Your 9/11 truth?

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
You can call it running away all you want. Why are qualifications required for grade school physics? Or is that just because it is beyond your understanding?

Now what we have here is called "misdirection". You don't want to address topic A so you attempt to bring the discussion off into topic B in the hopes that topic A won't be brought up again. You need to know I'm immune to such games.

I'll ask again...and since you're behaving as suspicious as a Nigerian banker offering to share your millions with complete strangers in exchange for a small donation, I'll bring up the FIRST question again

a) what is your background in physics
b) why are these conspiracy theories always so unnecessarily convoluted?

They're honest questions and they deserve honest answers.

And this is the Internet. Anybody can CLAIM anything so asking makes no sense. You can build the models and test the physics for yourself.

That is true, anyone *can* claim anything...but what you're overlooking is that when they do make up false credentials they're risking the possibility they're going to encounter someone who really IS an authority and who will expose them to be complete liars. This is why I prefer to keep mum about my own credentials- I've already encountered THREE BS artists who were posting BS in topics I was intimately familiar with.

I used paper rings as "weak as possible" supports for the mass I was dealing with. I am not responsible for your idiotic exaggerations of the importance of the shape. The supports must handle the static load but if multiple stages of the weakest possible support still slow and stop the dynamic load then the supposed collapse of the north tower is nonsense.

Good grief, you're such a complete bull [censored] artist. First you call me a liar in your last post for falsely accusing you of using paper rings in your model of the WTC and NOW you're turning around and explaining why you used paper rings in your model of the WTC.

You really have no credibility, Psikey.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

a) what is your background in physics
b) why are these conspiracy theories always so unnecessarily convoluted?

What have I said about any conspiracy theories, convoluted or otherwise?

What do conspiracies have to do with skyscrapers having to be able to hold themselves up?

psik

reply to post by headorheart


There is no "official story" about 9-11.


I was a firefighter at Nellis AFB that morning. That day sucked ass, btw.



There is/was a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) that day. LAW in nearly 100 countries, including America. The standards set by the NFPA were not followed, not permitted, and fire investigators were not able to do their jobs according to their own standards, and the law.

There is no "official story" about 9-11.

I just got done watching a documentary about it on The Learning Channel, so the images of the tower getting hit and the buildings collapsing is fresh in my head. I was 18 and a college freshmen when it happened and did not know of anything until about 1200 EDT because I skipped class to go surfing.

About a month before it happened I speculated about an attack involving a hijacked airplane crashing into big targets and that if done by middle eastern suicide terrorists it would give Bush and company a reason to go to war, something my gut told me they wanted to do.

I am certain it was hijacked planes that crashed into the towers and caused the collapse and don't buy into the planted explosives theory, however Tower 7 falling is suspicious.

I never believed the story that flight 93 was brought down by a passenger revolt. From the moment I knew the details I was certain it was shot down. A few people I know who were watching the news said shortly before it went down the news briefly reported that flight 93 had been intercepted by fighter jets followed by a blackout and back to the WTC live shots. The OS of the Pentagon is also very shady to me as well.

I am not certain who is really behind it, but I think the CIA and Mossad may have been the ones pulling the strings and the hijackers may have been Islam extremists being used as puppets. Also by noon, when I first saw the television coverage Osama's face was already being shown and believe he was nothing more than a scapegoat designed to give the American people someone to hate after the attacks.

One more thing, I find it very strange that FEMA was already in NYC for some sort of drill that week.

reply to post by ILikeStars

There is/was a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) that day. LAW in nearly 100 countries, including America. The standards set by the NFPA were not followed, not permitted, and fire investigators were not able to do their jobs according to their own standards, and the law. [/ex

I'm a FF too...

So explain how one does a "proper investigation" on a site of 16 acres, with debris piles of 100 feet with
remains of 2700 people inside. Oh and on fire too.....

Priority was too see if any survivors still alive (last one was found 26 hours after collapse of North Tower)

Removal of bodies/body parts from debris

Cleanup of debris

Exdtinguishing of fires in the debris piles

Or can have a "proper investigation" while debris pile continues to burn with bodies of victims still inside

Reality sucks. Sometimes have to chuck rule book and do what you can

reply to post by jrod

One more thing, I find it very strange that FEMA was already in NYC for some sort of drill that week.

Agencies have drills all the time.

If I were a bad guy with bad intents I would put off my plan for one day if I knew that FEMA and the military were having drills that day. Wouldn't you?

If I were the government conspirators I would choose a day when I didn't have military planes in the air near by. Wouldn't you?

reply to post by headorheart


My 911 truth?

Three planes were slammed headlong into three buildings, a fourth was forced down in a field. Many an innocent life was forever changed in the aftermath, both here, and elsewhere.

Was it a conspiracy? Hell yes it was... But this is where so many of us part ways in rather spectacular fashion. I happen to subscribe to a good portion of the official story. Not all of it, but a good portion. I believe that elements within the Saudi Arabian regime were involved up to their eyeballs. So too were Al Qaeda operatives. It would not overly surprise me if some Americans, too, were involved as a way to foment a war against the "evil that is Islam", or words to that effect... Were high level govt. officials involved? Doubt it. At least not 'til it came time to cover their asses... It was a case of, as with Pearl Harbour, not seeing the forest for the trees... They knew something was coming, but not where, or at least not soon enough to do anything about it...

As a result of these views, I've been called many a name in the past few years...

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

 

What have I said about any conspiracy theories, convoluted or otherwise?

What do conspiracies have to do with skyscrapers having to be able to hold themselves up?

psik

So are you saying that you reject all these "sinister secret plots to take over the world" 9/11 conspiracy theories floating around the internet? That's what's driving this hungering need to inflate these conspiracies to such extreme Rube Goldberg-esge convolution to begin with, after all.

...and you STILL didn't answer the question- what is your background in physics?

If Tesla, Marconi, the Wright Brothers etc. had worked for the government, then AC current, radio transmission, heavier than air flight, etc. could have been unknown to us for a long time. The MIC has had secrets for 60 years prior to 911 so almost any conspiracy theory is possible.

I am amazed that people think remote controlled airplanes are beyond the capacity of any team of engineers. I don't know about recent posts but as late a 2008 folks actually said that it was impossible to fly a big jet by computer program or radio signals. Making one thing work one time is alot easier than making something to mass produce and sell to other people at a profit.

60 years of secret developement could yield anything in the sciences, like Holograms, mass halucinations/suggestions, or energy field/matter manipulations.

One thing for sure-- the cold war ended but the goverment got bigger.

Originally posted by Semicollegiate
I am amazed that people think remote controlled airplanes are beyond the capacity of any team of engineers. I don't know about recent posts but as late a 2008 folks actually said that it was impossible to fly a big jet by computer program or radio signals. Making one thing work one time is alot easier than making something to mass produce and sell to other people at a profit.

60 years of secret developement could yield anything in the sciences, like Holograms, mass halucinations/suggestions, or energy field/matter manipulations.

That's not how the real world works. Everything the gov't has...the tanks, the bullets, the uniforms, the spy planes, the computers, everything...was made by private industry, and the entire reason why they make them to begin with ISN'T because the gov't asked them to, but because they intend to make a profit on it and it's something they can sell to other customers. Sure, the first batch of M4 carbines were sold to the military, but the next batch after that would be sold to local police forces. The rockets being built to launch spy satillites into orbit one week will be built to launch communications satillites into orbit the next. The Internet, the GPS system in your car, the nylons on the legs of your girlfriend you're feeling up on prom night, were all originally spearheaded for military use and which later spilled over into civilian use. Even canning food was invented in France so that Napoleon wouldn't have to serve his armies rotten food while on the march.

THEREFORE, it's almost mandatory to declare that if some super duper hush-a-boom explosives were developed by Dupont that exploded quietly and invisibly and left no blast damage behind, Dupont is sure as shootin' going to market something similar to their other customers who use explosives. Controlled Demolitions, Inc would pay top dollar for something like that so they don't need to pay for any more shattered windows in the neighborhood from the explosives they're using now going BOOM. I haven't seen even a thimbleful of any of the near-supernatural technology supposedly used by the conspirators anywhere else. Have you?

reply to post by Semicollegiate

I am amazed that people think remote controlled airplanes are beyond the capacity of any team of engineers.

Of course R/C is not "beyond the capacity".....it is the full context of facts that precludes R/C being involved on 9/11.

Firstly, there is no doubt of the two Boeing 767s and two Boeing 757s that were involved. But, to allege that they were somehow "retrofitted" to be capably of being remotely controlled?? Now you have to face a few facts.

The very task of the R&D alone to design, and then engineer such an installation is not something done overnight. And, it is not done without a great deal of testing, step-by-step, to work out any "bugs".

Then, even after all of that, there would be the many, many man hours of work needed for the actual conversion...on all four?? This means they would be taken out of service with the airline for that time period, something that could easily be shown to be false....since there is no record of such a thing happening.


Finally.....the glaring fact that there are two of the "black boxes" (Flight Data Recorders) recovered and readable, with information intact. From AAL 77 and UAL 93. These show controls being manipulated in the cockpit in ways that would only be accomplished by Human hand. The sort of things that a "remote controlled" airplane would have non reason to do.

reply to post by Semicollegiate


Whilst I agree that goverments have probably got lots of tech stuff we will never hear about, and remote controlling a plane could even happen...the problem I have with whole goverment behind the attack is the amount of people that would have to be involved in the background, tech & support staff to create the programme, ground staff to fit the system to the aircraft, a remote control pilot for the plane for example...All of the proposed ideas for 9-11 is easy to blame on the goverment, but if you think of what personnel would be needed to carry out the attack,and the planning this would involve for most of the situations the numbers of those involved would be immense, and not one of them thought that mass murder was madness? and not one of them has spoken of what happend to anyone? To me that doesnt seem plausable, but i'm happy for someone to put me right if they know something on this matter.

Good lord my spelling is woeful, long day in the office has turned me into a wreck.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Some things are hard to sell and so the companies wouldn't always try to sell the really fancy stuff. Who would you sell a building vaporizer to?

They developed nerve gas and that has no market.

There is caseless ammunition that fires from and electric charge and doesn't need to eject empty cartriges, and silent air rifles that you could hunt Grizzly Bear with. A Pentium controlled personal flying car that can VTOL out of any home owner's back yard. Hydrogen powered cars and solar powered cars but you don't see them on the market.

They could make solar satellite system that would microwave terawatts down to the Earth but they are scared of millions of third degree burns if the beam wandered off of the reciever, so they don't transfer power through microwaves except in you microwave oven, DON'T WATCH THE FOOD COOK.

James Cameron has built a one off hadopelagic submarine to go to bottom of the deepest sea floor in the world.

Building something for a one time job is alot easier than building some thing to mass produce at a profit.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

 

What have I said about any conspiracy theories, convoluted or otherwise?

What do conspiracies have to do with skyscrapers having to be able to hold themselves up?

psik

So are you saying that you reject all these "sinister secret plots to take over the world" 9/11 conspiracy theories floating around the internet?

...and you STILL didn't answer the question- what is your background in physics?

I don't give a damn about plots, sinister or otherwise. They are your straw man.

The Laws of Physics are incapable of giving a damn about conspiracies, Islam, governments or how many people died on 9/11.

Newtonian Physics is THREE HUNDRED YEARS OLD. That is a good enough background for 7th graders.

Potential Energy is mass * gravity * height. So computing the Potential Energy of the towers means knowing how much mass in steel and concrete was how high in the towers. So if 7th graders were provided with the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level of the towers then they should have no trouble computing the Potential Energy. So why haven't people with PhDs in physics been demanding that information for the last TEN YEARS?

The Conservation of Momentum is about mass hitting mass so any relevant calculation would involve the amount of mass so it comes back to the question I just asked.

9/11 is a Scientific Farce and our engineering schools have created this problem by not explaining the simple. When has Richard Gage ever brought up the distribution of mass in the towers? I asked him about it in 2008.

Conspiracies are not even worth talking about because physics is more fundamental than human behavior.

Of course if it is impossible for a normal airliner to have destroyed a 400,000+ ton tower then all of this talk about conspiracies is nothing but a smoke screen that prevents the solution to simple problems. I provided an NIST quote about the tower's weight and its distribution. Are you saying they don't have relevant qualifications?

psik

reply to post by psikeyhackr


Newtonian physics are outdated because they do not factor in the differences in elastic and inelastic collisions. You should know this if you know even the most basic physics from grade school.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by psikeyhackr


I know you have issues with the formula I posted created by Dr Frank Greening on how the towers came down, but what if the first floor to collapse was rubble fell directly onto the supporting restraints when it hit the next floor down, componded with the fact of the weakend structure, would this not still have enough momentum to bring down the rest of the tower?

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Semicollegiate

 

I am amazed that people think remote controlled airplanes are beyond the capacity of any team of engineers.

Of course R/C is not "beyond the capacity".....it is the full context of facts that precludes R/C being involved on 9/11.

Firstly, there is no doubt of the two Boeing 767s and two Boeing 757s that were involved. But, to allege that they were somehow "retrofitted" to be capably of being remotely controlled?? Now you have to face a few facts.

The very task of the R&D alone to design, and then engineer such an installation is not something done overnight. And, it is not done without a great deal of testing, step-by-step, to work out any "bugs".

Then, even after all of that, there would be the many, many man hours of work needed for the actual conversion...on all four?? This means they would be taken out of service with the airline for that time period, something that could easily be shown to be false....since there is no record of such a thing happening.


Finally.....the glaring fact that there are two of the "black boxes" (Flight Data Recorders) recovered and readable, with information intact. From AAL 77 and UAL 93. These show controls being manipulated in the cockpit in ways that would only be accomplished by Human hand. The sort of things that a "remote controlled" airplane would have non reason to do.

The fact that you have security on your computer makes any reliance on black boxes risky. Ultimately they are just electricity converted into a recording.

Hwo long have the 757 and 767 been in production? That is how long they would have had to rig them.

reply to post by psikeyhackr

You are starting to sound like a broken record.

9/11 is a Scientific Farce and our engineering schools have created this problem by not explaining the simple. When has Richard Gage ever brought up the distribution of mass in the towers? I asked him about it in 2008.

Our engineering schools did not create your problem. Your problem is that you don't have enough knowledge about building construction and the physics involved in their destruction.
If any of the schools had a problem with it some professor or student would have come out with papers explaining why it could not have happened the way it did. And you will never convince me that smart ass 21 year old students would listen to government hush orders.

And the simple fact that even you could not get Gage to fork over the calculations to show some grand conspiracy. That alone says that Gage knows it’s not a conspiracy.

So when you boil it all down you are the only person around who has a problem with it.


But I'm sure you will still be stuck on the psiky go round.

The official story is possible, during WW2 at least one pilot fell from 14 thousand feet and got only two broken ankles as injuries.

Aren't they supposed to check the collapse out rigourously to determine the saftey of any other or future buildings that have or will use the same design? There should have been a milli or micro second description off the collaspe to find our why the towers failed, and collasped into the smallest possible volume.

Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Some things are hard to sell and so the companies wouldn't always try to sell the really fancy stuff. Who would you sell a building vaporizer to?

Anyone who needed lots and lots of stuff to disappear economically, actually. A construction company sent to build a new road through mountains would no longer need heavy machinery, trucks full of dynamite, and armies of lawyers to protect themselves from the lawsuits filed by locals screaming YOUR DEMOLITIONS CRACKED MY FOUNDATION. Five or six of these incredible hush-a-boom explosives laid out in the right place, and BINGO, there's instantly a new road and it's home for bacon and eggs.

They developed nerve gas and that has no market.

Isn't bug spray essentially heavily diluted nerve gas that only affects organisms with simple nervous systems? I thought I had read that somewhere.

There is caseless ammunition that fires from and electric charge and doesn't need to eject empty cartriges, and silent air rifles that you could hunt Grizzly Bear with. A Pentium controlled flying machine that can VTOL out of any home owner's back yard. Hydrogen powered cars and solar powered cars but you don't see them on the market.

The reason for that is because they're still in the experimental stage and aren't economical for civilian use yet. This is literally the same situation with vehicles that ran on natural gas when the technology first came out. Now that the technology is practical, UPS is buying thousands of trucks that run on liquid natural gas.

I think it's safe to say that any prototype hush-a-boom explosives that could silently take down the WTC has proven itself to have been perfected.

James Cameron has built a one off hadopelagic submarine to go to bottom of the deepest sea floor in the world.

James Cameron is a civilian film maker. You've just proved what I said about technology originally created for a military application eventually winding up in the hands of civilians.

Building something for a one time job is alot easier than building some thing to mass produce at a profit.

This doesn't apply to explosive formulas. Whatever new whiz-bang chemical composition they whipped up, unless the secret ingredient is something rare and exotic like lunar soil or human souls, they can very easily make more of the stuff...and I sincerely doubt the company making the stuff would waste their entire supply of lunar soil or human souls on blowing up the WTC.