What is your theory on the events of 9/11???

Originally posted by hooper
Thats nice. Too bad on 9/11 there were thousands and thousands of objects involved. Not calculate the forces on each object and then get back to me.

What are you talking about?

That's nice? Newtonian physics is nice?

So what if there are thousands of objects involved? I was just explaining someones incomplete understanding of elementary physics. As usual you prefer to play ignorant in order to ignore reality that destroys your OS fantasies

You know I'm right.

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by RockLobster
Man , you need to stop waking me up like this - V -

Tell me , with your ever changing ->opinion

Originally posted by RockLobster
....But it IS the picture you create when you speculate such a thing ....... high speed impact physics ..... i like it

What word would you use -V- ? ....... i`m interested , i mean , you DO have some great theories ..... like that biro pen theory you showed us a couple of years ago ..... top notch

That was a very simple demonstration of how without a stable base to pivot off of, an object will simply rotate downward, as is what happened to the top of one of the towers. Are you telling me there's something wrong with it?

I'm not even sure what your criticism is here. You've offered nothing to the discussion.

Originally posted by thegameisup

Hahahahahahahahha! you trying to say all the dust is fireproofing! Hahahahahahaha! How ridiculous!

So are you suggesting they brought in dump trucks full of fake fire proofing dust and spread it around on the streets ?

The dust is fire proofing.

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by thegameisup

Hahahahahahahahha! you trying to say all the dust is fireproofing! Hahahahahahaha! How ridiculous!

So are you suggesting they brought in dump trucks full of fake fire proofing dust and spread it around on the streets ?

The dust is fire proofing.

Why would I be suggesting they brought dump trucks? I've never mentioned dump trucks, that is something you just came up with from the depths of your imagination.

I said I do not believe it was fireproofing, so your dump truck innuendo is null and void, no fireproofing, so none of your magical dump trucks needed!

Prove that dust was fireproofing.....

You can't, because whatever the dust was, it was not from fireproofing!

It was most likely the official story fairy dust, made out of the black box flight recorders that magically disappeared, and probably sprinkled all around by those imaginary hijackers.

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by thegameisup

Hahahahahahahahha! you trying to say all the dust is fireproofing! Hahahahahahaha! How ridiculous!

So are you suggesting they brought in dump trucks full of fake fire proofing dust and spread it around on the streets ?

The dust is fire proofing.

Prove that dust was fireproofing.....

Prove the dust wasn't fire proofing. You are the one with the conspiracy. You prove your conspiracy.

Originally posted by huh2142
Prove the dust wasn't fire proofing. You are the one with the conspiracy. You prove your conspiracy.

You're the one claiming all that dust is fire proofing, you need to prove your claim.

This seems to be a common problem with OS supporters, the assumption that only people who question the OS need to prove anything.

Yet there is no proof of anything in the OS. The NIST report is an hypothesis. Unproven, untested hypothesis. We have been asking you to prove the OS correct for 11 years, all we get is excuses that a third grader could see through.

So what if all the fire proofing turned to dust and ended up all over Liberty Street? How does that in anyway come close to proving the NIST hypothesis?

To do that you need to demonstrate that sagging trusses can put a pulling force on the columns, and IF they could why the connections didn't fail first. IF anyone can demonstrate that then you might have something.

Originally posted by thegameisup
I've never mentioned dump trucks,

So how are you suggesting the fire proofing dust ended up in the street ?

I can see the dust fall from the building, after the plane impact, and land in the street. That's how we know it's fireproofing from the building.



All of that white dust falling below the arrows is mostly fire proofing.

Originally posted by waypastvne
So how are you suggesting the fire proofing dust ended up in the street ?

I can see the dust fall from the building, after the plane impact, and land in the street. That's how we know it's fireproofing from the building.

All of that white dust falling below the arrows is mostly fire proofing.

You really can't be serious with this? This has to be the most ridiculous claim I've heard so far.

You deduce it was fire proofing because you see it after impact falling to the street? It couldn't possibly a number of other things, it just has to be fire proofing? Just because it fits your fantasy that lack of fire proofing made sagging trusses pull in the columns?

Really?

And now we have to prove your pet theory incorrect?

Really?

OK how about I claim it's concrete and other things? My proof? You can see it fall to the street after the impact. Will you accept that? Of course you won't.

Again another well thought out hypothesis from waypastvne.

Originally posted by reeferman
reply to post by r2d246

 

lets investigate the facts..

and leave the theories behind..

fact: there were so many war games on 911

that dealt directly with the same scenario..

to be coincidence..

who has access to inside intelligence?

The israeli's knew and were setup to document the event before plane #1 hit.

When it hit they were happy and started jumping up and down because they
knew they got the US to head over to the middle east to take some of
the heat off them for awhile.

Here, you can watch the Mossad members admit to it.



I also recommend the complete 911 timeline for ppl who want to do DEEP research
into events, and the film "9-11 press for truth", neither have been discredited at this point.

Some of the tell tale events that make ppl suspicious are them not releasing the
commercial video tapes from buildings near the pentagon, and same event in
the case of the OKC bombing. Only a few frames from one camera has been released.

At this time thou they have had enough time to tamper with it to be sure.

Even 6 of the 9-11 commissioners said there was a cover up.

The video in my signature also goes into details showing that they lied
about the molten metal at the site, and it stayed molten for over 2 weeks.

Only one thing can keep metal in a liquid state for WEEKS, that is thermite, and lots of it.

The energy weapon theory is just there to make ppl look bad.

Everything that happened can be explained with the fact that someone had
internal access to the buildings.

Proof of that is how fast they took down building 7, it takes time to plan where to place
the charges, then place the charges, and then wire it all up.

Building 7 was pre-wired for the owner's "pull it" order that he admitted he gave on TV.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by r2d246


The non-conspiracist side of me believes...
it was what "they" said it was - an attack by middle eastern terrorists on the US at which they flew planes into our buildings.

The conspiracist side of of me believes...
it was a controlled demolition where bombs where pre-planted into the buildings by our own government or people hired by either our government or other elitists or cronies.

The former :The attack may have been issued to destroy documents.
The latter: The government set this story up deliberately (middle eastern men terrorizing the country) to support their excuses for the war on terror overseas and thus to maintain their agenda and status as a global power.

In Conclusion: All of this, to me, sounds a lot like "Operation Northwoods" No?

The proposal fell dead in the water back in 62. So let's try again, eh?

After all, they do say history has a way of repeating itself.

Greys or Reptilians are who I think did it. That covers a lot of territory, but it's safe to say it wasn't 100% human.

reply to post by Ex_MislTech

Only one thing can keep metal in a liquid state for WEEKS, that is thermite, and lots of it.

Please explain this one. Thermite burns very, very, quickly and whatever it melts returns to a solid state in a matter of minutes, also one of the signature charateristics of thermite is blinding light, as bright as an arc weld. So please explain how tons and tons and tons of thermite was being ignited for weeks and no one saw anything.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Ex_MislTech

 

Only one thing can keep metal in a liquid state for WEEKS, that is thermite, and lots of it.

Please explain this one. Thermite burns very, very, quickly and whatever it melts returns to a solid state in a matter of minutes, also one of the signature charateristics of thermite is blinding light, as bright as an arc weld. So please explain how tons and tons and tons of thermite was being ignited for weeks and no one saw anything.

I've seen thermite in action in real life, and I've seen it in videos. You're completely correct about this, and I don't know why others have such a hard time believing it.

Thermite does not have all these magical characteristics which are attributed to it on this site.

Originally posted by ANOK


OK how about I claim it's concrete and other things?

The concrete was sandwiched between a layer of corrugated steel and a layer of carpet or vinyl making the dust more likely to be contained. The concrete is harder and less likely to turn to dust.

Three sides of the exterior columns including spandrel plates...



All of the core columns....



and the undersides of the floors and trusses were covered with an average of 1.5 inches of fireproofing.



By volume the fireproofing was almost equal to that of the concrete and much more likely to crumble to dust.

The white dust you see falling to the ground after impact is fireproofing.

Again another well thought out hypothesis from waypastvne.

Thanks. Maybe someday you'll have one.

reply to post by waypastvne


Mate you're not going to convince me that dust was fire-proofing, sorry. Wild speculation that is irrelevant to how the towers collapsed.

Again what you have to do is demonstrate how sagging trusses can pull in columns, and without the truss itself, or the connections, failing first.

reply to post by Ex_MislTech


No, according to the lady who called the cops on them, they did not show up until after the first tower had been hit. The interviews with her, were still available online last I checked.

reply to post by Ex_MislTech


Instead of attacking Jews why don't you attack false Jews? No offense but posting that was clips of perhaps a radical sect of Judaism that doesn't truly represent Israel. so now Israel is at fault of this? Did the people on board the planes happen to be Jewish who pretended to be Al Queda terrorist and willing to die for this? I don't think it's in the Jewish faith to commit suicide. Perhaps there is a radical form of Jewish people willing to do so but it seems like a side show distraction. It's too bad she didn't have a video camera. I'm not Jewish and I'm not saying this isn't some radical group but some people seem to keep blaming Israel which Israel has been attacked many times. I want to stick to known facts. Why did Cheney not shoot down the planes when they second one got close to the second building or at least when the third headed towards the White house region and hitting the Pentagon? Why did Rumsfeld order those soldiers to torture Arab Muslims and the worst punishment he got was to step down from power while the people he ordered to humiliate and mentally torture POWs got years in Military Jail? As for George W Bush he just was quoted as saying he was on a high for having power (not word for word.. Maybe I"ll find the quote) and that he now looks towards his father and doesn't feel the need for that sense of Power to control. So He's admitting his decisions were based on some Big Hard on Power trip?? This sin't WWII we don't accept everything we're told. We broke through and we forced a president (Nixon) nearly 40 years ago to step down. Now we have our homes bugged, Or civil rights danced on and it seems Mexican Drug Cartel can own fully autos through fast and furious but Americans will have their guns taken away. WAKE THE HELL UP!

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by ANOK


OK how about I claim it's concrete and other things?

The concrete was sandwiched between a layer of corrugated steel and a layer of carpet or vinyl making the dust more likely to be contained. The concrete is harder and less likely to turn to dust.

Three sides of the exterior columns including spandrel plates...


and the undersides of the floors and trusses were covered with an average of 1.5 inches of fireproofing.

By volume the fireproofing was almost equal to that of the concrete and much more likely to crumble to dust.

The white dust you see falling to the ground after impact is fireproofing.

Again another well thought out hypothesis from waypastvne.

Thanks. Maybe someday you'll have one.

edit on 27-7-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)

That last photo?? You believe that is WTC 1 or 2? or is this 7? Because there is no way in hell that is building 1 or 2. and never in the history has a steel structure fully collapsed. yet you have 3 in one day. What a load of crap. Building 7 was built in 1980s well after stricture ordinance went into affects. its been mentioned many times. No way in hell in NYC would that building have passed inspection on completion of being built. Perhaps in the 1940s or 50s during the corrupted union days but no way in hell in the 1980s.

Sorry.. I'm editing this last part because we're not supposed to attack one another verbally.. And I didn't mean to do so. but that is not Building 1 or 2. Those buildings had bow shaped trusses and high ceiling between floors. at best that is the basement of one of the garages and even then it doesn't look anything more than that of a boiler room