BYU physics professor says WTC was a controlled demolition

[FORD]

Deseret Morning News, Thursday, November 10, 2005

Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC

By Elaine Jarvik
Deseret Morning News

The physics of 9/11 — including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell — prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor.

In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.

In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says.

Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News

Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes — which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.

As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation."

Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation — that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse — can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says.

Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "

In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:

• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding."

Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September.

Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.

E-mail: jarvik@desnews.com

Link (http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C635160132%2C00.html)

[DrMaddVibe]

He's entitled to "think" that the world is flat and that you're a genius too...ever think about that?

[FORD]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
He's entitled to "think" that the world is flat and that you're a genius too...ever think about that?

But he's a conservative Mormon professor, at a conservative Mormon school, and his theory was just published in Utah's leading conservative Mormon newspaper.

That's pretty remarkable in a supposedly solid "red" state, isn't it?

Conservatives are waking up to the scam, AssVibe. When will you join them?

[DrMaddVibe]

The "cult" of personality!

[FORD]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
The "cult" of personality!

http://www.80smusiclyrics.com/images/livingcolour.jpg
Leave Living Colour out of this!

[DrMaddVibe]

Why...the song fits what you want to cram into this post!

[Hardrock69]

Paging Dr. Madd.....Paging Dr. Madd.....your presence is requested on the Neo-Con Fantasy-Land Short Bus....


http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=748554

[DrMaddVibe]

If you don't know what ne0-c0n means...don't use it.

[ELVIS]

How many wives does this idiot have ??

[weesfreewheelin]

The book of Mormon. Jesus the western:rolleyes: I guess I imagined those planes that day from where I stood in Newark NJ. Maybe this guy gets vsited by the same little green men that visit sammy hagar;)

[Keeyth]

Um... This is what I have been saying SINCE DAY ONE!!!

There is no way those planes brought down those buildings.

Now there is a BYU professor backing up those claims, and STILL the simpleton neo-con shitbags defend the official story!

HELLO!! It's already been proven Bush LIED about the war. What makes you think he isn't LYING about these attacks???? Especially when physics proves that their story isn't possible?? Don't you see yet how convenient these "hijackings" were for this President and his agenda???

*Smack, smack* HELLO! McFly? McFLY!! Wake UP!!!

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by weesfreewheelin
The book of Mormon. Jesus the western:rolleyes: I guess I imagined those planes that day from where I stood in Newark NJ. Maybe this guy gets vsited by the same little green men that visit sammy hagar;)

Nobody denies the planes were there. But who was actually in control of them is another thing entirely.

There are too many unanswered coincidences for this to have gone down the way they want you to believe. Look into it.

[ELVIS]

Oh my...:rolleyes:

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Um... This is what I have been saying SINCE DAY ONE!!!

There is no way those planes brought down those buildings.

Now there is a BYU professor backing up those claims, and STILL the simpleton neo-con shitbags defend the official story!

HELLO!! It's already been proven Bush LIED about the war. What makes you think he isn't LYING about these attacks???? Especially when physics proves that their story isn't possible?? Don't you see yet how convenient these "hijackings" were for this President and his agenda???

*Smack, smack* HELLO! McFly? McFLY!! Wake UP!!!

Then why run two planes into the Towers if they weren't necessary to bring them down? Why even mess with Step A, when you could've went right to Step B, which is to push the plunger down.

I smell BS, like usual when I read these hock conspiracy theories.

[DrMaddVibe]

"Bush LIED about the war"?

Can we revisit the UN speeches...AGAIN!

[Guitar Shark]

I would love to hear how "BCE" operatives managed to load up the WTC towers with explosives sufficient to bring them down, completely undetected.

We've all seen what's required to achieve a controlled demolition. It takes weeks, if not months, of careful planning and installation of equipment. Wires everywhere. Prep work. Yet somehow, the "BCE" managed to do all of this in secret, and the thousands of tenants and visitors to the WTC never noticed.

That BCE is truly amazing!

[ELVIS]

Not to mention, when a building is demolished it is literally taken apart at the seams prior to being demolished...

Get the fuck out of here with that BULLSHIT!

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Then why run two planes into the Towers if they weren't necessary to bring them down? Why even mess with Step A, when you could've went right to Step B, which is to push the plunger down.

I smell BS, like usual when I read these hock conspiracy theories.

I can't even believe you asked that. It's so obvious. He needed the dramatics of the planes to provide the cover (he can't just blow up buildings without the cause of the explosions being investigated)
He also needed to have the supposed reason to attack the middle east.

How could you ask such a stupid question?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
I would love to hear how "BCE" operatives managed to load up the WTC towers with explosives sufficient to bring them down, completely undetected.

We've all seen what's required to achieve a controlled demolition. It takes weeks, if not months, of careful planning and installation of equipment. Wires everywhere. Prep work. Yet somehow, the "BCE" managed to do all of this in secret, and the thousands of tenants and visitors to the WTC never noticed.

That BCE is truly amazing!

Ownership of the WTC changed hands 11 weeks before the attacks.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
I can't even believe you asked that. It's so obvious. He needed the dramatics of the planes to provide the cover (he can't just blow up buildings without the cause of the explosions being investigated)
He also needed to have the supposed reason to attack the middle east.

How could you ask such a stupid question?

I would think the Twin Towers going down ANY way would be dramatic enough. That still doesn't answer my question, Keeyth. Why have nineteen Islamic terrorists hijack two planes, possibly getting caught in the process, just to put on a good show?

[FORD]

It is an established fact that Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowy, both of whom have ties to Mossad, acquired the lease to the WTC a few months before the attacks.

It is also a fact that Marvin Bush (Chimpy's brother and card carrying member of the BCE) was the CEO of the company providing security for the WTC during this time.

Maintenance crews installed a "new sprinkler system" in the WTC in the weeks before the attacks. It's entirely plausible that explosive charges could have been placed in the building at this time, using the sprinkler system as a cover.

Silverstein admitted in a television interview that he gave the order to "pull" WTC Building 7. "Pull" means controlled demolition. Yet the power was cut to the entire WTC complex after the second plane hit the towers. Therefore there would have been no lights in building 7 allowing demolition crews to wire the building on that day. So the only possible answer is that the building was already set up for a controlled demolition. And if this is true of Building 7, then it could just as easily be true of Buildings 1 & 2 (the towers). Some have theorized that the buildings were ALWAYS wired for a controlled demolition, in the event that something could impact the towers and cause them to topple over onto Manhattan, rather than collapse onto themselves, as was done on 9/11/01.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Not to mention, when a building is demolished it is literally taken apart at the seams prior to being demolished...

Get the fuck out of here with that BULLSHIT!

To save the salvageable items maybe, but if you don't do that, it's not going to stop the explosives from taking the building down just as effectively.

Wake up and smell the BULLSHIT you've been fed by the BCE all this time.

[ELVIS]

Oh brother...:rolleyes:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
I would think the Twin Towers going down ANY way would be dramatic enough. That still doesn't answer my question, Keeyth. Why have nineteen Islamic terrorists hijack two planes, possibly getting caught in the process, just to put on a good show?

Funny how NONE of the names of the nineteen hijackers appeared on the manifests of either airline, and then THE VERY NEXT DAY, the FBI has 19 NAMES AND MUGSHOTS of them, even though ALL THE EYEWITNESSES WERE DEAD!

Smelled funny then, STINKS now!

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
I would think the Twin Towers going down ANY way would be dramatic enough. That still doesn't answer my question, Keeyth. Why have nineteen Islamic terrorists hijack two planes, possibly getting caught in the process, just to put on a good show?

Yes. putting on the show was the entire point of the plane crashes. Especially the second hit, which was designed as THE media event. The planners of the attack (whomever you believe that to be) knew that every TV network would have a camera at the scene to film the aftermath of the first crash. And then right on cue, plane #2 slams into the other tower. It was done purely for shock value, regardless of whether or not the plane was occupied. (many eyewitnesses said it appeared to be a cargo plane with no windows)

And while an entire nation was still understandably in shock, they pulled the towers, adding to the horror, and the psychological programming.

Or in other words, doing exactly what the PNAC manifesto called for. A new "PERLE Harbor" to create public support for the coming global fascist agenda.

[Warham]

Actually, it was three days later, Keeyth.

You are batting .000 still, especially after giving faulty info.

[Warham]

Originally posted by FORD
Yes. putting on the show was the entire point of the plane crashes. Especially the second hit, which was designed as THE media event. The planners of the attack (whomever you believe that to be) knew that every TV network would have a camera at the scene to film the aftermath of the first crash. And then right on cue, plane #2 slams into the other tower. It was done purely for shock value, regardless of whether or not the plane was occupied. (many eyewitnesses said it appeared to be a cargo plane with no windows)

And while an entire nation was still understandably in shock, they pulled the towers, adding to the horror, and the psychological programming.

Or in other words, doing exactly what the PNAC manifesto called for. A new "PERLE Harbor" to create public support for the coming global fascist agenda.

What programming? 60+% of the public disagrees with George W. Bush now! He hardly has any of the support he had on 9/11.

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by FORD
It is an established fact that Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowy, both of whom have ties to Mossad, acquired the lease to the WTC a few months before the attacks.

It's an established "fact" that YOU didn't show how this is even a truthful run!


Originally posted by FORD
It is also a fact that Marvin Bush (Chimpy's brother and card carrying member of the BCE) was the CEO of the company providing security for the WTC during this time.

Card carrying member? I'm dying to know how one becomes a "member"!


Originally posted by FORD
Maintenance crews installed a "new sprinkler system" in the WTC in the weeks before the attacks. It's entirely plausible that explosive charges could have been placed in the building at this time, using the sprinkler system as a cover.

Another loose cannon statement after being challenged on the merits of attempting to carry out the notion of setting explosives after the 1st Twin Towers attack!


Originally posted by FORD
Silverstein admitted in a television interview that he gave the order to "pull" WTC Building 7. "Pull" means controlled demolition. Yet the power was cut to the entire WTC complex after the second plane hit the towers. Therefore there would have been no lights in building 7 allowing demolition crews to wire the building on that day. So the only possible answer is that the building was already set up for a controlled demolition. And if this is true of Building 7, then it could just as easily be true of Buildings 1 & 2 (the towers). Some have theorized that the buildings were ALWAYS wired for a controlled demolition, in the event that something could impact the towers and cause them to topple over onto Manhattan, rather than collapse onto themselves, as was done on 9/11/01.

Where is the link to him admitting this? Are you jumping to conclusions to fit what he said in to your fantasy delusion?

You guys and your Art Bell bullshit stories...put the crackpipe down.


BOO!


:D

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Keeyth
To save the salvageable items maybe, but if you don't do that, it's not going to stop the explosives from taking the building down just as effectively.

Wake up and smell the BULLSHIT you've been fed by the BCE all this time.

Keeyth, my opinion of you is nil.

You are officially a dumbass.

Congratulations. :)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
If you don't know what ne0-c0n means...don't use it.

Exactly. Well said. They throw around names without knowing their meanings. Typical.

:gulp:

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Hardrock69


http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=748554

It's "The Keeyth, FORD, and Hardrock69 Tin Foil Beanie Express!!!"


:D :D :D

[Warham]

hehe

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Funny how NONE of the names of the nineteen hijackers appeared on the manifests of either airline, and then THE VERY NEXT DAY, the FBI has 19 NAMES AND MUGSHOTS of them, even though ALL THE EYEWITNESSES WERE DEAD!

Smelled funny then, STINKS now!

Shit man...that is an old tactic.

The entire world had pictures of Oswald and his entire biographybefore he was even charged with anything!

We are talking only a few hours!!!

How in the fuck would they have such an extreme amount of info on one guy and distribute it to the entire world before sunset, when he was not even captured until 3 PM or so???

Not only that, after 9/11, out of 19 hijackers, many of those named by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT as THE HIJACKERS were found to be alive in Saudi Arabia and are still alive to this day!

[Warham]

Good police work? That might be a stretch, I know, but perhaps, just perhaps...

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
It's "The Keeyth, FORD, and Hardrock69 Tin Foil Beanie Express!!!"


:D :D :D


Nice imagination you have there.

More BigBadBrucie Fantasies...
:rolleyes:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Keeyth, my opinion of you is nil.

You are officially a dumbass.

Congratulations. :)

Actually, considering my opinion of you, that means nothing.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Good police work? That might be a stretch, I know, but perhaps, just perhaps...

See??? You don't even make sense. So you are admitting that they have found these hijackers alive, therefore proving what we are saying about the planes not being hijacked, and yet you still defend your position?? Makes no sense, propellerhead.

[Warham]

I was responding to Hardrock and his Oswald post, goober.

The FBI put up a list of people they thought hijacked the planes. It's not 100% infallible. There were some 50+ suspects that they believed could have been involved with the hijackings. Mistaken identities? Mistakes at the FBI? There are many rational options to follow through with before we have to believe in your kook theories on what you think supposedly happened.

Oh, Keeyth, who bombed the WTC in '93? Was that the work of George W. Bush as well?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
I was responding to Hardrock and his Oswald post, goober.

The FBI put up a list of people they thought hijacked the planes. It's not 100% infallible. There were some 50+ suspects that they believed could have been involved with the hijackings. Mistaken identities? Mistakes at the FBI? There are many rational options to follow through with before we have to believe in your kook theories on what you think supposedly happened.

Oh, Keeyth, who bombed the WTC in '93? Was that the work of George W. Bush as well?

I know who they blamed it on, but it really doesn't matter, does it? What that incident proved was that those buildings could withstand a bomb going off in them without sustaining ANY damage. Proving it would take a LOT of bombs to bring them down. Planes or no planes.

[diamondD]

LOL Keeyth, you never fail to amuse me with your straw-grasping.

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
It is an established fact that Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowy, both of whom have ties to Mossad, acquired the lease to the WTC a few months before the attacks.

It is also a fact that Marvin Bush (Chimpy's brother and card carrying member of the BCE) was the CEO of the company providing security for the WTC during this time.

Maintenance crews installed a "new sprinkler system" in the WTC in the weeks before the attacks. It's entirely plausible that explosive charges could have been placed in the building at this time, using the sprinkler system as a cover.

Silverstein admitted in a television interview that he gave the order to "pull" WTC Building 7. "Pull" means controlled demolition. Yet the power was cut to the entire WTC complex after the second plane hit the towers. Therefore there would have been no lights in building 7 allowing demolition crews to wire the building on that day. So the only possible answer is that the building was already set up for a controlled demolition. And if this is true of Building 7, then it could just as easily be true of Buildings 1 & 2 (the towers). Some have theorized that the buildings were ALWAYS wired for a controlled demolition, in the event that something could impact the towers and cause them to topple over onto Manhattan, rather than collapse onto themselves, as was done on 9/11/01.


Do you have any actual verifiable facts you'd like to share with the group?

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
Yes. putting on the show was the entire point of the plane crashes. Especially the second hit, which was designed as THE media event. The planners of the attack (whomever you believe that to be) knew that every TV network would have a camera at the scene to film the aftermath of the first crash. And then right on cue, plane #2 slams into the other tower. It was done purely for shock value, regardless of whether or not the plane was occupied. (many eyewitnesses said it appeared to be a cargo plane with no windows)

And while an entire nation was still understandably in shock, they pulled the towers, adding to the horror, and the psychological programming.

Or in other words, doing exactly what the PNAC manifesto called for. A new "PERLE Harbor" to create public support for the coming global fascist agenda.


LOL Yeah, it had nothing to do with the fact they were on 2 separate takeoff times or anything.

Where's your public support at that you've been raving about for years? Not exactly peaking right now is it? I sincerely doubt the American public is gonna be ready to jump into another country in the forseeable future.

Damn, that BSCE is so sneaky! I bet it's all part of the plot!

[knuckleboner]

this just in...

physics proffesor demostrates that an understanding of even the basic principles of physics is not actually required in order to teach at BYU.

more at 11...

[diamondD]

If anyone wants their "not a plane that hit the Pentagon" theories shattered, loosen your tin foil beenie for a minute and check out this site.


Pentagon (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html)

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by diamondD
If anyone wants their "not a plane that hit the Pentagon" theories shattered, loosen your tin foil beenie for a minute and check out this site.


Pentagon (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html)

That site sooooooo did not prove a plane hit the Pentagon for shit. If anything, it proves a plane didn't hit it even more. It's lame excuses like "Oh, they didn't play the black box recordings to avoid further pain for the families" is so much bullshit, you shouldn't even be taken seriously ever again about ANYTHING!!!

[Nickdfresh]

Oh, he was is a physics professor...I was worried that he was a engineer, and might actually have a clue of what he was talking about...

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
this just in...

physics proffesor demostrates that an understanding of even the basic principles of physics is not actually required in order to teach at BYU.

more at 11...

rofl...

Strange how no one in Congress is pushing for an investigation into the controlled demolition theory... guess the entire government is BCE!

[DrMaddVibe]

http://www.reelwavs.com/movies/sounds/princess_bride/inconceivable4.wav

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh, he was is a physics professor...I was worried that he was a engineer, and might actually have a clue of what he was talking about...

You're a good liberal...;)

At least there's one independant liberal on this board that doesn't buy into this bullshit...

The rest of you are complete idiots, with our resident nut case FORD towing the line...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh, he was is a physics professor...I was worried that he was a engineer, and might actually have a clue of what he was talking about...

Is physics not a fundamental basic of engineering???

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by ELVIS

At least there's one independant liberal on this board that doesn't buy into this bullshit...


Make that two... although I am not liberal on all issues.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
rofl...

Strange how no one in Congress is pushing for an investigation into the controlled demolition theory... guess the entire government is BCE!

Funny how the first company on the scene at Ground Zero was named exactly that, huh? Controlled Demolition Inc.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Make that two... although I am not liberal on all issues.

I consider you an independant moderate, If I may say so...;)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS
You're a good liberal...;)

At least there's one independant liberal on this board that doesn't buy into this bullshit...

The rest of you are complete idiots, with our resident nut case FORD towing the line...

I never have bought into this conspiracy crap, other than: I think it is a distinct possibility that the Administration was aware of some sort of terrorist plot (thinking it would be like a run of the mill hijacking or airliner bombing as opposed to a suicide cruise missile operation), and ignored it in order to use the resulting hysteria to run through terror legislation and to garner unity and support for an extremist Neo CON, PNAC agenda.

But I've seen no real evidence to support this other than: The FBI was aware of middle eastern men in flight schools wanting to learn how to fly jetliners, but all-too suspiciously not caring about taking off or landing. The fact that the BUSH Admin. did nothing, absolutely nothing regarding the terrorist threat, not so much as holding a meeting on the subject (CLINTON, despite his failings, did so on a fairly regular basis) and they received at least 52-warnings of possible terrorist bombings/hijackings of commercial jets between April and September of 2001. And not reading the tea leaves on Afghanistan after the leading anti-Taliban resistance (Mahsood?) leader was killed by suicide bombers posing as journalists...

Of course, these conspiracy theories just distract attention away from the real issues of excessive Gov't incompetence and secrecy...This is why I believe that I can speak for GUITAR SHARK and SESHMEISTER as well when I say that these hokey theories are shit and do not represent any real "Liberal" point-of-view

-BUT-

Why is it that you guys decry FORD, H69, and KEEYTH as tin-foil-beanie wearers, and then in the same breath, you'll then imply that CLINTON had a secret cabal of Super-Commando NINJAS© that continuously killed or suppressed all witnesses or evidence of CLINTON wrong doing, despite one of the most comprehensive and expensive (mandate-exceeding, KEN STARR blow-job-obsessed) investigations against him?

You Neo Con deluded fools have your own brand of special beanies.;)

Liberal, Feminist, gay NINJAs for CLINTON:
http://www.angelfire.com/comics/jbb/ninja.jpg

[ELVIS]

I never said I believe that Clinton crap...

All I ever did was post the Clinton timeline in several occasions...

[Keeyth]

LMAO! Well said, Nick! :D

[ELVIS]

What part ??

[Keeyth]

All of it. He's entitled to his opinion, and I loved the way he showed the hypocracy of BBB, Warham, and the "special beanie" crowd! :D

[ELVIS]

You're part of the special beanie crowd...

Look in the mirror...


:elvis:

[Warham]

Originally posted by ELVIS
The rest of you are complete idiots, with our resident nut case FORD towing the line...

ROTFL.

Great line, Elvis. :D

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
LMAO! Well said, Nick! :D

He was talking about your kook theories, Keeyth.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
He was talking about your kook theories, Keeyth.

Your's too.:)

[Warham]

I have no theories.

I just find it funny that Clinton had so many friends who ended up as stiffs. I certainly wouldn't want to be one of his golfing buddies.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
I have no theories.

I just find it funny that Clinton had so many friends who ended up as stiffs. I certainly wouldn't want to be one of his golfing buddies.

Horseshit! You can find a large body count around anybody because people die all the time. This is all based on half-truths and innuendo.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Horseshit! You can find a large body count around anybody because people die all the time. This is all based on half-truths and innuendo.

I dunno, Nick. None of my friends have died from airplane crashes or committed suicides. That might be pushing it a bit. ;)

[Hardrock69]

Airplane crashes are a favorite of the CIA when disposing of "unwanted people".

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
I dunno, Nick. None of my friends have died from airplane crashes or committed suicides. That might be pushing it a bit. ;)


Originally posted by Hardrock69
Airplane crashes are a favorite of the CIA when disposing of "unwanted people".

Birds of a feather...:)

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
That site sooooooo did not prove a plane hit the Pentagon for shit. If anything, it proves a plane didn't hit it even more. It's lame excuses like "Oh, they didn't play the black box recordings to avoid further pain for the families" is so much bullshit, you shouldn't even be taken seriously ever again about ANYTHING!!!



LOL, this is coming from someone who thinks the planes COULDN"T have been hijacked because there were too many women with purses on there. I hardly worry about you taking me seriously, I worry that there's people like you out in public trying to function.

[DLR'sCock]

I really don't give a shit anymore as to what is truth and what is fable with regards to 9/11.....


If the official story is the truth, so be it, if there are other truths that have not been revealed to the public, then so be it....

All I know is that human beings were involved in 9/11, and humans are capable of executing the most horrific acts unto other human beings for their own ego driven, myopic and selfish gains...



...and they all danced to their song...(paraphrased)

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
I really don't give a shit anymore as to what is truth and what is fable with regards to 9/11.....


If the official story is the truth, so be it, if there are other truths that have not been revealed to the public, then so be it....

All I know is that human beings were involved in 9/11, and humans are capable of executing the most horrific acts unto other human beings for their own ego driven, myopic and selfish gains...



...and they all danced to their song...(paraphrased)

Why bother typing this?

[diamondD]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
I really don't give a shit anymore as to what is truth and what is fable with regards to 9/11.....


If the official story is the truth, so be it, if there are other truths that have not been revealed to the public, then so be it....

All I know is that human beings were involved in 9/11, and humans are capable of executing the most horrific acts unto other human beings for their own ego driven, myopic and selfish gains...



...and they all danced to their song...(paraphrased)

http://hotextra.com/images/bandbadvice.jpg

[DLR'sCock]

Why no bother, if you don't understand then carry on....

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
You're part of the special beanie crowd...

Look in the mirror...


:elvis:

That's actually good advice you should consider taking...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
He was talking about your kook theories, Keeyth.

As I said, he's entitled to his opinion of my theories, but I liked the way he pointed out the hypocracy in yours.

[Cathedral]

It was a controlled demolition.
Two planes hit the towers and they collapsed at the control of our enemies.

The conspiracy is in why people choose to defend the Terrorists that wage these attacks.
When it becomes prosecutable and not just speculation and grand theory construction, then maybe i'll be ready to listen to all of this bullshit.

Until then, take your imagination out for dinner, it needs some fresh air.

[Keeyth]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion as well, but I'm going to have to go with the logic of the Physics Professor from BYU on this one. I have spoken to more than one Engineer who also has a lot of trouble with the way those 'planes' were able to take those buildings down so efficiently.

I mean, if they could really do that, why don't we save money by using all the old out-of-commision planes for building demolition instead of wasting all the money it takes for explosives????

Ever think of that??

[diamondD]

No, because it's stupid.


Can't dispute that a plane hit the Pentagon now either, can you?

[FORD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Well, you are entitled to your opinion as well, but I'm going to have to go with the logic of the Physics Professor from BYU on this one. I have spoken to more than one Engineer who also has a lot of trouble with the way those 'planes' were able to take those buildings down so efficiently.

I mean, if they could really do that, why don't we save money by using all the old out-of-commision planes for building demolition instead of wasting all the money it takes for explosives????

Ever think of that??

And they could even make a new "reality" TV series out of it. "Greatest Airplane Building Demolitions"

[Keeyth]

LMAO! Exactly. We would save millions each year on the new demolition technique, plus MAKE millions on the reality show! :D

In fact I dare anyone to try demolishing a condemned building with an airplane and just see how effective it really is. I guarantee you the building, if it's anything CLOSE to what the WTC construction was, WILL NOT FALL! Guaranteed. In fact, I dare anyone to find footage of any other building being hit by a plane and falling down as efficiently as the WTC. It's simply not possible.

Any takers?

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
LMAO! Exactly. We would save millions each year on the new demolition technique, plus MAKE millions on the reality show! :D

In fact I dare anyone to try demolishing a condemned building with an airplane and just see how effective it really is. I guarantee you the building, if it's anything CLOSE to what the WTC construction was, WILL NOT FALL! Guaranteed. In fact, I dare anyone to find footage of any other building being hit by a plane and falling down as efficiently as the WTC. It's simply not possible.

Any takers?


Are you gonna supply the plane and skyscraper to hit? Or do we have to provide them on our own?

Just when you think it can't get any dumber...

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by diamondD


Can't dispute that a plane hit the Pentagon now either, can you?

No, I can't dispute a plane hit the pentagon.

I just dispute the claim it was a Boeing Passenger Jet :rolleyes:

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
I just dispute the claim it was a Boeing Passenger Jet :rolleyes:

Lounge, don't join that club man, I implore you!

[BlimpyCHIMP™]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
He's entitled to "think" that the world is flat and that you're a genius too...ever think about that?


Originally posted by ELVIS
How many wives does this idiot have ??

MORMON - EXACTLY MY THINKIN

BC!!
DIRTEE FAKKEN MORMONTHINK/MORMONSTINK

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by diamondD
Are you gonna supply the plane and skyscraper to hit? Or do we have to provide them on our own?

Just when you think it can't get any dumber...

Well, you can't get any dumber, I'm pretty sure of that... ...then again, ya never know. Keep posting and we'll find out.

I said if you can't supply the plane and building, then show me footage of a plane doing it. It's not like we don't have historical footage of planes hitting buildings. A plane hit the Empire State building years ago, and that building stayed up just fine. Show me a building that just completely self-destructs from a plane hitting it.

Then explain why did the second tower hit fall first?? It sustained less damage, and certainly less "jet fuel" so how did those supports 'burn' faster and make it fall faster than the building that had the full impact and full load of fuel??? It was burning longer, yet it fell later????

Hmmmm....

[ELVIS]

You're an idiot...

[Keeyth]

Just asking for an explanation there, fellow idiot...

[ELVIS]

I'm posting one in a thread on the subject...

[thome]

Are you advocateing this mans writeing or just pasteing up
something for forum posters to discuss.

Because in my opinion It Never Happend.....
Jus like the Moon Landing was a Scam.

You see they got those dweebs Penn&Teller to hide the WTC
We've all been scammed .

And if you choose to delete this Post go back and delete the
Title of this Thread and the First post.
They are equally silly.My OP

[kentuckyklira]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Keeyth, my opinion of you is nil.

You are officially a dumbass.

Congratulations. :) Great to see that your arguments aren´t any better addressing others than they are addressing me!

What a tool!

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I'm posting one in a thread on the subject...

Well, by all means, share the link to your enlightenment with all of us!
Hmm??

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by kentuckyklira
Great to see that your arguments aren´t any better addressing others than they are addressing me!

What a tool!

Yeah, but you have to understand, BBB rides a VERY short bus! :D

[ELVIS]

It's a whole thread, genious...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I'm posting one in a thread on the subject...

Oh, and by the way, just out of curiosity, are you a PHYSICS PROFESSOR????

I mean, it's not like some know-nothing wrote this theory. He's a PROFESSOR OF PHYSICS at BYU!!!!

Does that little fact really escape you???:rolleyes:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
It's a whole thread, genious...

Entitled what?

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
It's a whole thread, genious...

LMAO! There's no 'o' in genius, genius... :D

[ELVIS]

It's a typO !!

[diamondD]

Keeyth, I guarantee if someone posted a rebuttal from a different physics inspector, it would escape you.

[diamondD]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
No, I can't dispute a plane hit the pentagon.

I just dispute the claim it was a Boeing Passenger Jet :rolleyes:



Man, I just don't know how much more clear it gets than almost all witnesses saying it was. What more does it take?

I mean, fuck, it flew over rush hour traffic.

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
Man, I just don't know how much more clear it gets than almost all witnesses saying it was. What more does it take?

I mean, fuck, it flew over rush hour traffic.

If the BCE would simply release the Pentagon security footage, and the tape from the gas station on the other side of the highway, it would settle the question, wouldn't it?

(Provided it wasn't an obvious fake like the Fat Osama "confession" tape, that is)

[Warham]

You still wouldn't believe it.

[diamondD]

Now you're just in denial FORD.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by FORD
But he's a conservative Mormon professor, at a conservative Mormon school, and his theory was just published in Utah's leading conservative Mormon newspaper.


LMFAO!

Lets look at this expert...

This is a guy who believes that a convicted conman got up one day, went out into a field where an angel called MORONi gives him some solid gold tablets which he takes home.

The uneducated guy then translates them all in 60 days from ancient Egyptian into the book of Mormon which strangely seems to be very very similar to a book written years previously. Then surfucking surprise the angel pops back and collects the gold tablets before anyone sees them...:)

I'm not surprised he believes the demolition theory. Not the most difficult guy to cuntvince...:)

Secondly half the top architects and engineers in the world have looked into what happened at the WTC because they needed to know why it happened. They don't have any problem explaining exactly how and why they collapsed they way they did. Personally I've seen about 4 documentaries on it myself all from different entirely independant people.

Finally how come the conspiracy theory people always assume super human levels of organisation, secrecy, planning and execution from governments in elaborate complex plans when in the real world government bureaucracies couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery never mind keep it secret?

Cheers!

:gulp:

[Hardrock69]

Because inefficiency is the norm for those piece of shit bureaucratic organizations.

Organizations like the CIA, etc. cannot afford to fuck their shit up like that.

Not only that, despite the obvious bullshit of Brigham Young, simply because the professor works there does not mean he graduated from there.

Not only that, he is not going to get a degree in physics be creating some bullshit story like "An angel appeared to me in a field and handed me my Masters Thesis on some golden tablets and then took them away by the time I got home..."

Physics does not change depending on what university you teach at...

The comparison you made Sesh is laughable...

:rolleyes:

[Seshmeister]

There is all sorts of stuff on this but this summarises it.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
(A scientific journal)

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.


http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig5-sm.gif


As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1

It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

[Keeyth]

That is soooo much bullshit.
First off, these buildings were DESIGNED to withstand the impact of an aircraft after the previously mentioned Empire State Building incident.

Second, a BOMB went off inside the basement in '93 and NOTHING happened.

Third, your estimates on what the weight support it could handle are way off. Everything built at that time was built to withstand 3 times what was necessary or required.

And fourth, if by your own admission these weak 'clips' were at fault, then the building would have definitely fallen over to the side on the Tower that was hit only on one corner and had minimal fire.

BOOM!! Your theory all gone.

[Keeyth]

I tried to be patriotic.

I tried to believe. I watched those quarter mile high buildings fall
through their jaw-dropping catastrophes over and over again. I
listened to the announcer and the experts explain what had happened.
And I worked at my pitiful lack of faith, pounding my skull with the
remote control and staring on the flickering images on the TV screen.

But poor mental peasant that I am, I could not escape the teachings of
my forefathers. I fear I am trapped in my time, walled off from
further scientific understanding by my inability to abandon the Second
Millennium mindset.

But enough of myself. Let us move on to the Science and Technology of
the 21st Century. Those of you who cannot believe should learn the
official truth by rote and perhaps you will be able to hide your
ignorance.

Here are the bare bones of the WTC incident:
North tower struck 8:45, collapsed 10:29;
South tower struck 9:03, collapsed 9:50;
(See http://www.infoplease.com/spot/sept112001.html)

Using jet fuel to melt steel is an amazing discovery, really. It is
also amazing that until now, no one had been able to get it to work,
and that proves the terrorists were not stupid people. Ironworkers
fool with acetylene torches, bottled oxygen, electric arcs from
generators, electric furnaces, and other elaborate tricks, but what
did these brilliant terrorists use? Jet fuel, costing maybe 80 cents
a gallon on the open market.

Let us consider: One plane full of jet fuel hit the north tower at
8:45 AM, and the fuel fire burned for a while with bright flames and
black smoke. We can see pictures of the smoke and flames shooting
from the windows.

Then by 9:03 (which time was marked by the second plane's collision
with the south tower), the flame was mostly gone and only black smoke
continued to pour from the building. To my simple mind, that would
indicate that the first fire had died down, but something was still
burning inefficiently, leaving soot (carbon) in the smoke. A fire
with sooty smoke is either low temperature or starved for oxygen -- or
both.
http://www.fosters.com/news2001c/september/11/04758CA1-AC58-4591-9F50-5976D2BE2E04.jpg

But by 10:29 AM, the fire in north tower had accomplished the feat
that I find so amazing: It melted the steel supports in the building,
causing a chain reaction within the structure that brought the
building to the ground.

And with less fuel to feed the fire, the south tower collapsed only 47
minutes after the plane collision, again with complete destruction.
This is only half the time it took to destroy the north tower.

I try not to think about that. I try not to think about a petroleum
fire burning for 104 minutes, just getting hotter and hotter until it
reached 1538 degrees Celsius (2800 Fahrenheit) and melted the steel
(steel is about 99% iron; for melting point of iron, see
http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Fe/heat.html). I
try not to wonder how the fire reached temperatures that only bottled
oxygen or forced air can produce.

And I try not to think about all the steel that was in that building
-- 200,000 tons of it (see http://www.infoplease.com/spot/wtc1.html
for stats). I try to forget that heating steel is like pouring syrup
onto a plate: you can't get it to stack up. The heat just flows out
to the colder parts of the steel, cooling off the part you are trying
to warm up. If you pour it on hard enough and fast enough, you can
get the syrup to stack up a little bit. And with very high heat
brought on very fast, you can heat up the one part of the object, but
the heat will quickly spread out and the part will cool off the moment
you stop.

When the heat source warms the last cold part of the object, the heat
stops escaping and the point of attention can be warmed.

If the north tower collapse was due to heated steel, why did it take
104 minutes to reach the critical temperature? (See
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/sept112001.html). Am I to believe that
the fire burned all that time, getting constantly hotter until it
reached melting temperature? Or did it burn hot and steady throughout
until 200,000 tons of steel were heated molten - on one plane load of
jet fuel? (Quantity of steel in WTC:
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/wtc1.html)

Thankfully, I found this note on the BBC web page
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1540000/1540044.stm):
"Fire reaches 800 [degrees] C - hot enough to melt steel floor
supports." That is one of the things I warned you about: In the 20th
Century, steel melted at 1538 degrees Celsius (2800 F, see
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/fe.html), but in the 21st
Century, it melts at 800 degrees C (1472 F).

This might be explained as a reporter's mistake -- 800 to 900 C is the
temperature for forging wrought iron. As soft as wrought iron is, of
course, it would never be used for structural steel in a landmark
skyscraper. (Descriptions of cast iron, wrought iron, and steel and
relevant temperatures discussed at
http://www.metrum.org/measures/castiron.htm).

But then lower down, the BBC page repeats the 800 C number in bold,
and the article emphasizes that the information comes from Chris Wise,
"Structural Engineer." Would this professional individual permit
himself to be misquoted in a global publication?

I feel it coming on again -- that horrible cynicism that causes me to
doubt the word of the major anchor-persons. Please just think of this
essay as a plea for help, and do NOT let it interfere with your own
righteous faith. The collapse of America's faith in its leaders must
not become another casualty on America's skyline.

In my diseased mind, I think of the floors of each tower like a stack
of LP (33 1/3 RPM) records, only they were square instead of circular.
They were stacked around a central spindle that consisted of multiple
steel columns stationed in a square around the 103 elevator shafts.
(See http://www.skyscraper.org/tallest/t_wtc.htm and
http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm)

With this core bearing the weight of the building, the platters were
tied together and stabilized by another set of steel columns at the
outside rim, closely spaced and completely surrounding the structure.
This resulting structure was so stable that the top of the towers
swayed only three feet in a high wind. The architects called it a
"tube-within-a-tube design."

The TV experts told us that the joints between the floors and central
columns melted (or the floor trusses, or the central columns, or the
exterior columns, depending on the expert) and this caused the floor
to collapse and fall onto the one below. This overloaded the joints
for the lower floor, and the two of them fell onto the floor below,
and so on. Like dominos (see
http://news-info.wustl.edu/News/nrindex00/harmon.html).

Back in the early 1970s when the World Trade Towers were built, the
WTC was the tallest building that had ever been built in the history
of the world. If we consider the architectural engineers, suppliers,
builders, and city inspectors in the job, we can imagine they would be
very careful to over-build every aspect of the building. If one bolt
was calculated to serve, you can bet that three or four were used. If
there was any doubt about the quality of a girder or steel beam, you
can be sure it was rejected. After all, any failures would attract
the attention of half the civilized world, and no corporation wants a
reputation for that kind of stupidity -- particularly if there are
casualties.

I do not know the exact specifications for the WTC, but I know in many
trades (and some I've worked), a structural member must be physically
capable of three times the maximum load that will ever be required of
it (BreakingStrength = 3 x WorkingStrength). Given that none of those
floors was holding a grand piano sale or an elephant convention that
day, it is unlikely that any of them were loaded to the maximum.
Thus, any of the floors should have been capable of supporting more
than its own weight plus the two floors above it. I suspect the WTC
was engineered for safer margins than the average railroad bridge, and
the actual load on each floor was less than 1/6 the BreakingStringth.

The platters were constructed of webs of steel trusses. Radial
trusses ran from the perimeter of the floor to the central columns,
and concentric rings of trusses connected the radial trusses, forming
a pattern like a spider web (see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1540000/images/_1540044_world_trade_structure300.gif).

Where the radial trusses connected with the central columns, I imagine
the joints looked like the big bolted flanges where girders meet on a
bridge -- inches thick bolts tying the beams into the columns.

The experts tell us that the heat of the fire melted the steel,
causing the joints to fail. In order to weaken those joints, a fire
would have to heat the bolts or the flanges to the point where the
bolts fell apart or tore through the steel. But here is another thing
that gives me problems -- all the joints between the platter and the
central columns would have to be heated at the same rate in order to
collapse at the same time -- and at the same rate as the joints with
the outer rim columns on all sides -- else one side of the platter
would fall, damaging the floor below and making obvious distortions in
the skin of the building, or throwing the top of tower off balance and
to one side.

But there were no irregularities in the fall of the main structure of
those buildings. They fell almost as perfectly as a deck of cards in
the hands of a magician doing an aerial shuffle.

This is particularly worrisome since the first plane struck one side
of the north tower, causing (you would think) a weakening on that side
where the exterior columns were struck, and a more intense fire on
that side than on the other side. And the second plane struck near
the corner of the south tower at an angle that caused much of the fuel
to spew out the windows on the adjacent side (see
http://www.eionews.addr.com/images/wtc/southtowerpath.jpg).

Yet the south tower also collapsed in perfect symmetry, spewing dust
in all directions like a Fourth of July sparkler burning to the
ground.

Oh, wait. Here is a picture showing the top 25 floors of one tower
(probably south) toppling over sideways
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1535000/images/_1538563_thecollapseap150.jpg).
Why are there no reports of this cube of concrete and steel (measuring
200 ft. wide, 200 ft. deep, and 200 ft high), falling from a 1000 feet
into the street below?

But implosion expert Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition
Inc. in Phoenix, MD is of the opinion that it happened:

Observing the collapses on television news, Loizeaux says the
1,362-ft-tall south tower, which was hit at about the 60th floor,
failed much as one would like (sic) fell a tree
(http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc_enr.htm).

***
I have seen a videotaped rerun of the south tower falling. In that
take, the upper floors descend as a complete unit. All the way, the
upper-floor unit was canted over as shown on the BBC page, sliding
down behind the intervening buildings like a piece of stage scenery.

That scene is the most puzzling of all. Since the upper floors were
not collapsed (the connection between the center columns and the
platters were intact), this assembly would present itself to the lower
floors as a platter WITHOUT a central hole. How then would a platter
without a hole slide down the spindle with the other platters? Where
would the central columns go if they could not penetrate the upp
floors as they fell?

The only model I can find for the situation would be this: If the fire
melted the floor joints so that the collapse began from the 60th floor
downward, the upper floors would be left hanging in the air, supported
only by the central columns. This situation would soon become
unstable and the top 40 floors would topple over (to use Loizeaux's
image) much like felling the top 600 ft. from a 1300 ft. tree.

This model would hold also hold for the north tower. According to
Chris Wise's "domino" doctrine, the collapse began only at the floor
with the fire, not at the penthouse. How was it that the upper floor
simply disappeared instead of crashing to the earth as a block of
thousands of tons of concrete and steel?

The amazing thing is that no one (but Loizeaux) even mentions this
phenomenon, much less describing the seismic event it must have
caused.

Where is the ruin where the 200ft x 200ft x 50 story- object struck?
Foty floors should have caused a ray of devastation 500 ft. into the
surrounding cityscape.

In trying to reconstruct and understand this event, we have to know
whether the scenes we are watching are edited or simply shown raw as
they were recorded.
***

But let us return to the fire. Liquid fuel does not burn hot for
long. Liquid fuel evaporates (or boils) as it burns, and the vapor
burns as it boils off. If the ambient temperature passes the flash
point of the fuel and oxygen is plentiful, the process builds to an
explosion that consumes the fuel.

Jet fuel boils at temperatures above 176 degrees Celsius (350 F) and
the vapor flashes into flame at 250 degrees Celsius (482 F). In an
environment of 1500 degrees, jet fuel spread thinly on walls, floor,
and ceiling would boil off very quickly. And then it would either
burn, or run out of oxygen and smother itself. Or it would simply
disperse out the open windows (some New Yorkers claimed they could
smelled the spilled fuel).

In no case would an office building full of spilled jet fuel sustain a
fire at 815 degrees C (1500 F) for 104 minutes -- unless it was fed
bottled oxygen, forced air, or something else atypical of a fire in a
high-rise office building. Certainly, the carpets, wallpaper,
occasional desks -- nothing else in that office would produce that
temperature. What was burning?

OK, since it was mentioned, I am also upset with the quantity of
concrete dust (see http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm#why). No
concrete that I have ever known pulverizes like that. It is
unnerving. My experience with concrete has shown that it will crumble
under stress, but rarely does it just give up the ghost and turn to
powder. But look at the pictures -- it is truly a fine dust in great
billowing clouds spewing a hundred feet from the collapsing tower.
And the people on the ground see little more than an opaque wall of
dust -- with inches of dust filling the streets and the lungs
afterward. (http://eionews.addr.com/images/wtc/thirdexplosion.jpg)
What has happened here?

I need a faith booster shot here. I would like to find a pictures of
all those platters piled up on each other on the ground, just as they
fell -- has anyone seen a picture like that? I am told it was
cumulative weight of those platters falling on each other that caused
the collapse, but I don't see the platters pilled up liked flapjacks
on the ground floor.

Instead, the satellite pictures show the WTC ruins like an ash pit:
http://eionews.addr.com/images/wtc/numbersixafter_closeup.jpg
http://eionews.addr.com/images/wtc/wtcaerial.jpg

I am told by a friend that a Dr. Robert Schuller was on television
telling about his trip to the ruins. He announced in the interview
that there was not a single block of concrete in that rubble. From
the original 425,000 cubic yards of concrete that went into the
building, all was dust. How did that happen?

I have just one other point I need help with -- the steel columns in
the center. When the platters fell, those quarter-mile high central
steel columns (at least from the ground to the fire) should have
been left standing naked and unsupported in the air, and then they
should have fallen intact or in sections to the ground below,
clobbering buildings hundreds of feet from the WTC site like giant
trees falling in the forest. But I haven't seen any pictures showing
those columns standing, falling, or lying on the ground. Nor have I
heard of damage caused by them.

Now I know those terrorist must have been much better at these things
than I am. I would take one look at their kamikaze plans with
commercial jets and I would reject it as -- spectacular maybe, but not
significantly damaging. The WTC was not even a strategic military
target.

But if I were a kamikaze terrorist, I would try to hit the towers low
in the supports to knock the towers down, maybe trapping the workers
with the fire and burning the towers from the ground up, just as the
people in last 20 stories were trapped. Even the Japanese kamikaze
pilots aimed for the water line.

But you see, those terrorists were so sure the building would
magically collapse that way, the pilot who hit the north tower chose a
spot just 20 floors from the top.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/worldtrade010911.html

And the kamikaze for south tower was only slightly lower -- despite a
relatively open skyline down to 25 or 30 stories.
http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/920/15m/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/graphics/rubble_ny091101.htm

The terrorists apparently predicted the whole scenario -- the fuel
fire, the slow weakening of the structure, and the horrific collapse
of the building - phenomena that the architects and the NY civil
engineering approval committees never dreamed of.

Even as you righteously hate those men, you have to admire them for
their genius.

Few officials or engineers have been surprised by this turn of events
-- apparently everyone certified it for airplane collisions, but
almost no one was surprised when both collisions caused utter
catastrophes in both towers. In fact, their stutters and mumbles and
circumlocutions would make a politician blush:

"Eventually, the loss of strength and stiffness of the materials
resulting from the fire, combined with the initial impact damage,
would have caused a failure of the truss system supporting a
floor, or the remaining perimeter columns, or even the internal
core, or some combination."
(http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm#why)

In a hundred years of tall city buildings, this kind of collapse has
never happened before. Never. It was not predicted by any of the
experts involved when the WTC towers were built. But now that it has
happened, everybody understands it perfectly and nobody is surprised.

Is this civil engineering in the Third Millennium -- a galloping case
of perfect hindsight?

Only one I have found candidly admitted his surprise:

Observing the collapses on television news, Loizeaux says the
1,362-ft-tall south tower, which was hit at about the 60th floor,
failed much as one would like (sic) fell a tree. That is what was
expected, says Loizeaux. But the 1,368-ft-tall north tower,
similarly hit but at about the 90th floor, "telescoped," says
Loizeaux. It failed vertically, he adds, rather than falling
over. "I don't have a clue," says Loizeaux, regarding the cause of
the telescoping. (http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc_enr.htm)

There was one highly qualified engineer in New Mexico who thought the
collapse could only happen with the help of demolition explosives, and
he was foolish enough to make the statement publicly. But then he
recanted ten days later and admitted the whole thing was perfectly
natural and unsurprising. I wonder what happened in those ten days to
make him so smart on the subject so quickly.

Both articles at the Albuquerque Journal:
http://www.abqjournal.com/news/aqvan09-11-01.htm

And then, as though demonstrating how normal this "building
collapsing" phenomenon is, WTC buildings Six and Seven "collapsed,"
too:

"Other buildings - including the 47-story Salomon Brothers
building [WTC 7] - caved in later, weakened by the earlier
collapses, and more nearby buildings may still fall, say
engineers."
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1540000/1540044.stm
and http://www.eionews.addr.com/images/wtc/numbersixafter.jpg)

It seems no building in the area, regardless of design, is immune to
galloping WTC collapse-itis. It never happened in the 20th Century,
but welcome to the physical universe laws of the Third Millennium.

Pardon me, but this recitation has not given me the relief I hoped
for. I must get back to work.

I believe in the president, the flag, and the Statue of Liberty. I
believe in the honesty of the FBI and the humility of military men. I
believe in the network news anchor-persons, who strive to learn the
truth, to know the truth, and to tell the truth to the audience.

And I believe all of America is so well educated in the basic physics
discussed above, they would rise up in fury if anyone tried to pull a
cheap Hollywood trick on them.

Hand me that remote, will you? I believe clonk. I believe clonk.
I believe ...

---
J. McMichael

(Celsius/Fahrenheit conversion tool at
http://www.vaxxine.com/mgdsite/celcon.htm)

--
Logic is Truth and Truth, Logic
This is all we know on earth
- and all we need to know.

[Guitar Shark]

Keeyth, do you mind if I ask what you do for a living?

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Hardrock69

Not only that, despite the obvious bullshit of Brigham Young, simply because the professor works there does not mean he graduated from there.

Not only that, he is not going to get a degree in physics be creating some bullshit story like "An angel appeared to me in a field and handed me my Masters Thesis on some golden tablets and then took them away by the time I got home..."

Physics does not change depending on what university you teach at...

The comparison you made Sesh is laughable...

:rolleyes:

HK the guy is a loon!

He may be or have started out as a good theoretical physicist but he's now publishing mormon stuff like

Proof that Christ was in America (http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext%20and%20figures.htm
)

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Keeyth, do you mind if I ask what you do for a living?

I don't see the relevance, but I'm a Corporate Sales Executive.

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by Keeyth
That is soooo much bullshit.
First off, these buildings were DESIGNED to withstand the impact of an aircraft after the previously mentioned Empire State Building incident.




a 707, not a 757. you know that, right?

[Seshmeister]

The relevance is tha you are taking evidence from people with a high school education and an internet connection.

I'm not an engineer either but I know enough to see through that post.

For a start absolutely noone says that the steel melted, just that steel loses more than 50% of it's strength at the temperatures of the fire. I also know that there are different kinds and sizes of airplanes with different amount sof fuel on board.

I can't quite get to grips with the engineering of building things like the WTC which sway 20 feet in winds of 250mph so what I do is then look to scientific journals not conspiracy websites.

[ELVIS]

They sooo want the WTC collapse to be a conspiracy...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
a 707, not a 757. you know that, right?

So friggin WHAT??? A direct hit by a 707 would be the same as a near miss by a 757, which the second tower was barely hit with just a corner being taken out. What's your point???

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
The relevance is tha you are taking evidence from people with a high school education and an internet connection.

I'm not an engineer either but I know enough to see through that post.

For a start absolutely noone says that the steel melted, just that steel loses more than 50% of it's strength at the temperatures of the fire. I also know that there are different kinds and sizes of airplanes with different amount sof fuel on board.

I can't quite get to grips with the engineering of building things like the WTC which sway 20 feet in winds of 250mph so what I do is then look to scientific journals not conspiracy websites.

With this core bearing the weight of the building, the platters were
tied together and stabilized by another set of steel columns at the
outside rim, closely spaced and completely surrounding the structure.This resulting structure was so stable that the top of the towers swayed only three feet in a high wind. The architects called it a
"tube-within-a-tube design."

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by Keeyth
So friggin WHAT??? A direct hit by a 707 would be the same as a near miss by a 757, which the second tower was barely hit with just a corner being taken out. What's your point???

none.

if physics says that there is no difference between a small plane and a large plane, than i have no argument.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
none.

if physics says that there is no difference between a small plane and a large plane, than i have no argument.

ROFL!

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Seshmeister

I'm not an engineer either but I know enough to see through that post.



My father is a Mechanical and Electrical Engineer, who built a very succesfull Robotics engineering company and also has a little background in Architecture AND he's a staunch Republican and even HE says there is no way those towers should have come down the way they did. He read this same article and could not refute the facts this man layed out.

The first time he read it he actually got pissed at me, but later came around and said that he agreed he did not have a good explanation as to why those buildings came down, and that the official story did not hold water, and that this guy made some very good points. If you knew this man, for him to say that would convince you too.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
none.

if physics says that there is no difference between a small plane and a large plane, than i have no argument.

What kind of moron ARE you?? A 707 is NOT a small plane. Why don't you google it and take a look at some images for yourself. Either plane is essentially going to do the same amount of damage.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
ROFL!

You must not know the size of the planes in question either.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
They sooo want the WTC collapse to be a conspiracy...


No, I really didn't. But there is no other logical explanation. Those planes could not have brought those buildings down the way they did without help. Just the facts, m'am.

[ELVIS]

Facts...:rolleyes:

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Facts...:rolleyes:

Ironic, considering your whole life and belief system revolves around FAITH, and NOT "facts"

I'm just sayin'......


:cool:

[Alex Mogilny]

FORD?

Do you actually believe Bush had the Towers brought down?

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Ironic, considering your whole life and belief system revolves around FAITH, and NOT "facts"

I'm just sayin'......


:cool:


Well, I'm just sayin' too...

You got me all wrong...

For instance, I'm not one of those Christians who thinks the world is 6000 years old...

I'm not one of those Christians who, just because I believe I'm born again and a new creature in Christ, that I suddenly become an expert on what is right and wrong...

I believe in science, engineering, mechanics, physics, and intelligent design...

I would appreciate you not puting me in a certain group based on what I believe spiritually...

[Hardrock69]

Bush is irrelevant.

He may have had some idea something was going to happen, but he could hardly have "ordered" it to happen, as he is not in control of the Federal Government. Certainly not the CIA or other itnel agencies.

Aside from the engineering aspects of the building, I used to actually BUILD Boeing aircraft. I spent many years building 737, 747, 757 & 767 aircraft.

Though they are structurally sound for flight, there is no way they could take out a building like the WTC.

That is a FACT.

Period.

End of story.

All this bullshit about a single jetliner taking out each building of the WTC is the same as claiming that an aluminum beer can could pulverize a concrete block.

Can't happen.

Get over it Elvis.

You are still living in the village of denial, in the Neo-Con Fantasy-Land.

:rolleyes:

[ELVIS]

Bullshit!

Like there were people on the lower floors hearing explosions saying to themselves "gee, that sounds like a controlled demolition"...

That's basically what you said in the thread I posted...

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Aside from the engineering aspects of the building, I used to actually BUILD Boeing aircraft. I spent many years building 737, 747, 757 & 767 aircraft.

Though they are structurally sound for flight, there is no way they could take out a building like the WTC.

That is a FACT.

Period.

End of story.



You like making a fool out of yourself, don't you...

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Aside from the engineering aspects of the building, I used to actually BUILD Boeing aircraft.

Woo hoo, Mr Bigshot...:rolleyes:

Are we supposed to be impressed ??

Tell us what your specific job was...


I guess you built the entire aircraft in your mom's garage...:rolleyes:

I don't believe you anyway...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Bush is irrelevant.

He may have had some idea something was going to happen, but he could hardly have "ordered" it to happen, as he is not in control of the Federal Government. Certainly not the CIA or other itnel agencies.



Bush, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney and the rest of the PNAC'ers are not irrelevant in this. This was a plan for a catalyst to make this war happen, and they did it. I don't understand how you think he is irrelevant in this. These agencies and this government work for him, and his father was head of the CIA for many years.

[ELVIS]

Keeyth...

Get back to your sales job...

Those two kids that just walked in want to look at some x-mods...


:elvis:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Keeyth...

Get back to your sales job...

Those two kids that just walked in want to look at some x-mods...


:elvis:

Sorry Nurse Ratchet, I don't work in a retail location or environment.

I work for a company called Peer 1 in their Dedicated Complex Hosting Department. Why don't you go put a band-aid on your faith??

[Seshmeister]

How come anytime you ever see a demolition of a big building like a towerblock or a Vegas hotel you see explosions???

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Bullshit!

Like there were people on the lower floors hearing explosions saying to themselves "gee, that sounds like a controlled demolition"...

That's basically what you said in the thread I posted...

Actually, the CBS documentary "911", which aired approximately 6 months after the attacks, and which was based on the Naudet brothers documentary footage (including the only existing footage of the first plane crash*) showed FDNY firefighters inside the towers, and recorded the sounds of explosions with the firefighters speculating about their source.

Also, flashes of light, and clouds of smoke & dust were seen coming from lower floors just before the collapse. This was not dark gray or black smoke from the fire 80 stories up, but from the explosive charges that were already placed in the building weeks before the attack.

Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC admitted that he gave the order to "pull" WTC 7 later in the afternoon of 9-11-01. Since it would have been impossible to plant the charges in that building that day, they obviously were already wired.

And if WTC 7 was pre-wired for a controlled demolition, why not the towers?

-------------------------------
* - except for the live footage of the first crash that Junior claims he saw in his limo, driving to Booker Elementary in Florida, which would have to have been a closed circuit camera purposely set up to film the event for Chimp's benefit.

[scamper]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
All this bullshit about a single jetliner taking out each building of the WTC is the same as claiming that an aluminum beer can could pulverize a concrete block.

Can't happen.


It can happen with enough force.

[ELVIS]

Yeah, yeah FORD...

Why do you insist on repeating yourself over and over ??

People with paranoid schizophrenia do just that...


It would have taken months to set up the towers for demolition...

I don't know why I'm even bothering with this bullshit...

It's just not so...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS


It would have taken months to set up the towers for demolition...



And it would have taken a lot more than a plane to bring tham down...

[ELVIS]

Did you even read the thread I started describing how heat played a big role in the collapse ??

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Yeah, yeah FORD...

Why do you insist on repeating yourself over and over ??

People with paranoid schizophrenia do just that...


It would have taken months to set up the towers for demolition...

I don't know why I'm even bothering with this bullshit...

It's just not so...

All it took was a few weekends, a great maintenance cover story (new sprinkler system) and a security manager who just happens to be the brother of the world's most famous Chimp.

http://www.evote.com/evotepix/notours/marvin_and_george_bush.jpg

....that would be him, behind his Idiot brother.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by FORD
All it took was a few weekends, a great maintenance cover story (new sprinkler system) and a security manager who just happens to be the brother of the world's most famous Chimp.

http://www.evote.com/evotepix/notours/marvin_and_george_bush.jpg

....that would be him, behind his Idiot brother.

And once again, no sources are provided for this assertion...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Did you even read the thread I started describing how heat played a big role in the collapse ??

Did YOU even read the article I posted and the section on how heat dissapates???

I have welding experience, and his explanation of why the heat theory doesn't work is spot on.

[ELVIS]

No, they just make it up as they go...

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by scamper
It can happen with enough force.

no kidding. forget the aluminum beer can. just give me the pull tab and let me accelerate that little thing to whatever speed i like and i guarantee you i'll obliterate that cinder block.

[Warham]

I'm not even going to bother with this thread.

You can live in your own conspiracy dreamworld. I'm not going to be around long enough to worry about all these paranoid delusions that some of you carry around.

[ELVIS]

Yeah Warpig...

I'm about to excuse myself from this pointless argument as well...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
I'm not even going to bother with this thread.

You can live in your own conspiracy dreamworld. I'm not going to be around long enough to worry about all these paranoid delusions that some of you carry around.

Why aren't you going to be around? You're only 32, and unless you're terminally ill, I'm sure you'll be around long enough to see the truth come out.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Why aren't you going to be around? You're only 32, and unless you're terminally ill, I'm sure you'll be around long enough to see the truth come out.

The truth came out four years ago. There's no need for an alternate fictional version. I'm 32, but I'm not going to be on this Earth long enough to give too much time to bullshit conspiracy crap. It's like conspiracy freaks worrying about whether aliens landed in Roswell, NM. Who gives a fuck? It's not going to impact their life in any way. Live your life to the fullest and stop worrying about whether the boogieman is out to get you.

[Keeyth]

I don't. I just know when something isn't right, and what happened 4 years ago isn't right. There's something fishy about it, and thankfully there are enough concientious people in the world that they are looking into it and the truth will come out eventually. It doesn't affect my day to day life at all. It's not like I even discuss this with anyone other than the people on this board mostly. Politics does not make for very diplomatic conversation in the real world, generally apeaking.

[Warham]

Why doesn't it make sense what happened four years ago? You really honestly don't believe four or five terrorists could have captured a plane in 2001 and run it into a skyscraper? Is that hard to grasp? Or is it hard to grasp the fact that the structural and fire damage from these planes and their jet fuel managed to start a chain reaction in the towers, causing each floor to pancake on top of the ones below it, killing three thousand people in the process?

[ELVIS]

Politics does not make for very diplomatic conversation in the real world, generally apeaking.

Not when you start offering kook conspiracy theories and people look at you funny...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
Why doesn't it make sense what happened four years ago? You really honestly don't believe four or five terrorists could have captured a plane in 2001 and run it into a skyscraper? Is that hard to grasp? Or is it hard to grasp the fact that the structural and fire damage from these planes and their jet fuel managed to start a chain reaction in the towers, causing each floor to pancake on top of the ones below it, killing three thousand people in the process?

All of it. It doesn't make sense that those planes were off radio contact for so long with no military action taken, it doesn't make sense that those planes were able to topple two buildings out of order of the time they were hit and the severity of how they were hit. None of it makes sense. If the planes were actually capable of bringing even one of those buildings down, it should have been tower 1, but that one did not come down until after tower 2, a building which sustained less damage, and was burning for a shorter amount of time, AND was hit only on one corner, came down first. THAT makes NO sense in the world of physics OR logic.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Not when you start offering kook conspiracy theories and people look at you funny...

Actually, Most people I have spoken with this about, tend to agree with me when presented with the facts and the physics.... ...or at least agree there are some unanswered things that need to be investigated.

[Warham]

You do realize that people with more knowledge in physics than you or I have went on record saying that is logical and possible that what happened on 9/11 went exactly as the official story has cited.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Actually, Most people I have spoken with this about, tend to agree with me when presented with the facts and the physics....

You just said you don't discuss this with anyone other than the people on this board...

Make up your mind...

I think you're full of shit...

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Warham
You do realize that people with more knowledge in physics than you or I have went on record saying that is logical and possible that what happened on 9/11 went exactly as the official story has cited.

And this thread began with one who said it didn't... ...and his facts make more sense than those who were paid off by the Bush Administration to sell their story to the American people.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
You just said you don't discuss this with anyone other than the people on this board...

Make up your mind...

I think you're full of shit...

I don't, but OF THE FEW I HAVE discussed it with, MOST of them have agreed something's amiss.

You think I'M full of shit?

Well, I KNOW you are...

[thome]

Ok You freeks. Im letting it out, i can't hold it -no- longer, i'll deal with
my fellow -CIA- operatives and -The Greys- their our chumps anyway.

Its the -Ultra Men- I'm going to have trouble with.

Hillary Clinton with Bills authority and the- Vast Left Wing Conspirasy-
set the whole thing up. It was on Site for years -Bush- and the- Right-
fell into our -Trap-.We set -Sonny Boy- up and Dupped the American people. I was the Demo Man on the Tower Project.......
Coded -Sonny Boy-.That's all I can or need to say .

THERES SOMEONE AT THE DOOR !!!!!! My terminal has been compromised Late.....r.rr.........Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh....Shi...... .

[DLR'sCock]

Originally posted by Warham
You do realize that people with more knowledge in physics than you or I have went on record saying that is logical and possible that what happened on 9/11 went exactly as the official story has cited.


If anything, it is up for debate amongst the professional community, for while it is "possible" according to certain scientists, there are also scientists, physicists and engineers saying that it is also not possible, or improbable...

I will settle with the matter is a debate amongst the professionals, if there is a debate....


Anyway, I don't care anymore....me thinking about this, does nothing.....as I said, if there is a debate, it's where it needs to be...

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
You do realize that people with more knowledge in physics than you or I have went on record saying that is logical and possible that what happened on 9/11 went exactly as the official story has cited.

There are also "scientists" who claim cigarettes don't cause cancer. All depends on who signs their paychecks.....

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Keeyth
All of it. It doesn't make sense that those planes were off radio contact for so long with no military action taken,


I have absolutely no problem with that. Remember what the US was like prior to 9-11. It had the worst airport security in the western world.

I used to talk to people about it all the time. Fuck you could virtually load your luggage onto the plane from your car. Outgoing and incoming passengers would mix in the airports.

The US authorities seemed to think that terrorism would never come to the mainland. At the same time there was absolutely nothing to stop it.

Whilst spending trillions of dollars on 'defence' it was never about defending the US itself.

A few planes have their transponders switched off over the US and they are not going to get shot down by some permanent CAP.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Warham
You do realize that people with more knowledge in physics than you or I have went on record saying that is logical and possible that what happened on 9/11 went exactly as the official story has cited.

Not just people, the vast majority of the scientific community.

It's only on the internet it looks like it's heavily disputed.

It's the 'faked moon landings' all over again.

At first you think, 'Hey Jesus WTF?'.

Then you examine all the info and realise the conspiracy is 99% likely to be bullshit.

[Seshmeister]

The best way to think of this stuff is like a puddle on the road.

If you examine the puddle in itself you might think what are the chances of the water being the exact same shape as the hole?

It's fucked up thinking...:)

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Seshmeister


I have absolutely no problem with that. Remember what the US was like prior to 9-11. It had the worst airport security in the western world.

I used to talk to people about it all the time. Fuck you could virtually load your luggage onto the plane from your car. Outgoing and incoming passengers would mix in the airports.

The US authorities seemed to think that terrorism would never come to the mainland. At the same time there was absolutely nothing to stop it.

Whilst spending trillions of dollars on 'defence' it was never about defending the US itself.

A few planes have their transponders switched off over the US and they are not going to get shot down by some permanent CAP. [/B]

Remember Payne Stewart? The Golfer? His plane lost transpoder contact prior to 9-11 and there were military jets on that plane reporting that the windows were fogged up, etc. with MINUTES of them losing transponder contact with NO presidential authorization...

...these passenger jets were off the transponder for an hour and 45 minutes and no military action is taken????

Then, AFTER both jets hit the towers, the two fighter jets that WERE deployed, timed to arrive just minutes too late for the second tower being hit, then get TURNED BACK instead of going after the other two hijacked jets???? Something smells fishy there too... ...not likely unless it was planned that way IMO.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
The best way to think of this stuff is like a puddle on the road.

If you examine the puddle in itself you might think what are the chances of the water being the exact same shape as the hole?

It's fucked up thinking...:)

No, your analogy, THAT is fucked up thinking.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Keeyth
[B]Remember Payne Stewart? The Golfer? His plane lost transpoder contact prior to 9-11 and there were military jets on that plane reporting that the windows were fogged up, etc. with MINUTES of them losing transponder contact with NO presidential authorization...

...

Are you sure about that? Since everybody was dead on board, I'm not sure who would have shut down the transponder...

And it took a lot more than a few minutes for the fighters to get there...

US fighter patrols, which were drastically drawn down since the Cold War ended, are not geared to attacking hijacked commercial airliners, especially ones flying wildly off their FL Plan, they train to attack Russian/Chinese bombers...

And it's pretty interesting that not ONE US PILOT or air wing commander has come out and said that they were told to stand down, so secret air force jets, flying on remote control, could ram into the WTC while the other airliners were to be piloted out to the Atlantic, or landed at Cleveland with the passangers to be massacred by super secret BCE ninjas...

Can this sound anymore implausible?

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Remember Payne Stewart? The Golfer? His plane lost transpoder contact prior to 9-11 and there were military jets on that plane reporting that the windows were fogged up, etc. with MINUTES of them losing transponder contact with NO presidential authorization...

...these passenger jets were off the transponder for an hour and 45 minutes and no military action is taken????

Then, AFTER both jets hit the towers, the two fighter jets that WERE deployed, timed to arrive just minutes too late for the second tower being hit, then get TURNED BACK instead of going after the other two hijacked jets???? Something smells fishy there too... ...not likely unless it was planned that way IMO.


This is so fucking stupid. Since when was it military policy to shoot down passenger planes that have their transponder turned off? Should they have shot them down immediately because there was a suspicion they were hijacked?

The only possible conspiracy I can halfway agree with is that the flight over PA was shot down. And that was after they started flying them suicidally into buildings. And I don't have a problem with that.

But the rest of this crap is retarded.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Are you sure about that? Since everybody was dead on board, I'm not sure who would have shut down the transponder...

And it took a lot more than a few minutes for the fighters to get there...



Look it up. The fighter pilots kept trying to get the attention of someone on board, but the windows were fogged up, and they had to watch helplessly as the plane went down.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
And it's pretty interesting that not ONE US PILOT or air wing commander has come out and said that they were told to stand down, so secret air force jets, flying on remote control, could ram into the WTC while the other airliners were to be piloted out to the Atlantic, or landed at Cleveland with the passangers to be massacred by super secret BCE ninjas...

Can this sound anymore implausible?


This is what I'm talking about.

People take a fucking microscope to every detail of the obvious turn of events but it's fine for the alternative to be spectacularly unlikely.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by diamondD
This is so fucking stupid. Since when was it military policy to shoot down passenger planes that have their transponder turned off? Should they have shot them down immediately because there was a suspicion they were hijacked?



No one said they should have shot them down immediately just because they lost contact moron, quit trying to make everything so simplistic, but in the hour and 45 minutes they had to get a jet next to those planes, they would have been on top of it when the first plane hit the tower, and definitely would have shot down the second one before it hit, sacrificing about a hundred people instead of the thousands in the building.

[diamondD]

Looks like Nick and I both came to the same conclusion at the same time. :D

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Are you sure about that? Since everybody was dead on board, I'm not sure who would have shut down the transponder...

And it took a lot more than a few minutes for the fighters to get there...

US fighter patrols, which were drastically drawn down since the Cold War ended, are not geared to attacking hijacked commercial airliners, especially ones flying wildly off their FL Plan, they train to attack Russian/Chinese bombers...

And it's pretty interesting that not ONE US PILOT or air wing commander has come out and said that they were told to stand down, so secret air force jets, flying on remote control, could ram into the WTC while the other airliners were to be piloted out to the Atlantic, or landed at Cleveland with the passangers to be massacred by super secret BCE ninjas...

Can this sound anymore implausible?

There is a rumor that they were told to stand down, and it is not that implausible to me that military pilots would vow silence for their commander-in-chief. They are trained to follow orders.

I don't know what you are talking about with the whole BCE ninjas stuff...

[Seshmeister]

A rumor...

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth

You think I'M full of shit?

Well, I KNOW you are...


Dude, you're not nearly as bright as you think...

You are incapable of applying any logic to this subject matter...

These WTC conspiracy theories have been instantly shot down and you fail to, or just refuse to see it...

Nick and Sesh just posted disputes that you just ignore...

Wake up...


:elvis:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Keeyth
There is a rumor that they were told to stand down, and it is not that implausible to me that military pilots would vow silence for their commander-in-chief. They are trained to follow orders.

They're also educated, patriotic men with consciences...

The CIA is also regimented to follow orders, but you seen a lot of agents attack the BUSH Admin. (in the press as anonymous sources) over the Plame affair and their scape-goating over the "bad WMD intelligence." You're telling me that out of hundreds of people, not ONE would speak up?


I don't know what you are talking about with the whole BCE ninjas stuff... [/B]

I meant, what happened to the passengers?

Especially the ones' that supposedly landed CLEVELAND...Somebody had to do the dirty work!

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Keeyth
No one said they should have shot them down immediately just because they lost contact moron, quit trying to make everything so simplistic, but in the hour and 45 minutes they had to get a jet next to those planes, they would have been on top of it when the first plane hit the tower, and definitely would have shot down the second one before it hit, sacrificing about a hundred people instead of the thousands in the building.

Dude, you're way out there...

[ELVIS]

I never thought I would be referring to Nick as the voice of reason, but that day has come...;)

[diamondD]

8:13:31 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 last transmission from Boston Air Traffic Control: AAL11 turn 20 degrees right American Airlines Flight 11 responds: 20 right AAL11.


A few seconds later the Controller asks: AAL11 now climb maintain FL350 [35,000 feet] Controller: AAL11 climb maintain FL350 Controller: AAL11 Boston. There is no response from American Airlines Flight 11.


11) 8:14 to 8:20 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 goes off course and is hijacked.



8:24:38 a.m.: The pilot of American Airlines Flight 11, John Ogonowski, or one of the hijackers activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston air traffic controllers to hear a hijacker say to the passengers: "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport. Nobody move." Apparently, one of the hijackers confused the aircraft's radio with its public-address system. Air traffic control responds, "Who's trying to call me?"


19) 8:24:57 a.m. from American Airlines Flight 11, "Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet."


20) 8:25 a.m.: Boston air traffic control notified several air traffic control centers that a hijack is in progress with American Airlines Flight 11

8:46:26 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 impacts the north side of the North Tower (1 World Trade Center) of the WTC between the 94th and 98th floors. American Airlines Flight 11 was flying at a speed of 490 miles per hour (MPH).


When American Airlines Flight 11 struck the North Tower, "it set up vibrations which were transmitted through the building, through its foundation, and into the ground," says Lerner-Lam. Those vibrations, as indicated by seismographs at Lamont-Doherty and other locations, were the equivalent of a magnitude 0.9 earthquake, one too small to be felt.

31 minutes between the time they thought it was hijacked and impact.


8:14 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 a Boeing 767-222 with a maximum capacity of 181 passengers and 23,980 gallons of fuel, lifts off from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, bound for Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California

8:53 a.m.: A flight controller says to other airplanes in the sky about United Airlines Flight 175, "We may have a hijack. We have some problems over here right now."

9:00 a.m.: Last radar reading on United Airlines Flight 175 is observed at an altitude of 18,000 feet, descending, with a ground speed of 480 knots.


9:02:54 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 impacts the south side of the South Tower of the WTC between the 78th and 84th floors at a speed of over 500 MPH. Parts of the plane including an engine leave the building from its north side, to be found on the ground up to six blocks away.


When United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower, "it set up vibrations which were transmitted through the building, through its foundation, and into the ground," says Lerner-Lam. Those vibrations, as indicated by seismographs at Lamont-Doherty and other locations, were the equivalent of a magnitude 0.7 earthquake.



48 minutes after take off


One hour and 45 minutes? This is why people think you are an idiot. You can't even tell time!

No wonder you can't accept the facts. You don't even know what they are. :rolleyes:

9/11 Timeline (http://www.911timeline.net/)

[diamondD]

Still waiting on whay I'm sure will be another amazing rebuttal by Keeyth...

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Remember Payne Stewart? The Golfer? His plane lost transpoder contact prior to 9-11 and there were military jets on that plane reporting that the windows were fogged up, etc. with MINUTES of them losing transponder contact with NO presidential authorization...




Oh God, it gets even better.

FACT: In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet. Rules in effect back then, and on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts. Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," FAA spokesman Bill Schumann tells PM. After 9/11, NORAD and the FAA increased cooperation, setting up hotlines between ATCs and NORAD command centers, according to officials from both agencies. NORAD has also increased its fighter coverage and has installed radar to monitor airspace over the continent.



Any more of your amazing "facts" you'd like to make up and share with us Keeyth?

:rolleyes: Popular Mechanics (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=3&c=y)

[thome]

As in my earlier post it is equally plausible that the -LEFT- set
all of this up to discredit Bush -the Right- and yes they also manipulated
Bush to go to war, thru secret psychologically applied pressure.

This is your exact argument seen in a third dimension wich you seem not to be able to comprehend.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I never thought I would be referring to Nick as the voice of reason, but that day has come...;)

That's because I'm actually a secret moderate.:) It's the irrational partisan-extremists that are hurting this country.;)

It started in earnest in the CLINTON days with the "vast-right wing conspiracy" (The Arkansas Working Group/Project using a calculated, sustained campaign of half-truths and outright lies to defame a candidate in order to subvert the actual electoral process and real democracy) And it continues this day, and has been spread to both sides of the isle...


And BTW, I'm sure, but I think 9/11 Conspiracists are not relegated to the left. I think there are groups of anti-gov't rightist militia-types that believe the same thing.

[Nickdfresh]

The truth is that the 9/11 attack was very plausible, and even all too easy.

A group of hijackers, that only the pilot/leaders like ATTA know fully will be a suicide mission, the rest including the "muscle" hijackers themselves, think that it will be a early-70's style hijacking in order to draw attention to grievances in the Islamic world. The "muscle" hijackers even believe that they will be provided AK-47s and bombs, supposedly hidden in the cargo hold. The passengers are told that this is a "hijacking," and if the cooperate, no one will be hurt and the "bomb onboard" will not be detonated. The pilots then fly the aircraft to their targets...

The people that do realize that this is a suicide mission (FL93), realize that they are doomed, and decide to "roll" and go out on their terms and frustrate the attack.

It's all so simple, and very plausible and completely consistant with human nature.

It was a small cell of people, the leaders of which were educated and were carrying out a well-thought out plan that was years in the making.

The problem I have with the post-9/11 stuff is that the "al Qaida" that carried out 9/11 died on 9/11. Bin LADEN had little to do with it. This was a small faction that was led by Khalid Sheik MOHAMMED...

And they're pretty much dead, or in custody. So see, you don't have to live in a world of irrational fear and paranoia, invading Middle Eastern states to "spread democracy." :) There isn't much left of al Qaida, and the cream of the crop wiped themselves out in the suicide attack. The only al Qaida is the one we feed into...

If you want the truth (as I have come to accept it), if you are ready for what happened on 9/11, and before and after especially, view the BBC series "The Power of Nightmares." It's not perfect, but it's about as close to you can find meaning in three hours of your lfe. It really is an 'epiphany."

SESHMEISTER posted the link in this thread:

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24239

[Keeyth]

Nitpick all you want on the timetables and whatever, (you can find different timelines all over the place) but there is no way those planes would have brought those buildings down, and that is the point here.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
That's because I'm actually a secret moderate.:) It's the irrational partisan-extremists that are hurting this country.;)

It started in earnest in the CLINTON days with the "vast-right wing conspiracy" (The Arkansas Working Group/Project using a calculated, sustained campaign of half-truths and outright lies to defame a candidate in order to subvert the actual electoral process and real democracy) And it continues this day, and has been spread to both sides of the isle...


And BTW, I'm sure, but I think 9/11 Conspiracists are not relegated to the left. I think there are groups of anti-gov't rightist militia-types that believe the same thing.

I agree that you are a moderate. ;)

I just call you a liberal to see if I can irk you. hehe

[Warham]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Nitpick all you want on the timetables and whatever, (you can find different timelines all over the place) but there is no way those planes would have brought those buildings down, and that is the point here.

:rolleyes:

So people with fucking PhDs in structural engineering say it's possible and it DID happen on 9/11, but kooks like you are in denial. I dunno what else we can do for you.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by Warham
:rolleyes:

So people with fucking PhDs in structural engineering say it's possible and it DID happen on 9/11, but kooks like you are in denial. I dunno what else we can do for you.

Warham you idiot, obviously we are the ones with closed minds. FORD, Keeyth, and some random physics professor in Utah have seen the light.

If only we could be so lucky. :(

[Keeyth]

Well at least you are aware of THAT! :D

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Nitpick all you want on the timetables and whatever, (you can find different timelines all over the place) but there is no way those planes would have brought those buildings down, and that is the point here.

NITPICK? You are the one saying planes were on top of Payne Stewart's plane in minutes and the transponder was turned off. Wrong on both counts.

You were busted for making shit up. There's no nitpicking here.

Find me a different timeline if there's "different" ones all over the place. Prove you aren't making that one up too.

You can't make an effective point when your argument is full of lies, moron.

[ELVIS]

I'm done with Keeyth...

He makes shit up, and he doesn't seem to have any reading comprehension...

At least if you prove FORD wrong, he shuts up...


:elvis:

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by diamondD
NITPICK? You are the one saying planes were on top of Payne Stewart's plane in minutes and the transponder was turned off. Wrong on both counts.

You were busted for making shit up. There's no nitpicking here.

Find me a different timeline if there's "different" ones all over the place. Prove you aren't making that one up too.

You can't make an effective point when your argument is full of lies, moron.

Sorry, my mistake. They had lost radio contact with Stewarts plane. Again, that's not the point, you idiot. The point was they were able to deploy military assistance in a short amount of time.

They should have been able to do the same for the hijacked jets, moron.

[Keeyth]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I'm done with Keeyth...

He makes shit up, and he doesn't seem to have any reading comprehension...

At least if you prove FORD wrong, he shuts up...


:elvis:

I haven't seen you prove FORD wrong at all...

[ELVIS]

You're making that up as well...

You're not very smart...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Warham you idiot, obviously we are the ones with closed minds. FORD, Keeyth, and some random physics professor in Utah have seen the light.

If only we could be so lucky. :(

Yup! Just because the conspiracy theory is so much more wildly implausible than the official version it is supposed to supplant, don't let that get in the way of seeing the "truth," that the US government, with the help of super-ninjas, gremlins, and leprechauns conducted a vast conspiracy involving hundreds, if not thousands, of people to carry it out, and only a few people on the internet are the wiser.

They made three airliners, and hundreds of people "disappear," and managed to keep it a secret. And unlike every major conspiracy, conducted by countries with gov't control of the press, they managed to pull this one off....

[ELVIS]

:D

Awesome post, Nick...


:elvis:

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Keeyth
Sorry, my mistake. They had lost radio contact with Stewarts plane. Again, that's not the point, you idiot. The point was they were able to deploy military assistance in a short amount of time.

They should have been able to do the same for the hijacked jets, moron.


Can you not even fucking read? It took 1 hour and 26 minutes to reach his plane! And those jets DIDN'T have the ability to shoot a plane down.


E is right. At least FORD shuts up when he's wrong.


So, NOW, what's your point?

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Yup! Just because the conspiracy theory is so much more wildly implausible than the official version it is supposed to supplant, don't let that get in the way of seeing the "truth," that the US government, with the help of super-ninjas, gremlins, and leprechauns conducted a vast conspiracy involving hundreds, if not thousands, of people to carry it out, and only a few people on the internet are the wiser.

They made three airliners, and hundreds of people "disappear," and managed to keep it a secret. And unlike every major conspiracy, conducted by countries with gov't control of the press, they managed to pull this one off....

Actually, it was 4 airliners, but I'm not nitpicking. ;) Some people claim that PA wreckage wasn't a plane either.


Good post!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by diamondD
Actually, it was 4 airliners, but I'm not nitpicking. ;) Some people claim that PA wreckage wasn't a plane either.


Good post!

Oh yeah, well actually, the one that hit the Pentagon was a lear jet, or a missile.;)

[ELVIS]

Teeheehee...


:elvis:

[Warham]

LMAO.

[Guitar Shark]

FUCK! I think the BCE just hacked my computer. OK, I'm leaving the site. :mad:

[ELVIS]

:D

[Satan]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
FUCK! I think the BCE just hacked my computer. OK, I'm leaving the site. :mad:

Wrong thread, counselor.

[diamondD]

Well, they "pulled" the original. ;) Damn BSCE!