Originally posted by SimontheMagus
How convenient. So now even when it is admitted to you that there were bombs in the towers by the "Commander in Chief", which is what he was the other day when I said that Cheney ran the White House, now Bush is a moron and we shouldn't listen to anything he says.

I think your gig is up.

Bye byeeeeeeeee

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
How convenient. So now even when it is admitted to you that there were bombs in the towers by the "Commander in Chief", which is what he was the other day when I said that Cheney ran the White House, now Bush is a moron and we shouldn't listen to anything he says.

I think your gig is up.

Bye byeeeeeeeee

Let me get this straight. You think it's more plausible that Bush, the complete moron, let slip an international criminal conspiracy to murder 3000 Americans. As opposed to him making a stupid mistake in speaking? Something he's well known for?

PS. If you think I get paid to be here, you're wrong, but you're welcome to send me money!

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
No, he didn't let anything slip. He was pulling a CYA in case it was ever proven that bombs were in the building. And the cover story was... as hysterical as this is, that "operatives" somehow got in there and wired up the towers while nobody was looking. Here's the exact quote from a press conference at the Rose Garden of the White House on September 15, 2006:

Now of course, you guys have been railing for years how there were no bombs, the firemen and witnesses were delusional, et al, and now here you have "the moron" (I concur completely!) saying that there were indeed explosives in the towers.

Now I will tell you what exponent, I will take your word for it that you're not getting paid for this, ok? But it's a fairly safe assumption that if the big towers were wired, so was #7. Considering all the personal attacks the OS camp has levied over the past few years at anyone who suggests there were bombs in the building, I think its about time that maybe, instead of attacking each other, if you're really not a shill, that we start treating each other with mutual respect in order to get to the truth so we can hang the bastards who were really responsible for 911,

Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if we can exterminate them from the planet, the vast majority of all the problems and threats that we face as a species will miraculously disappear.

QUOTE from George W Bush posted by SimontheMagus..........He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."

Originally posted by AvadaKedavra14
The collapse of the twin towers was a very messy one, the easiest way to understand how each towers top sections overwhelmed the below sections, is to appreciate that the floors and connections in each structure were designed to support a static load, also live loads not however a dynamic one of the magnitude we see on 911.

Also most engineers agree that there was more than enough potential energy to collapse and destroy each tower, which we observe a large part of the PE was converted into heat, light and kinetic energy which broke up the structure.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by AvadaKedavra14
The collapse of the twin towers was a very messy one, the easiest way to understand how each towers top sections overwhelmed the below sections, is to appreciate that the floors and connections in each structure were designed to support a static load, also live loads not however a dynamic one of the magnitude we se on 911.

If the top sections overwhelmed the bottom section then what happened to the top section, especially the massive hat truss?

The argument about dynamic loads ignores Newtonian physics. ALL collision between two objects is a dynamic load. The collapse should have slowed and arrested due to building resistance, but the opposite happened meaning more energy was involved than gravity.

Also most engineers agree that there was more than enough potential energy to collapse and destroy each tower, which we observe a large part of the PE was converted into heat, light and kinetic energy which broke up the structure.

What 'most engineers'? Most engineers have not even expressed an opinion on the collapses.

If they did they're wrong. Every time a floor assembly hits resistance it would lose Ke to deformation, friction/resistance, heat, sound etc. So every floor impact you lose Ke, you don't gain Ke. Loss of Ke means the collapse would slow and stop.

If it happened the way the OS claims there would still be intact floors assemblies in the footprint, not to mention the hat truss which would be sitting on top of the pile. But the rubble was spread in a360 arc around the towers, which means mass was being lost, not gained, during the collapse. Loss of Ke and loss of mass means the collapses could not have been complete without another energy acting on them that has not been investigated for by NIST.