Proposition, here's an amazingly detailed report by a professor at some university out in Utah. Almost all data in it is based on proven scientific
data and experiments.
I ask everyone to please read this with an open mind, no baises whatsoever.
In return, you post any report you wish, from a private non government sponsored source, with scientific data behind the theories proposed. I'm
asking for something with detailed sources, like this, data, like this, and from a credible source from a professional well educated person. This
means no random websites that say "omg d00d l00k, a pl4ne hit the building, fire obviously made it collapse. "
If you can tell me you honestly looked at the report I linked to, with an open mind, and thought about the data that it containes, then I promise you,
that I will read your linked report, with a clear open mine, and i will think about what it proposes.
Please let your source be from a private/non profit source. Corporate sources, including magazines/newspapers cannot be taken at face value. The
popular mechanics arcticle debunking the 9/11 theories was a complete joke, biased, and caused me to lose faith in the credibility of that magazine.
Interestingly enough, I looked online to check out investors for the company that owns popular mechanics. I couldn't find anything, but on wiki, I
did notice that the owner of the company, is the Director of another major company in silicon valley. In 2005, a new position was created, soley for
one person, Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Longshot? Yes. But it's still interesting. I know if you look long and hard enough, everything is connected. In theory I can drive down the
street, and If I drive down it long enough, I can find your house. Given that you are in the USA. Almost every road is connected, even if two given
points are thousands of miles apart.
Please read that article, and if you wish, discuss it and disprove it as you wish. Although when you "debunk" something, explain WHY what is stated
there is false.
Example: statement A: steel melts at 1500C (not exact temp, just for an example). jet fuel can burn at a maximum temperature of 900 C (again, just
made up for the sake of argument). It was impossible for the jet fuel to melt the steel and create the pools of liquid steel found in the basements
of the WTC building.
The report uses this example, but with real data, and stated much better. I'll discuss this as it comes up, but the report proves wrong the theory
that the gypsum/dust of other things cause some high intensity reaction.
Bad response to statement A: omg a plane crashed into the buildings, didn't you see the large fires? they were huge, that's really hot. the steel
can weaken and the buildings can collapse.
Problem with the response? It doesn't disprove the statement with credible information. The facts that the fires were impossible to burn hot enough
to create the liquid steel was not adressed.
Once again, i challenge you to submit a report like this, which supports natural causes of the towers collapsing. Give me something good, something
that covers a lot of the things in the report above.
I'm asking this for a few reasons. A) I believe that regarding this situation, some people give more credit to their own hypothesis and guesses,
than to scientificly proven data. B)I'm really interested to see the reaction towards this well written paper, and how people respond to the data
within, most of which has been stated before, but not in such a credible, properly written report. C) I'm looking to expand my knowledge of this
situation, and by you providing debunking sources just as credible, it will help me sort things out.
I understand not everything can be proven with data, a lot is observation. I'll start with one such thing addressed in the report. A second or so
before one of the towers collapses, the top portion of the tower, the giant antenna, sinks/drops downwards before the building starts to collapse.
Even FEMA stated they wern't sure about this, and the report states that it could only happen if the entral supportive columns of the building were
somehow taken out, possibly with charges. Now showing that this happened first, before the rest of the building collapses, shows us that the center
columns failed first. Now consider that the center columns were MUCH stronger than the outter support columns, why would they collapse first?
I know this topic has been discussed a million times, but i'm asking for a more mature, well thought out thread.
Only reply to this if you have a decent, semi intelligent response, that adds to the conversation in a CONSTRUCTIVE manner. I do nay wish for this to
become a conversation between two kids "she did it, no i didn't, yes you did, no i didn't, yes you did, no i didn't..." etc etc. Unlike a lot of
people, i'm NOT doing this to rack up points from replies or whatever, I could care less about those. I'm actually asking people to LIMIT their
responses. Like i said, don't just repond with something like....
"that report proves nothing" " your theory doesn't make sense" "dude you disbelieve everything" etc etc. You can probably grasp what i'm
asking here. If you CANNOT follow the following, please don't post.
1) Make your post at lease a full paragraph. If you can't create a full paragraph, then your post is probably poorly thought out and or doesn't
contain usefull information. I don't care about grammar. Hell, I can barely spell my own name, don't worry about it.
2) Try not to be biased. Anything discussed, please give actual thought to. I don't believe fires from the plane took the building out, but if
someone provides an intelligent, well written statement/source, i'll read it and try to believe it. I just ask you do the same.
3) Try to make your post sound like an amendment of sorts, an addition or alteration of a chapter from a book. If your response seems more like
something you'd write in the side margin of a book, while taking notes, it's not worth posting.
If you actually read all of this, well, thanks. I'm just trying to get some order into this 9/11 discussion thing.
[edit on 27-3-2006 by xxvalheruxx]