.

 

Puleeze. You can't be serious. Google AE911 at least. At the very least. No offense to your Grandpa.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My grandpa is a christian, has been pretty much his whole life, and he'll be 92 in December. However, he also spent most of his life working as a civil engineer. He can still do trigonometric calculations in his head, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of any new bridge or construction by looking at it. Grandpa's always said that that there were other design flaws, apart from the use of steel, in the construction of the towers that also contributed to the towers coming down when the planes hit. As far as grandpa is concerned, those towers need not have come down, and the tragedy need not have been so great, if the towers had been constructed in a better manner. Ultimately, that tragedy was made worse by flawed design.

 

Which could also explain why that other building came down- it had its own design flaws that could not withstand the impact of the towers coming down.

 

Puleeze. You can't be serious. Google AE911 at least. At the very least. No offense to your Grandpa.

 

Dude, I wasn't giving my own opinion on the topic, I was reporting my grandfather's. I'm not going to sit here and say whether he was right or wrong in his opinion, simply because I have a habit of not commenting on topics I have not investigated sufficiently myself to form an opinion on. This is one of those topics. I haven't researched it, and I don't intend to start right now simply because you tell me to. I've got other shit to do, like a week's worth of study and a scholarship application to get ready for tomorrow. My grandfather's opinion on the matter was the only one I knew of, so thought I'd chuck it out there and see if anyone else had any thoughts on it. Your opinion of it is derision. Good for you. But your condescension has done little to inspire my interest of talking about your opinion any further, so I'm going to end this break from what I was doing and get back to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My grandpa is a christian, has been pretty much his whole life, and he'll be 92 in December. However, he also spent most of his life working as a civil engineer. He can still do trigonometric calculations in his head, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of any new bridge or construction by looking at it. Grandpa's always said that that there were other design flaws, apart from the use of steel, in the construction of the towers that also contributed to the towers coming down when the planes hit. As far as grandpa is concerned, those towers need not have come down, and the tragedy need not have been so great, if the towers had been constructed in a better manner. Ultimately, that tragedy was made worse by flawed design.

 

Which could also explain why that other building came down- it had its own design flaws that could not withstand the impact of the towers coming down.

 

Puleeze. You can't be serious. Google AE911 at least. At the very least. No offense to your Grandpa.

 

Dude, I wasn't giving my own opinion on the topic, I was reporting my grandfather's. I'm not going to sit here and say whether he was right or wrong in his opinion, simply because I have a habit of not commenting on topics I have not investigated sufficiently myself to form an opinion on. This is one of those topics. I haven't researched it, and I don't intend to start right now simply because you tell me to. I've got other shit to do, like a week's worth of study and a scholarship application to get ready for tomorrow. My grandfather's opinion on the matter was the only one I knew of, so thought I'd chuck it out there and see if anyone else had any thoughts on it. Your opinion of it is derision. Good for you. But your condescension has done little to inspire my interest of talking about your opinion any further, so I'm going to end this break from what I was doing and get back to it.

 

Well your Grandpa is right in a sense. You can usually build something better. Certainly the WTC could have been better designed to withstand such an impact. However there is the goal of the client and a limit to how much money they want to spend. So yes you could have designed a better Titanic or a better WTC. Humans are funny like that. We don't believe something is worth spending money on unless lots of people die in a tragedy. In the WTC the number one priority was to make wide office space so the owner could make a huge profit renting it out. Back in 1970 we figured we were all going to die in a Soviet missile attack and there was no way to build the WTC to survive that. If only they had known. However the WTC did survive a large car bomb in '93 so they didn't cut too many corners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the World Trade Towers building 7? What plane hit that?

 

Having said that, yeah, Hagee is an idiot.

 

One of the Twin Towers hit Building 7 as it collapsed, since, contrary to the conspiracy theorist religion, the twin towers weren't intentionally demolished, and they didn't fall precisely straight down like they would in a controlled demolition.

 

In the future, try watching videos of the events that don't include phrases like "THE VIDEO THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE" in the title or the description.

 

Oh, except now I suppose you'll tell me that the demolition of the Twin Towers was so precisely controlled that they made them fall exactly the way they needed to in order to hit Building 7 in exactly the right way so that it looked like a controlled demolition of that building and not like it was hit by hundred-ton chunks of another building as it collapsed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well your Grandpa is right in a sense. You can usually build something better. Certainly the WTC could have been better designed to withstand such an impact. However there is the goal of the client and a limit to how much money they want to spend. So yes you could have designed a better Titanic or a better WTC. Humans are funny like that. We don't believe something is worth spending money on unless lots of people die in a tragedy. In the WTC the number one priority was to make wide office space so the owner could make a huge profit renting it out. Back in 1970 we figured we were all going to die in a Soviet missile attack and there was no way to build the WTC to survive that. If only they had known. However the WTC did survive a large car bomb in '93 so they didn't cut too many corners.

 

Well, I suspect there is a kernel of truth in what grandpa says, even though I haven't looked fully into this topic, simply because of the type of engineer he was. When grandpa built his roads, he built them to last, taking into account all possibilities that may affect the road and its strength in the future. He would take a look at the planned road, then go out and physically survey the lie of the land for each section. He would look out for any pertinent issues, and double-check the calculations. Sometimes that meant that he found flaws in the plans, and would adjust the plans accordingly and then authorise construction for the adjusted plans. Then he'd get in trouble from his boss. Then his boss's boss would come along and survey what he had done, and commend him on the adjustments to the plans with an enthusiastic "that's a much better way for the road to curve/be!", and his immediate boss would shut the hell up.

 

So when grandpa surveys a new construction (he still can't help himself), I usually take his assessment of it on face value. And the roads he built decades ago are still in use and going strong, unlike some of the new roads in my area. A new section of road was built recently nearby, and within three weeks it had pot holes everywhere. Guess that's what happens when the bottom line becomes more important than doing something right the first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little bit of trivia about my family: As an employee of the Otis Elevator Company, my grandfather (now deceased) was one of the engineers involved with the construction of the Twin Towers, specifically the elevators/elevator shafts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about old #7? Office fires brought this thing down then? Again, word to your Grandpa's, and pudd1n', I'm not responsible for what you have to do, and I'm sorry that you feel that I have told you that have to do something. I didn't.

 

How can people believe that Jesus is God and then not, but still believe what they are told about 9/11 and then not? Like I said, at least examine Architechs and Engineers for 9/11 truth.

 

My grandpa was full blooded German and fought in WW1, in the arttillery, in the US army. Against Germany. He had family there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Puleeze. You can't be serious. Google AE911 at least. At the very least. No offense to your Grandpa.

 

In red: I'd call that you telling me to do something, mate.

 

Either way, try this on for size: I don't care to discuss this topic with you because I don't appreciate being patronised.

 

You may think that because this is an internet forum and you're sitting behind a computer screen that all decorum just flies out the window.That's just a wild guess there, going by the little interaction I've had with you and the little I've seen of you around the forum. But here's the thing. I do actually give a shit about the people sitting behind their computer screens. I do give a shit about how I interact with them. And if someone cannot be bothered with common courtesy, then I see no reason to interact with that person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at least examine Architechs and Engineers for 9/11 truth.

 

Conspiracy theories are largely paranoid delusions.

 

You know the one side of the argument. Have a look at the opposing evidence.

 

http://www.skeptic.c...eptic/06-09-11/

 

esp the article about WTC 7.

 

Firefighter Richard Banaciski "We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors."

 

The conspiracy theorist shows the photo of one side of the building without damage.

 

There are photos of the other side of the building with a 20 story hole, and raging fires.

 

The 9-11 "Truth" Movement only look at evidence to suport their existing PoV - confirmation bias. The exact same thing that goes on with religuious believers

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about old #7?

 

My guess was that the original client who ordered that 7 building did not want to pay for it to be reinforced to the standard of surviving having a thousand foot tall building fall on it. If you want you could build something into a bomb shelter to survive a wide range of attacks. That would be very expensive. Clearly the WTC7 client's main goal was to maximize office space for rental.

 

How can people believe that Jesus is God and then not, but still believe what they are told about 9/11 and then not? Like I said, at least examine Architechs and Engineers for 9/11 truth.

 

The two have nothing to do with each other. Stats are available for the old WTC. Blueprints are available. Millions of photos are available. Got a photo of God? The WTC really stood at 1 WTC plaza from the 70s until 2001.

 

The destruction of the WTC is one of the most well documented events in history. We know passenger planes were hijacked. We know those passenger jets hit towers 1 and 2. We know that the impact destroyed the fire resistant treatment on the beams. (The WTC was not designed to survive such an attack - see my earlier posts.) We know that the jet fuel fire got hot enough that the steel lost half its strength. We know that this lost of strength was more than the building was designed to take. (I suspect that was what BP's GP meant by design flaw. He might have done it differently.) We know that the collapse of tower 1 and 2 began at the impact site. Thus we know the collapse was caused by the impact and not some fantasy about demolition. We know that the collapse was not like a controlled demolition. (Sure everything fell down because of gravity but a waterfall falls down too. Is a controlled demolition like a waterfall?) We know building 7 was damaged in the collapse. These are demonstrated facts.

 

What is there to conspiracy? I could go through the events with the other two planes if you like but it ends the same.

 

Why is it so hard for you to accept the story told by the evidence?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I thought there would be more about Hagee being an idiot here:( I actually went to Cornerstone Church once and drove past it probably a gazillion times (it's on loop 1604 in San Antonio). It's MASSIVE. The parking lot itself is MASSIVE. It's like a huge ampitheatre inside and Hagee has his own WHITE CHAIR. There are like, balconies and people speak in tongues on command. (That's the part where I crept out because it was just sooo weird.) Plus he has this huge full color video billboard thing outside. That guy has a buttload of money. I can't stand the way he talks and how he thinks it's all about him. His name on everything. He has a bookstore in the church to sell all his writings. I think that's just plain wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't stand the way he talks and how he thinks it's all about him. His name on everything. He has a bookstore in the church to sell all his writings. I think that's just plain wrong.

 

Agreed. He is so un-Christian. Gluttony is supposed to be a major sin, yet he obviously stuffs his face all day :D He was one of my least favorite tv preachers, when I watched that stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't stand the way he talks and how he thinks it's all about him. His name on everything. He has a bookstore in the church to sell all his writings. I think that's just plain wrong.

 

Agreed. He is so un-Christian. Gluttony is supposed to be a major sin, yet he obviously stuffs his face all day biggrin.png He was one of my least favorite tv preachers, when I watched that stuff.

 

So are greed and pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.