Topic: [Vote] Who did 911? - page 33. (Read 63039 times)

Yeah seems like I fairly easily disprove the claim that the steel beams couldn't have melted last couple pages.  

So don't throw out the crack pipe option.

And yes, it certainly looks like it was an inside job - an inside job by Muslim Terrorists inside the airplane cockpits. 

Probably an inside job, but most likely - we won't know for sure...  Gee, those action films are starting to look realistic now - with all the fighting and backstabbing (Captain American - The Winter Soldier).  There was also talk regarding the structure of the twin towers and how they shouldn't have been affected the way they were because of their steal beams - I saw it somewhere on an article.

Off topic - You know it's serious when the fourth most voted option is: "I don't care. Where is my crack pipe?"

Just because the sonic broadcasting pulverized much of the concrete, doesn't mean the metal was pulverized. When you drop chunks of this and that from 1,300 feet in a conglomerate mess, you never can tell the exact place that all the pieces will land.

Hey Netpyder first things first.   There is a joke about a Mom yelling to her kid "Come to dinner!".  The kid is in his room on a computer and he yells back "I'll be there.  Just a minute.  Someone on the Internet is wrong!"

Real life is important.

hello,
i have not forgotten our debate , i am just a little bit busy with my personnal life, not going very well right now. i will post the notes when i finish sorting out the real life problem i have first. i am sorry to keep you waiting

So everyone picked the US Gov? I think its least likely to be them. It was da joos!

Sez who?  You?  Controlled demolition means just that - the force of the explosive charges is applied to a job, not to randomly blowing things up and tossing shrapnel around.  This is crazy talk.  There are hundreds of controlled demo videos, go show one where something is tossed 500 feet.

To illustrate the problem, ask what kind of explosion would toss a Humvee 500 feet.   That's not characteristic of a "controlled demolition."  Neither is it something a 500 lb shell would do.  In fact, no explosive would do this, because it would disintegrate the metal into small pieces rather than move it as a large object.  This is because the metal disintegrates when the shock wave exceeds the speed of sound in steel.  High explosives pressure wave exceed that requisite velocity by a factor of ten.

If the debris field mound extended 500 feet, which it did, who says the chunk didn't just slide down the mound and come to a stop at marker 500.

If 4-ton chunks of metal were tossed 500 feet in the collapse of the Twin Towers, then controlled demolition absolutely does toss 4-ton chunks of metal 500 feet.

But wait, there's more.  No "controlled demolition" tosses 4 ton chunks of metal 500 feet.  

So WTF?  I would like a clear and simple explanation of one or both or the best of these theories, because I truly don't get it.  And no rambling off into Evil World Overlords halfway through the explanation -we might be in agreement about the Evil World Overlords, but that doesn't have anything to do with HOW a building falls down or whether a plane hit it.

For people catching up, the situation appears to be this.

One conspiracy theorist on the thread (BADecker) argues that the fact that the towers collapsed into their own footprint implies explosives were used.

A different conspiracy theorist on the thread (TECSHARE) argues that the fact that the towers didn't collapse into their own footprint implies explosives were used.

Brilliant.

I'm fairly confident that gripflierGO was just making a short meaningless post to get his sig ad an extra view. A lot of users do that. It's annoying.

The fact that your hands are typing and words are appearing does not mean that you make sense.  Your ad hominem attacks don't shield a basic issue.  Why is #3 a useful or necessary item for the bad guys?

That would be like trying to rob a bank, and having one team go in with guns and another at the same time trying to tunnel in from underground.

It was an inside job, done by parts of the U.S. government and the U.S. military. Some of the terrorist that these U.S. perpetrators used may have been Muslim... at least on the outside. It absolutely was NOT the Muslims that did 9/11.

You really ARE going off the deep end. You should be asking this question of the families of the people who died.

Muslim were not did 911 attack...!!!

Muslims are not a terrorists......


Muslims don't kill innocent People....

“If someone kills another person – unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth – it is as if he had murdered all mankind.”  (Surat al-Ma’ida: 32)

Islam is perfect..

Well, 500-600 feet is the actual limit of the rubble heap, so it's not like it was 3x beyond the rubble.   

I'm not sure what you are trying to say (bolded above).  The force any falling object has is related to it's mass and gravitational acceleration.  A lightweight object is equally capable of going the same distance as a heavy object if either is deflected sideways.   Because the force involved is gravity.....

Now you seem to think that additional force over and above that would be required - I don't see why.  At 1800 feet, we could talk about something like that.  But why do you think it would be required just at the edge of the rubble heap?

Also, some steels certainly can snap, and quite obviously hundreds of welded together steel box columns did come apart into bunches of pieces, didn't they?

Finally, I don't even see the logic or internal consistency in the conspiracy theory as presented.  Let me show you why.

1.  Plane hits building at level XYZ.
2.  Building burns for an hour.
3.  Carefully planted explosives at or about the same level XYZ are detonated.
4.  Building collapses FROM FLOORS PLANE STRUCK.

You realize that after the plane hit that building was totally worthless, whether or not it went down?  It would have had to be destroyed later as unsafe and dangerous.

So why is #3 a useful or necessary item for the bad guys?

It makes no sense.   As for the "traces of thermite found?"   This is pretty laughable from several points of view.  A lot of thermite compounds exist, typically we might look at iron oxide and aluminum, both finely powdered.  Well, you could find those anywhere.  That is not evidence of thermite.  It's just rust and maybe beer cans.

Next, thermite is not an explosive as we typically use the term.  So it's not going to launch 4 ton chunk of metal anywhere.  To get around this problem I understand the answer is ratcheted up - "Oh, but it was NANO-THERMITE!!!!"

Those are rare and highly dangerous things to handle.  I'm not familiar with their use although similar issues exist with nano powdered metals of all sorts.  And that stuff, it's ridiculous to talk about a stealth operation of this scale using it - or for that matter anything else.

It's quite puzzling why exactly anyone who was going to conceive of blowing up a building would come up with thermite and or nano thermite.  Seems like it would be the absolute worst idea, frankly.  Very hard to get ignition, too.

So I really just don't get it - can't we have a better conspiracy theory than this?

I said feet and the link uses meters....and...? Does this some how negate the force needed to eject them or the math it is based on? This is just another distraction from the points.


First of all steel doesn't snap like a twig, it bends and contorts under pressure. Additionally such massive objects don't just randomly get thrown so far from the core structure. The amount of energy required to propel them that distance from the towers requires explosive forces. The fact that you are arguing the mass of the object has no bearing on the amount of force needed to propel it a great distance from the building is quite telling of your ignorance of basic physics. Materials were disintegrated, and were propelled for great distances. The building was pulverized, and yes, there were traces of thermate explosives btw.

That's an interesting point.

The intention of 911 was probably to have some great effect on Americans, but that isn't really how Americans work. The people who were directly affected by it considered it an earthshaking event but for most it was another big news event, that's all.

So when you see someone say "it changed our world forever" it's either an American being dramatic or a non american being polite or someone who was directly impacted by it.

True. But so did Pearl Harbor, and lots of other things.

Falling for one of My links!? But you go and use Wikipedia that almost anyone could go and change, and if he were of a mind to sit and watch it day and night, change back to what he wanted whenever somebody else changed it to something different.

So, who is the conspiracy theorist here? Those who adhere to the official government report? Or those who recognize that it was government that was behind the whole thing?