It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To 9-11 Debunkers

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Okay Captain O, my turn

Hoth, whether or not you will accept the fact that you have posted a bunch of quarter truths or not is beyond my power. However, lets look at your "facts"



Two 110 story steel structures, plus a reinforced command bunker (WTC7) all fell due to gasoline fires for the first time in the history of skyscrapers.


No, two 110 story steel structures collapsed due to severe damage caused by two fully fueled jetliners slamming into them, and a high temperature jet fuel fire. As they collapsed, WTC 1 had large sections collapse into WTC 7, causing fatal damage to it as well. Not sure where you get "gasoline" from...because jet fuel is quite different.

www.911myths.com...

Im not going to post all the quotes from the NYFD about the damage WTC 7 suffered that day.



Thermate, a military explosive used to cut through steel beems, was found at ground zero.


No, a goofy professor ran tests on a piece of steel that he got from his girlfriend's sister's husband's cousin...who said it came from ground zero. Ever hear of the phrase "chain of custody"? There isnt one here.

Better yet read all the links here:

www.911myths.com...

The "residues" that Mr Johns seems to think come from thermite..are all from materials you would expect to find in a skyscraper. Kind of like in 1989 when the US Navy found sodium chloride, steel wool and break free residue in the turret of the USS Iowa and declared it must have been a bomb, not realizing that break free and steel wool were used to clean the barrels and the frigging air is full of sodium chloride (especially at sea...salt water ring any bells?"




Many eyewitness accounts exist of explosives going off within the towers prior to its collapse.


No, Capt O had it right, they said they heard what sounded like explosions going off. Doesnt mean they were bombs. First aid oxy tanks, gas lines, cleaning chemicals (read the labels, avoid extreme heat or open flame), all things you would find in an office building like that, and all things that would go boom. Of course, the catastrophic failure of steel under extreme stress sounds like bombs going off too.




Two 110 story steel structures fell at nearly freefall rate of speed, something that is physically impossible without the use of controlled demoltion. Just watch the collapse of those two towers and then tell me that fire did that.


Ah yes, the fixation on free fall. If you want to do the calculations, you will find out that free fall would have taken about 9.22 seconds. Best guess is that the towers took between 18-25 seconds to completely collapse. Of course, the easiest way to disprove the free fall myth is to watch the videos taken from close to the towers. Large chunks of the towers hit the ground long before the rest of the towers do. THOSE chunks were falling at free fall speed. Better yet, go through all the links here

www.911myths.com...



The only buildings demolished because of 9-11 near ground zero were owned and insured by Larry Silverstein.


Which, honestly, means absolutely nothing. However, since you brought up the insurance point......He tried to get much lower insurance for the buildings, his banks made him take out more. And as one of your other posts pointed out, he wasnt going to get near enough money to rebuild everything AND he still had to pay the 120 million dollar a year rent. In other words, he will lose money.

www.911myths.com...




9 or 10 of the supposed hijackers (convenient how all of the newstations came out with this at the same time) are now known to be alive in foreign countries.


No, 9 or 10 people with similar sounding names are still alive. I mean, there are about 2 dozen people in my town with my same first and last name, and 5 that have the same middle initial...or do you think all muslim/arab/persian names are unique?




Seizmegraphs in the area picked up demolition signatures, i.e., explosives going off in the area.


The seismographs that are always quoted as proving explosives, belong to Columbia University and are ALWAYS misrepresented. Here they are

www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

No massive precollapse spikes that would indicate explosions. Of course, you can also read this

www.globalsecurity.org...




Insider trading of airline stock, from sources connected to the CIA, was found prior to 9-11.


Referring to the "put options", get back to me on this once you figure out just how many times in 2001 that there were huge amounts of put options placed on UA and AA. Heres a hint....9/11/01 wasnt the only day or even the biggest day for put options. Then again, AA had announced some crappy financial news before that day which meant the stock was going to fall even before 9/11.




Building strength, asbestos treated steel does not melt or even weaken at the temperatures generated by a gasoline fire, especially one that went out as quickly as the fires in the WTC.


As Capt O, said, one third of one tower was coated with asbestos fireproofing. Building studies done before 9/11 showed large sections of the framework where the fireproofing had crumbled away, leaving the steel unprotected against fire. The impact of the airliners would have caused even more of the fireproofing to fall off the steel. Then there is this..

Herbert Levine, inventor of the spray on asbestos fireproofing, upon hearing that the WTC would NOT be completely protected by asbestos

"if a fire breaks out above the 64th floor, that building will fall down.”




posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Swamp.... good job. That just about covers all of it. Most people in here, although searching for the truth, ignore it if it does not meet their agenda.



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 





As steel is heated it begins to soften, At 1000 F it loses 10% of rated
strenght, at 1200 F 25%, 1400 F 50%, 1800 F only 10%. The steel
expands as it is heated, at 1000 F it expands 9 1/2 inches per 100
linear feet. The expanding steel begine to twist, bend and sag under the
stress. At some critical point the steel will have reached a point where
it can not support the load and fail. The load is transferred to adjacent
parts of the structure which if under heat stress will fail in a cascading
manner. Witness the violent failure of the exterior columns which
initialed the building collapse


I'm well aware of all of this, but none of it explains how two 110 story steel structures failed so completely, within minutes of each other for the first time in the history of the world. Such a total structural failure would demand that all of the construction-grade steel and trusses failed across a majority of the floors at nearly the same time, due to a hydrocarbon-based fire that was contained on a few floors and clearly going out (plumes of black oxygen-starved smoke, plus fire fighters saying that it was nearly out on tape). The odds of this are so ridiculous that it defies all belief. Such a structure-wide failure being attributed to a 1400 degree fire (and that's when it is at its hottest) is beyond impossible. All of this is very misleading, which reminds me of O.J.'s "the glove won't fit" demonstration. To an idiot this might sound reasonable, but if you apply any degree of thought to it at all, it's asinine. This 1400 degrees at 50% failure applies to what type of steel? Construction-grade steel made to withstand these type of temperatures failed totally, across a majority of the structure? How long would it take at 1400 degrees before the steel would weaken enough to cause structure-wide failure? The fires that were caused on that day by the Jet fuel would have only reached those temperatures at the moment of impact and then quickly burn off with the fuel. We know that just before the collapse the fires were nearly out because of the huge amounts of smoke, indicative of an oxygen-starved fire, and the testimony of firefighters that said that they had it under control. The NIST report even admits that they cannot explain the total structural failure due to just the fire. How long was the Bank at Ground Zero on fire?? Why didn't it fall as well?

As for Swamps, I will address your concerns later.. Right now I'm going to bed...



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
I am not entirely sure just who started the "black smoke means an oxygen starved fire" baloney, but it is just that, baloney. Ask ANY member of the US Armed Forces, especially those in aviation, just what color smoke comes from a jet fuel caused fire...heres a hint DARK BLACK. Hell ask any resident of Mayport, Florida or San Diego what color smoke came from the firefighting schools, back when we still actually used jet fuel, diesel and mogas to start the fires...they will tell you the same thing. Big, raging fires producing billowing black smoke. Good grief, does anyone actually look for information OTHER than what they read on conspiracy sites?

Do any of these look like they are about to go out?

www.desplaines.org...

www.af.mil...

www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk...

extras.mnginteractive.com...


Cant wait to hear what you have to say next....



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
by the way, if "construction grade steel" could stand up to the puny trash can fire that you seemed to think was going on that day...WHY would they worry about spraying fireproofing on it?



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Thermate, a military explosive used to cut through steel beems, was found at ground zero.

No, it wasnt.

theres Ph.D's that say there was, what are your credentials? you searched ground zero and analyzed the metal? what were the results?


I am not entirely sure just who started the "black smoke means an oxygen starved fire" baloney, but it is just that, baloney.


first responders from ground zero can be quoted as saying that.



[edit on 1-9-2007 by jprophet420]



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
by the way, if "construction grade steel" could stand up to the puny trash can fire that you seemed to think was going on that day...WHY would they worry about spraying fireproofing on it?


Well, according to Captain O' My Captain, they only fireproofed a little bit of one of the towers. Apparently, they didn't think that it was all that important.




I am not entirely sure just who started the "black smoke means an oxygen starved fire" baloney, but it is just that, baloney. Ask ANY member of the US Armed Forces, especially those in aviation, just what color smoke comes from a jet fuel caused fire...heres a hint DARK BLACK. Hell ask any resident of Mayport, Florida or San Diego what color smoke came from the firefighting schools, back when we still actually used jet fuel, diesel and mogas to start the fires...they will tell you the same thing. Big, raging fires producing billowing black smoke. Good grief, does anyone actually look for information OTHER than what they read on conspiracy sites?


Here's a hint... the God of nature. I know, he's a hard bugger to get to know, but his physical laws of nature are quite difficult to break.

Yes, jet fuel burns black, just like every other hydrocarbon based fire. Why? Because they are not that hot on the scale of fires. Different types of fire burn different colors and produce different colors of smoke. For instance, a thermate reaction would produce a white powdery smoke, exactly what we saw bullowing from the basement prior to the collapse of the South Tower, and just after the collapse. It's called Aluminum Oxide and is indicative of a very white-hot fire. Jet fuel burns black because it is red-hot and oxygen starved (fuel source is burning off quickly). A fire that is going out, i.e., oxygen starved, will produce more smoke than a fire that is getting plenty of oxygen and is burning hot. Now, I'm sure that we've all been camping. When the camp fire is almost out is when it is smoking the most.

What we saw on 9-11 were large amounts of black smoke billowing from both impact locations (where the planes had hit), and fire fighters within the structures, claiming to have it under control. Next thing you know the whole thing is falling like a stack of cards at nearly free fall rate of speed directly into the path of most resistance. Huge Iron and concrete chunks were blown outward blocks from ground zero, and ,yes, even downward. This is called a demolition.

Don't worry, I will address the rest of this mess... Patience young padawan.



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
There seems to be a very heavy reliance upon government sources for 9-11 debunkers. Again, the Warren Commissionesque 9-11 Commission was a political hoax put on by the perpetrators.... This is what governments do. It's called propaganda, otherwise horse droppings. It's like asking the weasel what happened to the chickens. It makes for great stupidity, if you're dumb enough to fall for it.

Debunkers love to bring up the NIST, a government created and funded organization. Again, the inmates can't run the prison. The NIST report on the 9-11 tragedy has been found wholly insufficient by professional researchers and laymen alike. Now, I doubt that anybody here has read all 10,000 pages of this report, but here is a source that has poured through it and these are its findings:


The group says that a different conclusion better fits the evidence - they believe that pre-positioned explosives were responsible for the destruction of the WTC towers. "It sounds outlandish," Jones says, "But when you look at the evidence, it fits. In fact, many of the physical features of these events -- such as their rapidity, totality, and the observed iron-rich spheres in the WTC dust -- fit the demolition hypothesis and are difficult to reconcile with any of the existing collapse explanations."

"There were 80 to 90 floors of completely intact steel structure below the impact zones, untouched by fire or damage, which had held up the mass above them for decades and, in the case of the perimeter columns, were over-designed by a factor of 20. Also, almost all of the mass of the building coming down from above was being ejected outside the footprint as it fell, so there is not even a "pile driver" to crush the building below, and thus no valid engineering explanation for the failure!" Gage says that the only way to achieve what NIST describes as "'such little resistance [from the structure below to the falling mass above,' was to destroy that solid intact structure with pre-planted explosives."

"It sounds extreme," he says, "even preposterous. But when you set aside your disbelief, you find explosives to be the only valid explanation for the 'collapse' and this explains many features -- such as the virtually free fall speed, symmetry, audible & visible explosions, pulverization to dust of all of the floors, file cabinets, etc. -- that are consistent with demolition style collapses, but not with historical structural failures by fire."

The Request asserts that the NIST Final Report violates information quality standards, draws inferences that are inconsistent with its own computer simulations and physical tests, and exhibits a significant bias toward a preordained conclusion while ignoring available evidence contrary to it. The Request also says that if this bias is corrected, the NIST simulation clearly indicates that the Towers should not have collapsed due to plane damage and fire. The obvious alternative, which the group says should have been studied by NIST, is explosive demolition.Continued at Source


I'll address the rest of your concerns soon.



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   


originally posted by HothSnake1
and fire fighters within the structures, claiming to have it under control.
That's the first I've ever heard of firefighters claiming to have it under control.
Maybe this is what you're talking about. Transcripts from whatreallyhappened.com.

Battalion Chief Palmer: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."

Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"

Battalion Chief Palmer: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."

Ladder 15: "Floor 78?"

Battalion Chief Palmer: "Ten-four, numerous civilians, we're gonna need two engines up here."

Ladder 15: "Alright ten-four, we're on our way"


Palmer says two isolated pockets of fire, which I am not doubting. Here are a few questions:
1. What are lines?
2. Where is floor 78 in relation to the impact damage of the South Tower?
3. Where is South stairway Adam in relation to the damage?
4. How much of the overall damage and fire can he see from his position?
5. What are engines?

A lot of conspiracy theorists like to use what Battalion Chief Orio Palmer says in his final words as proof that the fires could have easily been extinguished with two firehoses. If you dig a little deeper and answer the five questions above, you'll find out that it is simply not true!



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Fetzer characterizes Dr. Wood, who has degrees in civil engineering, engineering mechanics, and materials engineering science, as the leading expert on technical aspects of the destruction of the World Trade Center. "There are experts in many areas of science and of engineering studying 9/11," he explained, "but she has degrees that are centrally focused on critical areas in which competence is required to begin to understand what happened on 9/11. No one else in the 9/11 community comes close to her level of expertise."

Her complaint, technically, Request for Correction, like the others, asserts that the basic integrity of NIST's report, called NCSTAR 1, is lacking because, by its own admission, NIST did not investigate the actual destruction of the World Trade Center Towers: "The focus of the investigation was on the sequence of events from the instance of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower." This means that the NIST report does not actually include the collapse behavior of the towers after the conditions for their initiation were realized, which NIST refers to as "the probable collapse sequence."

"NIST, of course, claims that it was the impact of the aircraft and the jet-fuel based fires, which caused the steel to weaken and bring about a collapse," Fetzer said. "But the buildings were designed to withstand such occurrences and the steel had been certified by UL to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for several hours without weakening. The fires only burned around 500 degrees for less than an hour (in the case of WTC-2) and an hour-and-a-half (in the case of WTC-2), so NIST really doesn't even reach the point at which a 'collapse' of any kind would be 'initiated.' The situation is quite remarkable."

Thus, to this day, Americans have not been given any explanation whatsoever for the destruction of the WTC complex that comports with information and quality standards. In contrast, Dr. Wood's RFC contains a stunning array of visual evidence that confirms highly unusual energy effects seen by all as the Twin Towers were almost instantaneously destroyed in less time than it would take a billiard ball to hit the ground if dropped from the height of 110 stories, a result she demonstrates in relation to the law of falling bodies.Continued at Source


Stay tuned... More is coming, I'm just too busy right now. Certified by UL to withstand 2000 degrees for several hours [emphasis added]. The fires burned at 500 degrees according to NIST. Thin-metal Aluminum airliners wouldn't have made a dent in the concrete reenforced giant steel cores of the Twin Towers, built to withstand hurricane force (150 mile per hour) winds and the impacts of two consecutive Jet airliner impacts. The fires weren't even close to hot enough to weaken this steel. What the hell caused total structure-wide failure in two 110 story steel skyscrapers, almost simultaneously on September 11, 2001. The 9-11 Commission didn't come close to answering this question and neither did their offspring the NIST.




[edit on 1-9-2007 by HothSnake1]

[edit on 1-9-2007 by HothSnake1]



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   


Palmer says two isolated pockets of fire, which I am not doubting. Here are a few questions:

1. What are lines?
2. Where is floor 78 in relation to the impact damage of the South Tower?
3. Where is South stairway Adam in relation to the damage?
4. How much of the overall damage and fire can he see from his position?
5. What are engines?


There were only 2 FF on the 78th floor - Chief Palmer and Fire Marshall
Ronald Bucca who RAN the entire way up from the ground.

1)
The lines they are talking about are "house" lines stored in the fire
equipment cabinet near the standpipes. Palmer and Bucca had no fire
equipment, that was carried by the engine (hose) and ladder companies
(tools). The house line would probably be only 1 1/2" single jacket hose
with a low pressure and flow rate - capable of controlling only small fires.

2)
The 78th floor was at the bottom of the impact zone - the left wing tip of
United 175 tore through the floor - debris from the plane followed by a
fireball of burning jet fuel killed and wounded dozens of people standing in
the lobbies waiting for elevators. The 78th floor was a "sky lobby" where
people changed from express elevators to local elevators which made
stops on each floor.

3)
Stairway A or "ADAM" was one of the outboard stairways (A and C were
outboard, only 44" wide, just barely wide enough for two people to pass,
B was the interior stair, 54" in wide). Stair A had to make a wide dogleg
around the elevator machinery and was undamaged, the other stairs were
struck by the plane and impassable.

4)
Palmer could only see the damage from the 41th floor to the 78th in his
trek up, he did not know the extent of the damage above - nobody in the
FDNY knew how much damage or extactly where it was. Palmer, who
knew the WTC well, had found a frieght elevator which ran from ground to
41th floor. This was the only elevator still working.

5) Engine companies were presumably in the stairs making way up,
Ladder 15 was the first company to come up the stairs behind Palmer.
3 companies detailed to the South Tower accidently went to the North
Tower and were spared when the South Tower collapsed.

Hope this helps



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


It doesn't, infact, it's pretty irrelevant. You can tell by the video footage that the fires were almost out. Tons of smoke and people standing in the skeleton, not jumping anymore. According to the NIST, the fires weren't even close to hot enough to weaken the steel in either Tower. It's time that we dropped this myth of thin metal airliners and Jet-fuel fires causing complete structural failure of three steel skyscrapers for the first in the history of skyscraps on that fateful day.

I'm not done.. Just wait.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Hey guys this is my first time posting on ats, but I'm not new to the 9-11 conspiracy theories. I guess I'll just come out and say It I do not believe the conspiracy theories.

There are many reasons. but I will only make 2 as I want you to concentrate now....

---#1

First I would like to question HothSnake1 "sources" such as 911scholars.com, whose "experts" consist of people like David Ray Griffin, who is a professor of philosophy hmm no offense to him but he doesn't exactly seem qualified to judge the structural soundness of the towers.

Fetzer, the creator of the site, also misleads people by characterizing "requests of correction" to the NIST report made by a civil engineer (Dr. Woods). She questions the completeness of the report and unexplained activity, but is in no way saying she knows that the towers fell as a result of controlled demo.

Its funny how a Civil engineer, material scientist, etc. will not say they know exactly what happened, yet the conspiracy theorists here have ALL the answers not just to structural happenings, but to who did it, why they did it, who was involved, etc...

This is typical of a conspiracy theorist though, as they always have the answers.

Hothsnake1 quote:
"Don't worry, I will address the rest of this mess... Patience young padawan."

----#2

I do not see how its hard to believe that a fire (whose temperature is a function of fuel QUANTITY/quality and not just quality) couldn't weaken the structure enough. Lets do some quick calculations and by no means perfectly accurate calculations.
Some one asked "How long would it take at 1400 degrees before the steel would weaken enough to cause structure-wide failure?"

well... from www.exxonmobilaviation.com/AviationGlobal/Files/WorldJetFuelSpecifications2005.pdf
we'll use JP-7 Low Volatility Kerosine, other fuels have very similar properties, besides this is just for fun.

Net Heat of Comb. (MJ/kg) Min. 43.5
Density @ 15°C (kg/L) 0.779-0.806 (well use .779)

From howstuffworks.com -----> "According to Boeing's Web site, the 747 burns approximately 5 gallons of fuel per mile (12 liters per kilometer)." = 7.7 L/mile

flights were supposed to be from east to west coast. (sorry dont know exactly) but from "http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_distance_in_miles_from_the_East_Coast_of_the_US_to_the_West_Coast"
For all you trivia buffs out there, the SHORTEST distance from the East to West Coast (as the crow flies) would be 2,092 miles from San Diego, CA to Jacksonville, FL.

Ok so now we can do some math.

2092 mi. * (7.7 L/mi) * (.779 kg/L) * (43.5 MJ/kg) = 545857 x 10^6 joules

specific heat of steel varies but a estimate is given at www.cambridge.org/uk/education/secondary/science/ks4/gateway_science/downloads/physics_sample.pdf
420 J/kgC
That is it takes 420 joules of energy to heat a kilogram of steel 1 degree C.

that means the plane had enough energy in the fuel alone to heat 1000 tons of steel by 1400 degree Celsius . How much steel in 1 level of WTCs?

But this also doesn't account for all the other fuels in the building (furniture, paper, carpet, drywall, etc...). Another inaccurate assumption I made was complete combustion (not possible). Also there was obviously other recipients of this heat gain (concrete and other building materials) But, even from these simple calcs I can believe there was more then enough energy to cause considerable temperature increase in the steel.

Not to mention there are many structural engineers who would agree with 95% of the pancake theory. After all straight down is the path of least resistance for any falling object.
-----
So lemme get YOUR theory straight all mighty Bush and his neo-con army managed too get the media, wtf workers, engineers, eye witness, governments, terrorists, etc to cooperate with their plan, yet they couldn't manage to plant WMD in Iraq, or produce a ounce of progress in Iraq, so as to avoid the lowest approval ratings since Nixon?

I love logic!!!



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 03:42 PM
link   


theres Ph.D's that say there was, what are your credentials? you searched ground zero and analyzed the metal? what were the results?


Name ONE Ph.D that was at ground zero during the clean up and has verified thermite. Wait, there isnt any. You have ONE phd that studied a piece of metal that supposedly came from Ground Zero and he found chemical residues that include those you might find from thermite...of course you would also find the same materials in a normal high rise building (aluminum oxide, manganese etc...).




Well, according to Captain O' My Captain, they only fireproofed a little bit of one of the towers. Apparently, they didn't think that it was all that important.


No, he said that the asbestos fireproofing was on one third of the one tower. The rest of the towers were coated with a different type of fireproofing, which was far inferior to the asbestos.




Yes, jet fuel burns black, just like every other hydrocarbon based fire. Why? Because they are not that hot on the scale of fires. Different types of fire burn different colors and produce different colors of smoke. For instance, a thermate reaction would produce a white powdery smoke, exactly what we saw bullowing from the basement prior to the collapse of the South Tower, and just after the collapse. It's called Aluminum Oxide and is indicative of a very white-hot fire. Jet fuel burns black because it is red-hot and oxygen starved (fuel source is burning off quickly). A fire that is going out, i.e., oxygen starved, will produce more smoke than a fire that is getting plenty of oxygen and is burning hot. Now, I'm sure that we've all been camping. When the camp fire is almost out is when it is smoking the most.


Gee, so how many firefighting schools have you been through? Ive been through three and have fought quite a few fires. Magnesium fires, jet fuel fires, bedding/trash/wood fires, I think I might know just a tad about the subject. Jet fuel fires produce lots of smoke no matter what.




Certified by UL to withstand 2000 degrees for several hours


Bzzzt wrong answer, Underwriter Laboratories had NOTHING to do with the steel of the WTC. Mr. Ryan has been completely discredited and was fired from his job for attempting to attach his employers name to his conspiracy ravings.


So bring it on...continuing to rely on already discredited garbage only weakens your argument.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999


So bring it on...continuing to rely on already discredited garbage only weakens your argument.



Argument.... you give them too much credit swampfox. Sometimes I feel like im wasting my breath on this site. But then I remember only 16% of Americans believe the controlled demo garbage.

Also please stop referencing conspiracy pages, as evidence. ANYONE can make a webpage.

I also love how all these conspiracy theorists think the government want a police state, this sentimentality has been going on since the 60's, yet I can still pursue life liberty and happiness. SO either they are not good at it or there aren't any conspiracies. OR wait lemme guess this is because of all the hard work of conspiracy theorists right?

This quote by historian Bruce Cumings also sums up what will happen with all this nonsense...eventually.

"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities.

AKA you have this much evidence and the whole world has THIS MUCH and eventually people will stop authoring their own conspiracy evidence, so they can move on to the latest conspiracy (repeat cycle).

Stop blaming elites, government for for your own failings in life and you may not fail so often.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 





No, two 110 story steel structures collapsed due to severe damage caused by two fully fueled jetliners slamming into them, and a high temperature jet fuel fire. As they collapsed, WTC 1 had large sections collapse into WTC 7, causing fatal damage to it as well. Not sure where you get "gasoline" from...because jet fuel is quite different.


Two 110 story steel structures engineered (study the engineering specs) to withstand two consecutive impacts (each Tower, so a total of four) of fully loaded and fueled 707s, and to withstand the sustained burning temperatures of 2000 degrees before weakening for several hours. Also, these buildings were engineered to take sustained 150 mph hurricane force winds. They also consisted of a giant concrete reenforced steel core, which no Aluminum Jet airliner would be able to make a dent in. To say that either Towers 1 or 2 collapsed due to this would be stating the unfathomable.

WTC7 had damage on corner of it. It still doesn't explain the demolition like free fall collapse that we witness around 500 pm on that day.

[Leslie Robertson(structual engineer of Twin Towers:] "The twin towers were in fact the first structures outside the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airplane."



No, a goofy professor ran tests on a piece of steel that he got from his girlfriend's sister's husband's cousin...who said it came from ground zero. Ever hear of the phrase "chain of custody"? There isnt one here.


The New York Times reported that the molten steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered" source

Goofy?? Nice ad hominem. Is that your professional opinion?

Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, describes fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks, according to published news reports. source

The NIST admits that it was there, but claims that it was irrelevant, while failing to consider it at all.

As for the dust sample, I'll take the expertees of a PHD physics professor over the 911 debunkers "chain of evidence" bunk any day of the week.

Besides, there is a ton of video and photographic evidence, which I have already provided: www.911blackops.50megs.com




The "residues" that Mr Johns seems to think come from thermite


No, thermate... Sulfur was also found in samples from the 9-11 site. Add this to the photographic and eyewitness evidence and you have smoking gun. The dubunkers movement's arguments are quite week on this topic.




No, Capt O had it right, they said they heard what sounded like explosions going off. Doesnt mean they were bombs. First aid oxy tanks, gas lines, cleaning chemicals (read the labels, avoid extreme heat or open flame), all things you would find in an office building like that, and all things that would go boom. Of course, the catastrophic failure of steel under extreme stress sounds like bombs going off too.


Firefighters that claimed that they heard a rapid succession of "pop, pop, pop, pop", just like a controlled demoltion. A janitor and several other that heard large explosions coming from the basement, windows being blown out on the lower floors, along with ceiling tiles, lights and marble tiling falling from the walls. Others witnessed the basement levels reduced to rubble after hearing large explosions. That's called demolitions.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   


Ah yes, the fixation on free fall. If you want to do the calculations, you will find out that free fall would have taken about 9.22 seconds. Best guess is that the towers took between 18-25 seconds to completely collapse. Of course, the easiest way to disprove the free fall myth is to watch the videos taken from close to the towers. Large chunks of the towers hit the ground long before the rest of the towers do. THOSE chunks were falling at free fall speed. Better yet, go through all the links here


Actually, 9.22 seconds would be free fall within a vacuum. I think that it is safe to say that the Towers did not exist in a vacuum. I don't know where you get 18-25 seconds (what, are you counting paper debris?)? I know that I've counted the South Tower at around 12 seconds, which is ridiculous for a so-called pancake collapse.
Large chunks were blown across the street as well as downward. Blown as in exploded with great force, causing pyrotechnic flows to engulf the streets below. Great explosive force was involved, far more than a pancake collapse would induce.




Which, honestly, means absolutely nothing. However, since you brought up the insurance point......He tried to get much lower insurance for the buildings, his banks made him take out more. And as one of your other posts pointed out, he wasnt going to get near enough money to rebuild everything AND he still had to pay the 120 million dollar a year rent. In other words, he will lose money.


Right, I forgot that to the 9-11 debunkers movement, everything is just a strange coincidence. I quoted that force because I knew that it would get Pavlov's 9-11 dubunkers dogs drueling... I see that it worked.
Let's see, 120 mil a year for six years.... Hmmmmm, that's not even a billion dollars yet, meanwhile, he is slated to get at least 3.5 billion; he was, a year ago, trying for over 7 billion dollars. Plus, he and his investor buddies have already broken ground on their new Freedom Tower project. It sounds like life has never been better for the guy. Made off like a bandit.
It's well known that the Port Authority wanted to get rid of the towers because they were filled with asbestos, outdated, and expensive to operate. Why would he lease the entire complex, just weeks before 9-11, knowing that it was going to be a losing proposition?




No, 9 or 10 people with similar sounding names are still alive. I mean, there are about 2 dozen people in my town with my same first and last name, and 5 that have the same middle initial...or do you think all muslim/arab/persian names are unique?


Yeah, I've heard this argument before... thought it was dumb then too. Is that why several of them saw their pictures on the news and commented to their families that, "that's me!!?" Were they identical twins as well?




that means the plane had enough energy in the fuel alone to heat 1000 tons of steel by 1400 degree Celsius . How much steel in 1 level of WTCs?


Your demonstration is nice, but it fails to prove anything. At what point will construction-grade steel, designed to withstand much higher temperatures for a sustained period of time, completely fail within the engineering construction of the WTC Towers? We already know that jet-fuel is capable of weakening steel at 1400 degrees. Your calculations are flawed, anyhow, for they presuppose perfect conditions, i.e., a perfect burn.




So lemme get YOUR theory straight all mighty Bush and his neo-con army managed too get the media, wtf workers, engineers, eye witness, governments, terrorists, etc to cooperate with their plan, yet they couldn't manage to plant WMD in Iraq, or produce a ounce of progress in Iraq, so as to avoid the lowest approval ratings since Nixon?


As FDR once said, "nothing in politics happens by accident." The bumbling nature of our government is according to plan.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Nice thread, you've succeded in drawing out the "it's just the way we were told crowd" right off the bat! Swampy and Cappy will no dought keep you very busy. Their arguments are somewhat sound and they will have list of experts and evidence to back it up, but I still feel there is something terribly wrong with 911 and the justification of subsequent wars on the other side of the world.

Keep hammering away Hoth, there are many in the shadows and on the sidelines paying attention to never ending story that is 911.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 07:10 PM
link   
[If the government appeared competent, then what excuses would they use for all of their failed policies (everyone of them), when in reality they are designed rackets. The people are being fleeced, but they are under the impression that their government just doesn't know what its doing. Either they are ruled by a bunch of complete retards, or they are ruled by designers, masquerading as fools. It's the same pretext used in Nigerian 419 scams across the internet and snail mail. Pretend to not speak English and otherwise appear to be a bumbling idiot, and your mark will trust you more under the false impression that "he couldn't be conning me because he's just too dumb."




No, he said that the asbestos fireproofing was on one third of the one tower. The rest of the towers were coated with a different type of fireproofing, which was far inferior to the asbestos.


Still, proves nothing..




Bzzzt wrong answer, Underwriter Laboratories had NOTHING to do with the steel of the WTC. Mr. Ryan has been completely discredited and was fired from his job for attempting to attach his employers name to his conspiracy ravings.


Discredited? hardly. He may have been silenced, just like Steven Jones was silenced.. It's funny how anyone that does not tow the establishment (i.e., British Intelligence) party line ends up without a job and ignored by the media. Next we will find them declared insane and placed in the basement of some mental institution. Can you become anymore obvious?

And yet you still ignored the bulk of what the major complaints are against the findings of the governments NIST report, and you still ignore the smoking-gun question: How did catastrophic failure across the entire structures of Towers 1 and 2 occur, almost simultaneously, due to jet-fuel based fire contained on a few floors of a 110 story structure, built of construction-grade steel designed to withstand high temperatures? The NIST didn't answer this question... The 9-11 Comission didn't answer this key question... Can you?




I also love how all these conspiracy theorists think the government want a police state, this sentimentality has been going on since the 60's, yet I can still pursue life liberty and happiness. SO either they are not good at it or there aren't any conspiracies. OR wait lemme guess this is because of all the hard work of conspiracy theorists right?


Really? Do you hold allodial title to your car or your house? Do you have a reprasentative government, i.e., do you hold as much clout in Washington D.C. as Wal-mart or exxon? You have heard of something called the Patriot Act, right? I just hope that we are in the same concentration camp together one of these days, that way I can laugh at you.





"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities.


Thanks for that.. I haven't had a good laugh like that in a while. Either this guy is really dumb, or I need to send a 419 advance fee letter fast. He's the easiest mark I've ever seen.


From a historical perspective, the only reality is that of conspiracy. The very nature of warfare, corporate business, and government is conspiratorial. Nations seek to outwit and destroy their opponents by any means, including psychological warfare, not only waged against the enemy, but also against an unwilling public. Propaganda has always been a staple of government, and the Nazis certainly didn’t invent it, nor did it die with their German faction. What is truly amazing is that we still fall for the propaganda games of our governments after being exposed to them for over a thousand years and reading about them in our history books. After Vietnam, Watergate, Iran Contra, the U.N. Oil for Food Program, etc., only the most delusional can deny the existence of conspiracy. By definition, secret organizations, such as the CIA, FBI, NSA, Secret Service, etc., are duplicitous and clandestine. Corporate board meetings are not usually made public knowledge, nor are the National Security meetings that the President holds with his cabinet. Secret police have always been the benchmark of totalitarian regimes, yet Americans never seem to question the fact that they are bombarded with more secret police agencies than they can count on two hands. What purpose does the secret police serve in a supposedly free society, except to oppress and destroy those freedoms? Fool the public into believing all manner of menacing hobgoblins, and the "Waffen SS" can have its way with them.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I've combed through the 9-11 debunking websites, yet I still haven't seen it explained as to what happened to the cores of the Twin Towers. These giant concrete reenforced steel structures, spiraling up through the middle of both Towers were described as indestructible. How were these structures:


reduced to this:
?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join