Just Wondering...

a reply to: waypastvne

You work with steel and claim it is to strong to be damaged or destroyed by aircraft aluminum.

I work with IRON.
I'm an ironworker/connector/glazier.
Not to be confused with a rodbuster/steelworker/boilermaker.

a reply to: randyvs

work with IRON.
I'm an ironworker/connector/glazier.
Not to be confused with a rodbuster/steelworker/boilermaker.

With knowledge of iron, you would have known that stored iron can generate heat high enough to start fires and you would have known that a typical fire generates temperatures high enough to weaken steel and iron.

a reply to: skyeagle409

No it does not.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

And this just proves my point exactly. I haven't even stated what I believe and ALREADY, I'm being accused of citing disinformation. Please tell me how I've been misinformed? Please empart your vast and relevant wisdom which clearly has much more credence than mine...

Or would that be treading to close to an intelligent conversation?

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

No it does not.

Of course it can and here is further proof that you are incorrect because fire fueled by office furniture is what buckled this steel beam.

Office fire buckled steel beam

If you truly had knowledge of iron and steel you would have known that I am correct and you are simply wrong.

a reply to: skyeagle409

With knowledge of iron,

Aside from what I know all to well about the trades involved.
I also know cartoons and gov. explanations aren't evidence.
PERIOD.

And I also know you have no idea what you're talking about.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: waypastvne

You work with steel and claim it is to strong to be damaged or destroyed by aircraft aluminum.

I work with IRON.
I'm an ironworker/connector/glazier.
Not to be confused with a rodbuster/steelworker/boilermaker.

So you have decided to dodge the question. Wise decision.

Would any other truthers like to take up the challenge and explain to us the magic of explosives ?

If you are going to use the phrase "Laws of physics" you should be able to hold a conversation on the subject.
here is the question again.

originally posted by: waypastvne


I have a question for you or any other member of the truth movement to answer for me.

You claim that an aircraft weighing 250,000 pounds and traveling at 800 feet per second should bounce off or do very little damage to WTC 1 & 2 certainly not enough damage even with the fires to bring down the buildings.

You claim that only explosives can do that. So the question I am asking is.......

Can you explain the magic of explosives to me ??????????????????

Lets take for example C4 the explosive used in demolitions.

en.wikipedia.org...(explosive)

C4 comes in a package 2"x1.5"x11" and weighs 1.25 pounds. When C4 is detonates it converts from a solid to a gas. This gas consist mostly of Nitrogen, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, this gas still only weighs 1.25 pounds, it did not gain any mass during detonation, so its mass weight is still 1.25 pounds.

1.25 pounds of nitrogen / carbon dioxide / carbon monoxide gas comes out at about .1 pound per cubic foot, so 1.25 pounds of it equals 12.5 cubic ft. of gas.

That is about the same volume of air contained in your average refrigerator.

www.google.com... UQDx

So can you explain to me how a gas the same size as the air inside of my refrigerator can do more damage than a heavy/fast moving aircraft ???

Explain the magic to me. You can use truth physics to explain it if you want.


Remember: ASTM A242 steel has a 50ksi minimum yield strength and a 70ksi minimum tensile strength.



(no help from the other debunkers please)

a reply to: waypastvne

This narrative doesn't have room for factual answers. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for one.

a reply to: randyvs

Aside from what I know all to well about the trades involved.
I also know cartoons and gov. explanations aren't evidence.
PERIOD.

And I also know you have no idea what you're talking about.

That doesn't cut it because as an aircraft structural technician, one of my jobs was to anneal and heat-treat aerospace metals including steel.

You mght want to view this video, which proves that you are incorrect.

Fire weakens iron

Now, would you care to correct yourself or do I need to post specifics about iron and steel?

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I can say with absolute certainty that a majority of the claims of the "Truth Movement" are, in themselves, an obfuscating disinformation campaign/conspiracy of the highest order. And a very successful on at that.

Most of the so called disinformation put out by truthers is result of ignorance, often deliberate. How many times have seen someone post wrong information, been corrected, then refuse to believe it

Truthers often distorted the facts, quote mining - where quotes are taken out of context and then strung together
in a particular pattern as evidence of conspiracy

Ever seen the video of WTC 7 collapse ?- often the first 20 seconds of the building buckling is edited out - the scenes
where the rooftop penthouses are seen collapsing. Truthers do this to bolster their claims of deliberate
demolition

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: waypastvne

This narrative doesn't have room for factual answers. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for one.

I know, but it's fun to watch them dance.

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I can say with absolute certainty that a majority of the claims of the "Truth Movement" are, in themselves, an obfuscating disinformation campaign/conspiracy of the highest order. And a very successful on at that.

Most of the so called disinformation put out by truthers is result of ignorance, often deliberate. How many times have seen someone post wrong information, been corrected, then refuse to believe it

Truthers often distorted the facts, quote mining - where quotes are taken out of context and then strung together
in a particular pattern as evidence of conspiracy

Ever seen the video of WTC 7 collapse ?- often the first 20 seconds of the building buckling is edited out - the scenes
where the rooftop penthouses are seen collapsing. Truthers do this to bolster their claims of deliberate
demolition

You mean this one for starters?
youtu.be...

a reply to: Rocker2013

That brings me to something else... I wonder how many of these truthers were not even alive, or just toddlers, when this event actually happened?

A good many of them. ...and in this age of you tube, the more strident the claim, the more likely it is to be able to influence young minds. Influence that misinforms.

Fourteen years. You'd think someone, somewhere, would have come forth with definitive proof of some of these theories. But nope, still throwing 'em against the wall hoping something will stick.

Over the years, I've looked at many of the theories, and not one has answered as many as portions of the OS. Not that it, itself, doesn't have some holes in it.

This is one of the most agenda driven topics I've ever seen. Right up there, in some circles, with Holocaust Denial. It gives an excuse to say things like: "nefarious govt." "Bush sucks" , well, you know the litany. As though there isn't sufficient evidence to say that without manufacturing "facts" out of whole cloth about this horrible event.

a reply to: Rocker2013

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Reefer Madness!

Your ambivalent take on this is pretty outstanding and I like it. Cherrypicking the hardness evaluation from the report might look a bit twoofer_ish but let me explain why I keep riding this undead horse. Some people would have been able to say: "well... ok then, there seems to be no proof for the weakened core on that page, let's move on and think about the fact why and how this matters conspiracy-wise."

Nothing wrong with a point being taken to move on, innit?

And it is funny to see those people, who keep stating that they deny ignorance, actually just embrace a different form of twoofertrash but in exactly the same way their 'enemies' do so (and as they probably did in the meeting at St. Marks Church you mentioned). At this point opinions don't matter anymore, there are just twoofs full of shills everywhere and any possibly reasonable delve into the topic became just another virtually and pointless debate about egos, partaking posters or their coffee-partys. Call me truther again and I will tell you if it's safe! Nothing but the truth, why not?



Cheers!

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

A link to your own thread proves nothing.

a reply to: waypastvne

I know, but it's fun to watch them dance.

I bet I can dance better than you.

No.1 shows some fairly convincing power with the admission that
no iron was used that approaches any where near the gage involved
with 46 verticle risers that have nothing and I mean nothing to do
with any explanations involving " Beams " or " Supports " or trusses
or steel joists or outside aluminum curtain wall glass captures.





ABRACADABRA!

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: skyeagle409

No it does not.

Yes it does.

I believed the OS lock stock and barrel until my sign up date here at ATS.
I felt like I got gut punched for a week. Who can know all the details, WTC7 is what leads to the basics beyond the OS.

The more I look at things some thing become less clear, others become more focused.
For example certain elements of 4 specific countries are known to be involved. Are these sanctioned by the governments that pay them, probably not.

Super black ops mission by 4 rogue groups, together they made it happen, planning must have gone on for years.