University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
It's a lot harder to disprove the truth.

Which is why truthers have been unable to disprove any claims about the OS, whilst all their false claims, like holographic planes, mini nukes, nanoo thermite, cruise missiles, beam weapons from space, explosives were used etc. have been shown to be false!

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Sorry, but a chair is soild. Does not copmress like a building. The leg is at the perimeter and not a core internal failure. In fact, only takes thtee points to make a plain. Remove one leg of four, the chair may stay upright. Poor choice. What are you? The doctor of illogic?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Sorry, bridges are structures and they tend to fall straight down. A very tragic exaple of a pancke collapse is the hyatt hotel walk way collapse. I remember footage of muti stacked road ramps pancaking in California from an earth quake. If you search earthquake pancake collapse, you will find examples of buildings destroyed by pancaking in on themselves along with other buildings that toppled. If you are to lazy to look up this previlent inflation, not doing it for you. But it is obvious there many documented cases of bridgeds, ramps, structures, building pancaking into there own footprints. So yes, I can dig up an example of a building that was destroyed by pancaking into its own footprint.

originally posted by: samkent

The structural design of 7 World Trade Center therefore included a system of gravity column transfer trusses and girders, located between floors 5 and 7, to transfer loads to the smaller foundation.

So the majority of the center mass was not supported in the center.
If you or I tried to do this on our homes we would be called red necks.
But if you have a degree it's call innovation.

So if the famous column 79 (in the center) fails due to heat . . .

Only if column 79 broke below the 7th floor. Still doesn't explain why the top 4/5ths of the building collapsed the way it did.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
It's a lot harder to disprove the truth.

Which is why truthers have been unable to disprove any claims about the OS, whilst all their false claims, like holographic planes, mini nukes, nanoo thermite, cruise missiles, beam weapons from space, explosives were used etc. have been shown to be false!

Beam weapons from space!? Holy cow, haven't heard that one yet.

I can't remember the last time any 'truther' tried to espouse those things, other than explosives being used, and nano thermite, both of which there is evidence to suggest.
It's a talking point many like to use...9-11 truthers are somehow in the same camp as moon hoaxers, reptilians, etc. Nope; that's what separates 911- there are enough genuinely captivating anomalies in the OS to at the very least strike curiosity. It's not like you're instantly crazy for even pondering it. It's one of those things that, regardless of the position you take on it, you probably came to that conclusion by actually doing a bit of research, not just taking someone's word for it.

originally posted by: humanityrising
Beam weapons from space!? Holy cow, haven't heard that one yet.

www.drjudywood.com...

I can't remember the last time any 'truther' tried to espouse those things, other than explosives being used, and nano thermite, both of which there is evidence to suggest.

There is? Care to show us this "evidence"?

a reply to: hellobruce

I hated homework in school too.

Explosions
Thermite
Other stuff


Notice I said evidence to suggest. I'm not going to change your mind, you're surely not going to change mine. Let's agree to disagree.

a reply to: humanityrising

In the hyatt hotel walk way collapse only one support initial gave way. Then instantly the upper walkway fell. Upon hitting the lower walkway, it failed. The result was a pancake failure to the ground. If the design is made to transfer the load evenly and suddenly cannot, a sudden increase in strain at the broken point of transfer will likely cause a chain reaction of failures. Like knocking down a row of dominoes. Many items can only handle a fraction of their deisgn static load if subject to shock load.

I like how truther say this cannot and has never happen. You come up with real cases proving them wrong, then all of a sudden there is an another item that is impossible. Gravity is powerful and a bitch. Always working to pull items to the centure of earth's mass. Willing to exploit any flaw to bring structures low.

a reply to: neutronflux

You come up with real cases proving them wrong, then all of a sudden there is an another item that is impossible.

That's called moving the goal post.

You can be discussing the Pentagon and in desperation a conspiracy believer will say "But that doesn't explain building 7".
It's been going on for 15 years and will likely be here for the 2nd decade.
After this long you would think they would have something strong enough to take to court.
Oh I forgot, the court system is in on it too.

a reply to: samkent

Neutronflux somehow sees relevance in two walkways that collapsed in 1981 due to 'insufficient load capacity'. A bit of the pot calling the kettle black no doubt.

a reply to: humanityrising

A jet slammed into a building does not cause internal damage, heat, and stesses beyond design? Because it did! I was ask to produce examples of structures pancancking into their own footprint because of the misbelief it was only possible using demolitions. I have provide actually case of pancaking due to structure failure.

The Pentagon? One it's be verified by witnesses and physical evidence verified by credible experts a jet hit the building.

Two, where in the hell had the Pentagon in this thread be debated at lenght? The debate was on the WTC. Bright shinny things to distract turthers and keep those conspiracy booms selling!

a reply to: humanityrising

How about the nano thermite? Can you tell me who found the residue. Who the samples were shared with for verification. People that collected their own samples that were able to duplicated results. That the trace elements were not just part of the construction materials from the dust cloud of the WTC collapse. Those that peer reviewed the report of the individuals clamming to have found proof of nano thermite. Proof the samples were collected through a scientific method and rules for chain of effidance?

originally posted by: humanityrising
Beam weapons from space!? Holy cow, haven't heard that one yet.

Actually, that is a far less absurd explanation than the OS.

a reply to: neutronflux

The person's name is Dr Niels Harrit. The peer-reviewed study, in PDF form, is linked in one of my above replies. You will call it insufficient because it is not consistent with your worldview.

(End reply)

A couple things I just realized:

If I may prod a bit at the OS side's status quo; as exampled previously, a whole litany of labels are thrown at 'truthers'. The spectrum of 'conspiracy theories' subscribed to is incredibly vast. My personal suspicions do not involve much hocus pocus, though I am somehow lumped in the holographic plane crowd. Isn't that a little dishonest if implied as a debate tactic?

Other thing; does anyone ever change their mind about 911, politics, or religion once their mind is made up. Personally I've never seen it happen.

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: neutronflux

The person's name is Dr Niels Harrit. The peer-reviewed study, in PDF form, is linked in one of my above replies. You will call it insufficient because it is not consistent with your worldview.

(End reply)

A couple things I just realized:

If I may prod a bit at the OS side's status quo; as exampled previously, a whole litany of labels are thrown at 'truthers'. The spectrum of 'conspiracy theories' subscribed to is incredibly vast. My personal suspicions do not involve much hocus pocus, though I am somehow lumped in the holographic plane crowd. Isn't that a little dishonest if implied as a debate tactic?

Other thing; does anyone ever change their mind about 911, politics, or religion once their mind is made up. Personally I've never seen it happen.

I did. I used to buy into the theory that the towers were demolished. Not so much now. I suppose there are certain anomalies for want of a better way of putting it that make you think twice but they can all be explained quite easily. I still firmly believe that there was a conspiracy that day but not in the way that everyone seems to think.

I see how people might think the government stood aside to just let things happen. Or maybe there was terrorist agents in our government. I think the biggest cover-up is how the government failed to stop 9/11and how embarrassed they were. I served with lots of good persons with integrity. The would not want this to happen to our citizens........ To mom's and dad's......

a reply to: sg1642

Good to hear. My views change over time too. Not sure why but I seem to be properly equipped for paradigm shifts, whereas I feel most people's worlds would come crashing down as a result of how invested they are in their beliefs.

I would imagine our views on 911 might be similar then. My opinion:
false flag and/or allowed attack + war profiteering/embezzlement + integration of Huxleyan & Orwellian society = the most unchecked power structure in human history

And then there are the mountains of evidence and cause for suspicion. It's just too obvious, even if only a tiny fraction is legitimate.

What am I implying? That at the very least, some elements of the western and Arab upper echelon were complicit to a degree. That is all I'm saying.

OSers must believe OJ was innocent too as that's the OS, isn't it.

originally posted by: neutronflux
I see how people might think the government stood aside to just let things happen. Or maybe there was terrorist agents in our government. I think the biggest cover-up is how the government failed to stop 9/11and how embarrassed they were. I served with lots of good persons with integrity. The would not want this to happen to our citizens........ To mom's and dad's......

Starred you for that

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: sg1642

Good to hear. My views change over time too. Not sure why but I seem to be properly equipped for paradigm shifts, whereas I feel most people's worlds would come crashing down as a result of how invested they are in their beliefs.

I would imagine our views on 911 might be similar then. My opinion:
false flag and/or allowed attack + war profiteering/embezzlement + integration of Huxleyan & Orwellian society = the most unchecked power structure in human history

And then there are the mountains of evidence and cause for suspicion. It's just too obvious, even if only a tiny fraction is legitimate.

What am I implying? That at the very least, some elements of the western and Arab upper echelon were complicit to a degree. That is all I'm saying.

OSers must believe OJ was innocent too as that's the OS, isn't it.

If anyone believes their government wouldn't allow or even have a hand in the death of the innocent people they are supposed to serve, they are more delusional than the people who think the towers were destroyed by space based energy Beams.

a reply to: sg1642

civilization conspires agsist itself. Invidusls bring false witness, steal, rape, murdered, genocide, operate through corruption, purse the almight god ow wealth. Why would a government of the people be any different? Maybe change needs to start with your actions.....

a reply to: humanityrising

It's a talking point many like to use...9-11 truthers are somehow in the same camp as moon hoaxers, reptilians, etc. Nope; that's what separates 911- there are enough genuinely captivating anomalies in the OS to at the very least strike curiosity. It's not like you're instantly crazy for even pondering it. It's one of those things that, regardless of the position you take on it, you probably came to that conclusion by actually doing a bit of research, not just taking someone's word for it.

Questioning aspects of 9/11 is not the problem - it is the bizarre conspiracies (space beams, nuclear bombs, etc) which are
bandied about. Even the nano thermite/secret explosives in building theories fail the logic test .

One has to stay within the bounds of reality....

You can question such things as why Port Authority used unproven materials and methods in building like WTC

Things like why used bar joist web truss for floor supports rather than solid I Beams or using untested spray on fire proofing
(and then guessing how much to use 1/2 in initially, later increased to 1 1/2 inches)