The official conspiracy theory lacks evidence. You would think after a TERRORIST ATTACK where 3000 people died an investigation would include testing for accelerants and explosives, but no, reason, none of the booms were louds enough. Are you serious.

People want an real investigation of the events, not a cover up.

And it isnt kids in their basement who are the conspiracy theorists, it is architects engineers firefighters, whitnesses and politicians intelligence/military people coming forward.

Originally posted by TosskeyDo you honestly think they will be pleased with ANY report that doesn't verify their beliefs?

No way, for some it's a religion, you might as well tell muslims that "we have found no evidence that allah exists"

For other ppl there's still too much money in it and they will be on it again right away

Originally posted by C46driver

Originally posted by TosskeyDo you honestly think they will be pleased with ANY report that doesn't verify their beliefs?

No way, for some it's a religion, you might as well tell muslims that "we have found no evidence that allah exists"

For other ppl there's still too much money in it and they will be on it again right away

I just don't understand why conspiracy theorists cling to the most ridiculous theories.

It was a hologram!

Shaped charges!

Controlled demolition!


Where are the level headed conspiracy theorists that can accept that 'terrorists' crashed planes into buildings, but think the US Government was complicit in either perpetrating the hijackings, or atleast just turning a blind eye to it? Not that I think that's the case, personally, but I just find it funny that most conspiracy theorists immediately jump to the absolute least unlikely scenarios.

Originally posted by Tosskey
Where are the level headed conspiracy theorists that can accept that 'terrorists' crashed planes into buildings, but think the US Government was complicit in either perpetrating the hijackings, or atleast just turning a blind eye to it? Not that I think that's the case, personally, but I just find it funny that most conspiracy theorists immediately jump to the absolute least unlikely scenarios.

edit on 13-3-2011 by Tosskey because: (no reason given)

I agree holograms etc., is silly but to say controlled demolition didn't happen means you have not looked at the evidence.

For the towers without going into a lot of detail, as it is in plenty of other threads if you bothered to look, Newtons laws of motion proves the OS impossible. 30 floors can not crush 80 floors without being crushed themselves (equal opposite reactions), so the 30 floors would run out before the 80 floors did. And that's even IF the collapse happened according to the OS. Personally I don't think the collapse should have happened at all from one hour of fire. But regardless the OS does not offer a logical explanation as to how it could happen. Even Bazants paper, that claims to explain it, requires a large mass of floors to still be in the footprint of the towers, yet there are none.

The majority of WTC 7 landed in its own footprint, evidenced by post collapse pictures, i.e. all four outer walls were on top of the collapsed building. This is only possible from a controlled implosion demolition.



This is why the OS is in question, and should be.

Originally posted by ANOK
I agree holograms etc., is silly but to say controlled demolition didn't happen means you have not looked at the evidence.

For the towers without going into a lot of detail, as it is in plenty of other threads if you bothered to look, Newtons laws of motion proves the OS impossible. 30 floors can not crush 80 floors without being crushed themselves (equal opposite reactions), so the 30 floors would run out before the 80 floors did. And that's even IF the collapse happened according to the OS. Personally I don't think the collapse should have happened at all from one hour of fire. But regardless the OS does not offer a logical explanation as to how it could happen. Even Bazants paper, that claims to explain it, requires a large mass of floors to still be in the footprint of the towers, yet there are none.

The majority of WTC 7 landed in its own footprint, evidenced by post collapse pictures, i.e. all four outer walls were on top of the collapsed building. This is only possible from a controlled implosion demolition.

This is why the OS is in question, and should be.

Agreed, it is also quite clear that Tosskey hasn't really gone through this particular thread with any sincerity. Maybe when Toss... read the title of the thread it seemed to be home ground.

This ‘in its own footprint’ reason is just plain silly. It has no choice but to fall straight down.
If you expect it to fall like a tree in a forest then you are wrongly assuming it’s a rigid structure.
If you expect the lower floors to support the upper floors then you know nothing about hi rise construction. Essentially each floor is designed to support about the same weight. If you exceed that weight by too much it will fail.

These simple concepts are understood by the masses of people who matter.
All of you arm chair engineers will be disappointed because there will never be another government sanctioned investigation.