For Chowder: What Myth?

[Will]

So wait, first you say mass media is a bad source, but now its a credible source? Make up your fucking mind.

you need to read the posts consecutively if you are going to be able to maintain th context of what is said. Go back to being a cheerleader for others.

Way to go, you now sound like a "my dad could beat up your dad" 12 year old. That is certainly the way to get your point across.

Far from it. I am the only subject matter expert in the room. The fact that I could kick all of your asses has nothing to do with it :p


Uhm, sorry, what? Charlie's explanation at least used math and science to explain it for fucks sakes, not some half-cocked theory that he found on the internet...

I never said it didn't, and I wasn't attacking his explanation like you seem to think. Again, read all the posts in order to maintain the context of what is said.

I mean, god damn Will, if we're all too fucking retarded to see the truth, and we're in the minority, then go fucking hang out on Digg.com with your cronies. Funny though how sheeple usually means majority...

Don't be offended, didn't you know you were clueless? you are always suggesting where I should go and what I should do. Very presumptuous since we aren't friends. Didn't your momma teach you any manners?


Wait, what? Please don't tell me you're referring to The War of 1812. If you are, take your head out of your ass. Guess who still owns this land. Thats right, WE DO. Guess who got sent home, and had their White House burned down, thats right...

Um, wtf are you talking about?

[Will]

Fucking jew.


Oh yes, the most popular politician on YT. Fucking big deal.

Want another peanut?

[Talorth]

i was just making a point that if we really tended so close to our histories all the time then why does the United States still not have such a close pact with the french?

It is foolish to use the past in such a fashion as you did in

Not for nothing, but we kicked you fucking ass and established our own country cause we didn't like the way you did business. We became friends again but don't ever forget that asswhoopin'.

You did not kick my ass. I am not patriotic, I do not feel that my country represents myself.

[BLACK]

Want another peanut?


Yes please.


Want another piece of fried chicken?

[Will]

i was just making a point that if we really tended so close to our histories all the time then why does the United States still not have such a close pact with the french?

It is foolish to use the past in such a fashion as you did in



You did not kick my ass. I am not patriotic, I do not feel that my country represents myself.

You got me off into the weeds......never said I kicked your ass, I said we (as in America) kicked your ass (as in Great Britain).

If your country is that unimportant to you, and you care so little for it, why live there?

[Will]

Yes please.


Want another piece of fried chicken?

Surely.

[Will]

I'm gonna go play L2 now, I'll let the flames pile up till tomorrow. NN all :)

[Grindrolas]

Um, wtf are you talking about?
I read them in consecutive order, you're just spewing your usual rhetoric, like some annoying Jehovah's witness on my god damn door step. We aren't buying MOVE ALONG!

And lol, perhaps you need to take American, or North American History Will. We, the Canadians (then British colonists) burned the White House down in 1812.

Stop referring to us as GB. You killed BRITISH to gain yourselves your Independence. We did it diplomatically. What happened when your nation tried to come up here and "liberate" us? You got sent home packing.

[Talorth]

You got me off into the weeds......never said I kicked your ass, I said we (as in America) kicked your ass (as in Great Britain).

If your country is that unimportant to you, and you care so little for it, why live there?

Don't you see my point?

I care enough that I am happy to live in my country, it is a beautiful country. But I don't feel sole attachment to it. It is a country. I am not buried in it's soil.


I never realised that the United States had to kick anyone's ass, I thought you guys were all about the peace? I thought the entire point of the War of 1812 was to establish the United States as a country based upon very good principles (IE maintaining the declaration of independence? HELLO!?). But instead, I see its about who kicked who's ass.

Also, no one really won... both asses were equally kicked when you think about. The British destroyed washington's public buildings.... thats pretty devastating all things considered :P.

[LordChowder]

Did you even watch the clip or did you just google debunking and pick the first one? This isn't the first attempt by the government to debunk the so called 9/11 conspiracy theory in support of the official conspiracy theory. Everything in this clip has been "redebunked" by the Steven Jones clip I posted (he was a professor at BYU, I think his specialty was physics) and others.

You aren't even pointing to an actual assertion in the clip, just a general idea like "they tell us what really happened to the towers and it's on the internet". I am willing to pull it all apart if you are. Alas, and again, I can see your brain is on idle so ta ta for now.

look who didnt watch the clip. theres no government officials in that entire video nigger. unless you wanna count firefighters as government officials? even though they lost more in this than anyone else besides the civilians that died. show them a bit of respect? the end of the video, they have a real expert, not someone like you, claiming to be one. clearly explain what brings down the towers. learn to listen.

[Damarus]

Far from it. I am the only subject matter expert in the room. The fact that I could kick all of your asses has nothing to do with it :pWhen a lot of this discussion has been about the collapse of the WTC towers and the underlying causes/issues/theories/etc, I would've thought my diploma of building design and technology and current employment as a design draftsperson at a consulting engineers firm would've made me some kind of subject matter expert :(

[BLACK]

It doesn't. D:

[Damarus]

It's because I'm Australian isn't it, and our buildings are all made of sticks and mud :(

[Talorth]

kango poo.

[CharlieM]

When a lot of this discussion has been about the collapse of the WTC towers and the underlying causes/issues/theories/etc, I would've thought my diploma of building design and technology and current employment as a design draftsperson at a consulting engineers firm would've made me some kind of subject matter expert :(

Lets not play down my 4 years of advanced math, and 3 years of physics (which included a significant portion of structural engineering and material physics).

Running at 28k atm, stupid internet cap, ill address the issues you had when my shit loads it up in about 20 min will.

Edit:
Actually, refuting the claims you had in giant bold letters (which I just got to btw) is a futile effort.
Its all circumstantial, with zero evidence to back the claims up.
There could be a huge number of reasons, if any single one of those was actually true, as to why the govt. would do something like that, but im not going to start to speculate on something that I have seen zero evidence for.

[Will]

I enchanted my Belittlement skill... Wait for ittttt... Nigger.

It better be at least +9 to get with mine, Billy's nigger.

[Will]

Maybe she was, sometimes people can be very unaccountable for what happened when they are in a state of panic/fear. But I believe that was the Bush administrations spin on things anyways? They certainly made a good job of turning gulf war #2 into the war on terror.

Or, maybe she saw exactly what she said she saw...can you allow for that?

I am not nullifying anything, it is a conspiracy. A conspiracy is exactly that, a conspiracy. Maybe you should look it up in a dictionary. I am sorry for any unintended feelings you may toward having me call it a conspiracy from your own self righteousness, but thats your own problem. You are seeing things that aren't there.

"Conspiracy Theory" is the tag you are using, and that is the establishments catch phrase to marginalize anything that doesn't support the official conspiracy theory.

The truth of 9/11 still remains shrouded in mystery, I am not against the idea that there is a possibility that the United States government knew something was going on. But, all the conspiracy theories have been unplausible, and very irrational.

I totally agree with you except for the irrationality of the so called conspiracy theories. It isn't "unplausible" for the US government (or elements within) to perpetrate an attack on it's own citizens. Please see operation "Northwoods":

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation Northwoods

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#column-one), search (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#searchInput)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b1/NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg/185px-NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg)
Operation Northwoods memoranda (March 13, 1962).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-northwoods1)


Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a 1962 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962) plan by the US Department of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense) to cause acts of terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism) and violence on US soil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) or against US interests, blamed on Cuba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba), in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro). As part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project) anti-Castro initiative, the plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag) actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism) (such as hijacked planes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_hijacking)) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_Lemnitzer).
The main proposal was presented in a document entitled "Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)," a collection of draft memoranda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoranda) written by the Department of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense) (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Chiefs_of_Staff) (JCS) representative to the Caribbean Survey Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caribbean_Survey_Group&action=edit).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-northwoods1) (The parenthetical "TS" in the title of the document is an initialism for "Top Secret.") The document was presented by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_Defense) Robert McNamara (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McNamara) on March 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_13) with one paragraph approved, as a preliminary submission for planning purposes.
The previously secret (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Secret ) document was originally made public on November 18, 1997 by the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_Records_Review_Board),[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-0) a U.S. federal agency overseeing the release of government records related to John F. Kennedy's assassination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination). A total of about 1500 pages of once-secret military records covering 1962 to 1964 were concomitantly declassified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declassification) by said Review Board.
"Appendix to Enclosure A" and "Annex to Appendix to Enclosure A" of the Northwoods document were first published online (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web) by the National Security Archive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Archive) on November 6, 1998 in a joint venture with CNN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN) as part of CNN's 1998 Cold War television (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television) documentary series — specifically, as a documentation supplement to "Episode 10: Cuba," which aired on November 29, 1998.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-5)[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-6) "Annex to Appendix to Enclosure A" is the section of the document which contains the proposals to stage terrorist attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism). The Northwoods document was published online (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web) in a more complete form (i.e., including cover memoranda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorandum)) by the National Security Archive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Archive) on April 30, 2001.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-7)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It actually happened that elements within the government wanted to attack US cities and blame it on Cuba in order to have a pretext to invade them. Since there is a documented history of this "kind of thing" happening in the past, yada yada yada...

Please open your eyes, you are almost there!

[Will]

When a lot of this discussion has been about the collapse of the WTC towers and the underlying causes/issues/theories/etc, I would've thought my diploma of building design and technology and current employment as a design draftsperson at a consulting engineers firm would've made me some kind of subject matter expert :(

I wasn't aware or didn't catch your credentials. Please, speak on it brother.

[Grog]

will, there's an edit button. you don't HAVE to make 15 posts in a row

[Will]

Lets not play down my 4 years of advanced math, and 3 years of physics (which included a significant portion of structural engineering and material physics).

Running at 28k atm, stupid internet cap, ill address the issues you had when my shit loads it up in about 20 min will.

Edit:
Actually, refuting the claims you had in giant bold letters (which I just got to btw) is a futile effort.
Its all circumstantial, with zero evidence to back the claims up.
There could be a huge number of reasons, if any single one of those was actually true, as to why the govt. would do something like that, but im not going to start to speculate on something that I have seen zero evidence for.

You weren't in the room last night. Did you catch the clip I posted on Steven Jone's experiments with the WTC steel?

As to the bolded claims, they aren't circumstantial, they are a matter of public record. Every single one of them is true, would you like to see my sources of information on them?

[//Antisaint]

It better be at least +9 to get with mine, Billy's nigger.

You obviously enchanted it Cost, that was pretty cheap..

I enchanted for power.. Fucking epitome of low life scum. Coming here with your nigger agenda forcing your beliefs without allowing legitimate debate.. Hard headed nigger.. I'd vote we hang you but you would be too stubborn to actually die.. Fucking cunt.

[Will]

I read them in consecutive order, you're just spewing your usual rhetoric, like some annoying Jehovah's witness on my god damn door step. We aren't buying MOVE ALONG!

So, you are the voice of the modnrated community again, were you elected or did you pull a Bush?

And lol, perhaps you need to take American, or North American History Will. We, the Canadians (then British colonists) burned the White House down in 1812.

in the immortal words of the South Park creators...."FUCK CANADA"

Stop referring to us as GB. You killed BRITISH to gain yourselves your Independence. We did it diplomatically. What happened when your nation tried to come up here and "liberate" us? You got sent home packing.

You were able to do it diplomatically because we fought for ours and there butts were still sore. We went home cause it sucks up there, true story.

[Grog]

43 posts from my fifth star!

[//Antisaint]

would you like to see my sources of information on them?

My source that you're a nigger

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MG/200827%7EThe-Soul-of-Nigger-Charley-Posters.jpg

[Articula]

I am not blatantly ignoring anything; check the clip I posted in response to Articula if you want to know what happened to the towers. Hard to keep up with all you flamers.

You guys are blatantly ignoring anything that doesn't have to do with CharlieM's fine research. At least he is using his brain. You should try using yours.

The second video you posted didn't work :(

[Will]

You obviously enchanted it Cost, that was pretty cheap..

I enchanted for power.. Fucking epitome of low life scum. Coming here with your nigger agenda forcing your beliefs without allowing legitimate debate.. Hard headed nigger.. I'd vote we hang you but you would be too stubborn to actually die.. Fucking cunt.

Your enchant failed you miserable baboon, stupid fucking sambo, porch monkey, coon, spade, niglet, nigger..............................wannabee.

[Damarus]

I wasn't aware or didn't catch your credentials. Please, speak on it brother.Yer I don't think I said anything about why I knew anything on structural design in this thread, I've only said it in other threads like "what do you do for a job?" sorta thing.

I pretty much just wanted to whinge lol :p That and kinda point out you were making a big assumption saying you were the only expert. Not really a big deal though lol :)

[Will]

The second video you posted didn't work :(

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/200606scientificanalysis.htm

Check it out here Arti, I was linking to google video, interesting you can't view it in the thread because I can :/

Alternatively, just google Professor Steven Jones and thermite. That should take you to the actual video I was trying to embed.

[Will]

Hey Mondrators, stop fucking with my title please, I liked Nigger Charlie cause you gave it to me...give it back!!!!!

[Grog]

notice how i have 5k less points will

[Will]

Yer I don't think I said anything about why I knew anything on structural design in this thread, I've only said it in other threads like "what do you do for a job?" sorta thing.

I pretty much just wanted to whinge lol :p That and kinda point out you were making a big assumption saying you were the only expert. Not really a big deal though lol :)

On the the first two towers falling, it is truly difficult to come to a conclusion as to what actually brought the towers down because it is plausible the planes did (in spite of the whole jet fuel not burning that hot vs. the crowd that says it could have). WTC7 is another story altogether. No planes hit it. How did jet fuel jump from building to building?

[Will]

will, there's an edit button. you don't HAVE to make 15 posts in a row

My flames tend to pile up and I would hate to miss anyone.

[Will]

My source that you're a nigger

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MG/200827%7EThe-Soul-of-Nigger-Charley-Posters.jpg

Wish I had my soul brothers with me now :p

That's ok, I don't need an entourage to keep up with the likes of you.

[Grog]

My flames tend to pile up and I would hate to miss anyone.
you didn't even read my post did you. did you just quote the wrong person or something?

[Will]

you didn't even read my post did you. did you just quote the wrong person or something?

I read it, you said there is an edit button so I don't have to have 15 posts in a row....is there a way to, Iuno, space them out?

[Grog]

what you could do is, iuno, paste all the millions of posts you make in a row into one post
or is this really just your attempt to up your post count?

why does ron paul have a myspace?

[Victis]

charlie explained to you how it was possible that 7 fell with as best an answer as any engineer or architect could come up with, and you didn't want to hear.


i lol'd

[Damarus]

On the the first two towers falling, it is truly difficult to come to a conclusion as to what actually brought the towers down because it is plausible the planes did (in spite of the whole jet fuel not burning that hot vs. the crowd that says it could have). WTC7 is another story altogether. No planes hit it. How did jet fuel jump from building to building?I'm the first to admit I'm not strong on WTC7 (I didn't know it existed until like a year ago - I was never really that into the 9/11 attacks passed what I needed to know from the media [ie. how many were dead, what hit the towers, them falling, etc], conspiracy theories etc didn't interest me and from what I had seen I could draw enough logical conclusions to be happy).

From what I've researched on the tower, it was built on top of a Con Edison substation, which had it's foundations designed to carry the load of a future building on the site. Apparently though, the final building covered a much larger footprint than planned when the substation was built in the 1960's. Now this is obviously crucial to the transfer of loads through the building, if the foundation can't cope with the load being sent through it to earth, then basically it's like overloading a circuit. You've got a whole lot of energy with no where to go. Now this probly wasn't a problem until a tonne of debris was falling onto the tower, and ontop of that it seems that debris had damaged the tower from the ground, up until about the 18th floor. When each structural column in the building was responsible for 186 square meters of floor space, it seems pretty plausible that removing a few of them wouldn't do much for your structural integrity. As for how the building fell - Again skyscrapers are designed not to topple sideways or anything, in order to limit damage to the surrounding environment.

Now thats my thoughts without looking into too many sources - I understand that fire damage was said to be a main cause, but I can't really see it being the case. Sure fire damage was probably apparent. Falling molten debri/flames causing fires in the tower, detonation of mechanical plant, energy with no where to go (energy can't dissapear - so manifested as heat?), and all that sorta thing could've easily caused a strong heat presence and could cause a similar effect on the structural integrity of any steel like in the two main towers, but I would've thought this would just be the nail in the coffin for the building and not the main cause... Iunno its fairly late lol, thats as much as I can be bothered writing for now.

Also Vic, it's all well and good to 'lol', but as a Dell computer tech, what's your basis for 'loling' at Charlie's logical and plausible idea which did infact implement structural design/architecture/physics theory? Did you see something more plausible in a computer game?

[exiledone]

this thread is getting out of hand, stop fucking trying to change Will's mind, even if osama and the fucking people who hijacked the plan CAME BACK FROM THE DEAD AND SAID WE FUCKING DID IT, MR. BUSH CAN'T EVEN TIE HIS OWN SHOE WE FUCKING DID IT. he would still swear on his soul that there is a conspiracy and mr. bush payed them off with 40 virgins and a big black dildo.

[Victis]

What's wrong with the official story? Well, let's start with the fact that no steel-frame building in history has ever totally collapsed due to any set of causes other than demolition and severe earthquakes.

There have been numerous examples of severe fires that have ravaged skyscrapers, gutting several floors, burning for numerous hours, and these fires didn't produce collapses; they didn't even damage the vertical columns of these buildings. Examples are the One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia and the First Interstate Bank fire in Los Angeles.

These fires were far worse than those in either of the Twin Towers or Building 7 -- the 3 skyscrapers that collapsed in New York City on 9/11.

So given that, it's clear that the collapse of these 3 skyscrapers, based on the official explanation, were the largest and most mysterious engineering failures in the history of the world.

Starting the day of the attack, a series of explanations was promoted to explain the collapses. What's wrong with this? ... Well, the basic physics of fire temperatures. The melting point of steel is slightly below that of iron, which is 1535 Celsius. The highest temperature you can achieve by burning hydrocarbons in the atmosphere without pressurization or preheating of the air is around 825 Celsius, and that's when you have pre-mixed fuel and air -- the kind of blue flame you get with a gas stove. Diffuse flames of the type you have in building fires are far cooler than that, and oxygen-starved diffuse flames are far cooler still. Note that the the dark smoke, especially in the South Tower, indicate that those fires were oxygen starved; they were probably only a few hundred degrees Celsius.

Moreover, fires have never caused a column failure in any steel structure, because steel has a high thermal conductivity, which means you pour heat onto it, and it soaks it away -- the heat conducts very rapidly.


Corus Construction Corporation performed extensive tests in multiple countries in which they subjected steel-framed carparks, which were uninsulated, to prolonged hydrocarbon fueled fires, and the highest temperatures they recorded in any of the steel beams or columns was a mere 360 degrees Celsius. At that temperature, structural steel loses only about 1 percent of its strength.


Now note that, discounting demolition, the telescoping collapses mean that the towers would be collapsing through themselves following the path of most resistance. That's not the way matter behaves -- I mean even if the towers were made of tooth-picks or butter, anything, they wouldn't collapse through themselves; they would topple one way or the other. And yet you see this perfect dead-centered symmetry in both collapses, even in the South Tower which started to tip but then just became symmetric. That's exactly what controlled demolition seeks to achieve in order to minimize damage to adjacent structures.

[SLIDE] (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/proofs.html) Finally the proofs of demolition.

The first two of these are just totally based on common sense. The second two require a little bit of physics, but they're still basically common sense.

[SLIDE] (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/aerialdust.html) Now the first proof is that if you look at the way that the towers disintegrated you can see thick clouds of pulverized concrete being ejected within the first two seconds. That's when the relative motion of the top of the tower to the intact portion was only a few feet per second.
Now how could that speed turn the concrete that constituted the floor slabs -- how could it pulverize the concrete? It takes a lot of energy to pulverize concrete. To convince yourself that that proves demolition, think of taking a concrete block and dropping it from two stories. What do you think would happen? I think it would break into a few pieces. Even if you dropped a concrete block from a thousand feet, what do you think would happen? I think it would break into a bunch of small pieces. Obviously it wouldn't convert it into powder. There was some source of energy that was thoroughly pulverizing these buildings before they even started to fall.

[SLIDE] (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/freefall.html) Second, rubble falling through the towers encountered no more resistance than rubble falling through the air. How could this be? If you dropped an object from the top of the tower in a vacuum, (the rate of gravitational acceleration is 32 feet per second squared) it would take 9.2 seconds to reach the ground. When we watch the North Tower collapse we see that it took about 13 to 16 seconds for the rubble to reach the ground, either inside or outside the footprint of the building. So in other words you have the stuff that's falling freely through the air outside the profile of the building and the stuff that's falling through where the building was -- it's [all] falling at the same speed.
Now if air could slow down the fall of debris from 9.2 seconds to 14 seconds, say a 50% slowdown in the rate of fall because of air friction, how much more should the huge intact structures -- the thousand foot vertical structure of these buildings -- how much more should that have slowed down the fall of the rubble within the profile of the building? A hundred times? A thousand times? And yet it falls at about the same rate. Clearly, again, the building was being demolished ahead of the falling rubble.

[SLIDE] (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/dustvolume.html) The third proof is one that I've published a paper on, and it's based on the expansion ratio of the pyroclastic cloud following the collapse of 1 World Trade Center, the North Tower. Now the part of the cloud that I'm talking about is this dense part down here, the pyroclastic part, the part that's like a volcano. This part up here is a lot of smoke.
So what I do is I compute an estimate of the volume of this cloud at 30 seconds by taking sample points ... I compute a cylinder, and then based on that I come up with an estimate that the volume was about 5 times the volume of the original building, modulo some mixing, so I reduce my estimate down to an expansion ratio of 3.4 times.

Now there is only one way that expansion could have occurred: through the input of huge amounts of heat energy. Normally when you have the demolition of a building there is not that much energy in the explosives, and the dust cloud is about the size of the original building.
Not so with the twin Towers -- the dust clouds were multiple times the sizes of the buildings, and the only way that expansion could have occurred is through the input of vast amounts of heat energy to convert water to steam and expand gases. How much heat energy was required? I calculate that at least 1.5 million kWH was required to produce the expansion of the dust cloud of the North Tower to the 30-second mark. That compares with the gravitational potential energy -- the supposed source of all the energy according to the official theory for all this destruction -- of only about 100,000 kilowatt-hours. So basically we have an over ten-fold energy imbalance just looking at the energy required to produce the dust cloud expansion. That doesn't even account for other energy sinks, such as the vast energy sink required to pulverize all that concrete.

[SLIDE] (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/disintegration.html) The final proof is a little subtle too, because it requires understanding the law of angular momentum. Here we see, if we look at the destruction of the South Tower, that the top first started to tip, but then, instead of continuing to tip more, it started to disintegrate and then even started to rotate in the opposite direction.

The law of the preservation of angular momentum says that if you have a solid object and it has an angular momentum, it will preserve that angular momentum unless acted on by a torque. However, what we see is that it doesn't preserve that angular momentum. Instead it stops rotating and starts rotating the other way. And yet the only torque would have been tending to make it rotate faster in the same direction.
So the only explanation is that virtually the entire top of the South Tower had been shattered before it even began to fall, and that's clearly impossible according to the official theory, in which the top is this piston that is supposedly hammering down and crushing the rest of the building.
Well, not so, if it's already to disintegrate before it's even started to fall. Gravity couldn't do that -- some other form of energy had to break up the tower before it started to fall.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/text/index.html

[Articula]

this thread is getting out of hand, stop fucking trying to change Will's mind, even if osama and the fucking people who hijacked the plan CAME BACK FROM THE DEAD AND SAID WE FUCKING DID IT, MR. BUSH CAN'T EVEN TIE HIS OWN SHOE WE FUCKING DID IT. he would still swear on his soul that there is a conspiracy and mr. bush payed them off with 40 virgins and a big black dildo.

Oh shut the fuck up and stop reading the post if it bothers you that much, you whining child.

[Tassles]

/penny on the track

[Victis]

Also Vic, it's all well and good to 'lol', but as a Dell computer tech, what's your basis for 'loling' at Charlie's logical and plausible idea which did infact implement structural design/architecture/physics theory? Did you see something more plausible in a computer game?

Yeah, it is good to 'lol'.. and I don't work for Dell anymore.. how does working at a help desk constitute my 'expertise' in an area and not another? You don't really know shit about me (hence the "You're a Dell computer tech!" and therefore you can't be anything else).. I lol'd because Tassle or whatever his name is said Charlie offered the best explanation that any engineer or architect could come up with.. well guess what? I have talked to an architect, and I had lengthy discussions with him for (literally) hours on end.

I will give it to Charlie, he's the only one to produce any real argument (which is what I'd prefer than everyone jumping on the bandwagon) ..but to compare him to the engineers and architects of today?... yes, I lol'd..

I also lol at you guys obliquely attempting to flame me because I worked for Dell.. I never (unless you want to try to track down a post ofc) have claimed to be any sort of expert on the issue.. hell I don't think I really have much expertise in anything really.. I mean I played hockey for 14 years.. I've excelled in sales and customer service environments.. guess I shouldn't laugh at Charlie, I mean he isn't regurgitating what he's learning right now.. is he.. lol

ps: Oh, and yes, video games are what I was troubleshooting, jackass.. thats why I get multiple msgs each day from people that have gotten my email, looking for help.. because fuck, I'm just a sucker for being helpful to those who don't know.. not like I wasn't in their shoes at some point :rolleyes:

Thanks for trying <3

[Grindrolas]

So, you are the voice of the modnrated community again, were you elected or did you pull a Bush?
I'm sorry, but aside from the few people who are somewhat supporting your outrageous claims, do you see any of us buying into it?

in the immortal words of the South Park creators...."FUCK CANADA"
"oh shit, I'm not as smart as I thought I was."

You were able to do it diplomatically because we fought for ours and there butts were still sore. We went home cause it sucks up there, true story.
Our ability to obtain freedom diplomatically had nothing to do with the way the United States went about it. It was a slow process, but our nation wasn't created through blood shed. We started our independence process in 1867 with the "British North America Act" and completed the process in 1982. Again, it had nothing to do with your war for independence.

[exiledone]

Oh shut the fuck up and stop reading the post if it bothers you that much, you whining child.

lets have you shut the fuck up

[Victis]

I'm sorry, but aside from the few people who are somewhat supporting your outrageous claims, do you see any of us buying into it?


"oh shit, I'm not as smart as I thought I was."


Our ability to obtain freedom diplomatically had nothing to do with the way the United States went about it. It was a slow process, but our nation wasn't created through blood shed. We started our independence process in 1867 with the "British North America Act" and completed the process in 1982. Again, it had nothing to do with your war for independence.

There isn't 'buying' into anything really.. just take a look at the facts and history of events that transpired afterwards..

Take this for what it is.. people don't argue that the US Gov't is 'taking advantage' of the situation via the current war.. right? Its criminal they say, and the majority agrees, even charlie and the others who offer up some sort of retort (without slandering Will, this focus isn't about him, yet all you guys do is talk shit to him) also agree that what the US is doing right now (its gov't, not the people) is absolutely ludicrous...

Are you going to tell me that you believe they had absolutely nothing to create that opportunity (aside from a report that stated they needed a "new pearl harbor" type of event to push their agenda..) and exploit it? I mean really.. everyone says "bush isn't smart enough to pull that off!"... you really think Bush is the one in power? Really? Come on man you know better than that.. even the Canadian gov't its corrupt, look at all the shit that happens and the amounts of money involved..

I do agree that pulling something like 9/11 off is pretty far fetched.. I think those buildings falling like that (not just 1, but 3) is equally far fetched.. and there are some huge holes in these 'reports' who are led by people influenced/controlled by those in power.

You guys actually believe 9/11 happened, and those guys with an agenda were like.. holy shit, this is exactly what we were looking for to push the plans through.. sweet deal, time to invade! Its not like the US didn't lie about Iraq's "WMDs" and manipulating information to create a doctored 'report' of information that led to the invasion.. the world was lied to, the US citizens were duped, they've all been had, and the only people who end up paying for these lies/mis-truth is the citizens that are lied to, and those who are unwillingly going to Iraq to complete their terms of service.

[Articula]

lets have you shut the fuck up

Waaaa go cry to mommy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/parenting/images/300/baby_crying_closeup.jpg

[Victis]

Gonna have to teach exile some comebacks yo

[Articula]

Gonna have to teach exile some comebacks yo

He whines about people not caring, but evidently he's not paying attention. There are some very good arguments for both sides here. Seriously, if it doesn't interest you. Don't read it.

[Grog]

THAT CORNER IS ROUNDED
>.>

[LordChowder]

why does everyone who believes in conspiracies ignore huge obvious points of information? fire damage didn't bring down the towers alone. you have VERY severe fires, tons of jet fuel, and an office building filled with furniture and paper, and other officely goods that burn quite well. now, as this is all fine and dandy, and a fire sure to cause massive damage and weaken the structural integrity by itself... 2 FUCKING PASSENGER PLANES JUST CRASHED INTO THE BUILDINGS. HELLO? ARE WE FAMILIAR WITH THE AMOUNT OF FORCE THAT WOULD BE IN A FUCKING PASSENGER PLANE TRAVELING THAT FAST, SMACKING INTO THE SIDE OF A BUILDING!? why is this so hard for people. fire damage alone wouldnt even have to take it down. shit was a flying bomb.

[Emillia]

I love you all...

This is a great thread

[LordChowder]

let me just try and cover the falling speed. ok, id like to cover this as easy as i can. i understand people who believe in this shit may be somewhat slow. ok, when the floors above the crashes give way and collapes suddenly on the floors below, the first floors would create little resistance for that much weight and force. as you move down the tower, the damage done may have been much less than above. however, as floors falls, and gain more debris with more floors, the weight and force grows exponentially. it wouldnt take long before even an undamaged support structure wouldnt buckle under that weight. thats the pancake theory. thats not even a theory, thats what the buildings are designed to do. if the bottom floors didnt buckle and pacake with that weight, the floors that had fallen above them, would have fallen into the surrounding area. why not just hand it to the designers for creating a building that did what it was supposed to? give under its own weight and pancake in on itself. so to clarify, the reason why there was little resistance, is because it was designed to be that way. the floors gave out as the floors above fell onto them. since they were designed to give, they did little to slow down the fall. if the falling debris was slowed too much or stopped completely, theres nothing to stop it from tipping off.

[LordChowder]

I love you all...

This is a great thread

cyber?

[Grindrolas]

There isn't 'buying' into anything really.. just take a look at the facts and history of events that transpired afterwards..

Take this for what it is.. people don't argue that the US Gov't is 'taking advantage' of the situation via the current war.. right? Its criminal they say, and the majority agrees, even charlie and the others who offer up some sort of retort (without slandering Will, this focus isn't about him, yet all you guys do is talk shit to him) also agree that what the US is doing right now (its gov't, not the people) is absolutely ludicrous...

Are you going to tell me that you believe they had absolutely nothing to create that opportunity (aside from a report that stated they needed a "new pearl harbor" type of event to push their agenda..) and exploit it? I mean really.. everyone says "bush isn't smart enough to pull that off!"... you really think Bush is the one in power? Really? Come on man you know better than that.. even the Canadian gov't its corrupt, look at all the shit that happens and the amounts of money involved..

I do agree that pulling something like 9/11 off is pretty far fetched.. I think those buildings falling like that (not just 1, but 3) is equally far fetched.. and there are some huge holes in these 'reports' who are led by people influenced/controlled by those in power.

You guys actually believe 9/11 happened, and those guys with an agenda were like.. holy shit, this is exactly what we were looking for to push the plans through.. sweet deal, time to invade! Its not like the US didn't lie about Iraq's "WMDs" and manipulating information to create a doctored 'report' of information that led to the invasion.. the world was lied to, the US citizens were duped, they've all been had, and the only people who end up paying for these lies/mis-truth is the citizens that are lied to, and those who are unwillingly going to Iraq to complete their terms of service.
I'm not denying that they took advantage of it, I whole heartedly agree, and quite frankly I think Bush, and his administration, should be brought to trial over it. I don't think they planned it, I don't think they told someone else to do it. Perhaps I'm a little naive in thinking that. There have been a multitude of American conspiracies throughout history, a smaller event would be easier to believe, but as all of us have stated in one of Will's threads, or another (and yes, we've all attempted to discuss with Will at one point or another), the sheer number of people needed to pull this off makes keeping it a secret impossible. Someone out there would have blown the whistle by now. If it comes to light that it was them, I will be shocked, appalled, and think even less of the government to the south. The "greatest" nation in the world will have killed 3000 of their own people, all for oil.

Anyways, Will, you are by definition, insane. You keep posting these threads on this board, expecting a different result every time. Until there is some independent report that holds some clout, I won't be giving into the conspiracy machine that is the Internet.

[LordChowder]

Or, maybe she saw exactly what she said she saw...can you allow for that?



"Conspiracy Theory" is the tag you are using, and that is the establishments catch phrase to marginalize anything that doesn't support the official conspiracy theory.



I totally agree with you except for the irrationality of the so called conspiracy theories. It isn't "unplausible" for the US government (or elements within) to perpetrate an attack on it's own citizens. Please see operation "Northwoods":

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation Northwoods

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#column-one), search (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#searchInput)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b1/NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg/185px-NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg)
Operation Northwoods memoranda (March 13, 1962).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-northwoods1)


Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a 1962 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962) plan by the US Department of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense) to cause acts of terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism) and violence on US soil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) or against US interests, blamed on Cuba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba), in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro). As part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project) anti-Castro initiative, the plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag) actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism) (such as hijacked planes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_hijacking)) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_Lemnitzer).
The main proposal was presented in a document entitled "Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)," a collection of draft memoranda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoranda) written by the Department of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense) (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Chiefs_of_Staff) (JCS) representative to the Caribbean Survey Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caribbean_Survey_Group&action=edit).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-northwoods1) (The parenthetical "TS" in the title of the document is an initialism for "Top Secret.") The document was presented by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary of Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_Defense) Robert McNamara (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McNamara) on March 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_13) with one paragraph approved, as a preliminary submission for planning purposes.
The previously secret (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Secret ) document was originally made public on November 18, 1997 by the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_Records_Review_Board),[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-0) a U.S. federal agency overseeing the release of government records related to John F. Kennedy's assassination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination). A total of about 1500 pages of once-secret military records covering 1962 to 1964 were concomitantly declassified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declassification) by said Review Board.
"Appendix to Enclosure A" and "Annex to Appendix to Enclosure A" of the Northwoods document were first published online (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web) by the National Security Archive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Archive) on November 6, 1998 in a joint venture with CNN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN) as part of CNN's 1998 Cold War television (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television) documentary series — specifically, as a documentation supplement to "Episode 10: Cuba," which aired on November 29, 1998.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-5)[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-6) "Annex to Appendix to Enclosure A" is the section of the document which contains the proposals to stage terrorist attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism). The Northwoods document was published online (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web) in a more complete form (i.e., including cover memoranda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorandum)) by the National Security Archive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Archive) on April 30, 2001.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods#_note-7)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It actually happened that elements within the government wanted to attack US cities and blame it on Cuba in order to have a pretext to invade them. Since there is a documented history of this "kind of thing" happening in the past, yada yada yada...

Please open your eyes, you are almost there!

one should probably note, you may want to postpone opening your eyes. this plan was rejected by kennedy, and the creator of the plan was made to step down. also, any bit of research into the plan will point out it wasnt on us soil, and the plan didnt call for the murder of american civilians. it was a plan for america to go to war with cuba... wow its the cold war, we did lots of logical things during the cold war when our entire foreign policy is based on preventing the spread of communism. it called for things like sinking an unmanned us naval ship near cuba, staged attacks on a military base on cuba. etc etc if your dumb fucking ass thinks this is in some way justification that the federal government would kill 3000 american lives youre a fucking retard.

[Victis]

if your dumb fucking ass thinks this is in some way justification that the federal government would kill 3000 american lives youre a fucking retard.

Will, you've got a choice here..

Option 1: Dumb fucking ass

Option 2: Fucking retard

A little redundant but still a choice none the less!

[Damarus]

Victis, I got from you what I wanted with my question to you - Some kind of actual response and not just a 'loling' at Charlie, so I'm happy and I'll leave the derailing of this discussion by questioning your expertise, alone.

Now I'm at work so I don't really have time to go through all the links you provided and write an in depth response at the moment (by the way it was a fairly nice argument, regardless of if I tend not to agree with it), but picking up on a couple of things:

- Your theory seems to ignore the planes actually hitting the towers - like chowder said (nice simple posts by the way chowder), an enormous amount of force, and as I've stated before that energy can't just go nowhere, and yeah basically fire isn't the sole cause (can't be arsed recapping the effects of the energy);

- From the demolition theories I've read they believe it was thermate (thermite with sulfur I believe) which basically melts stuff. The theories don't say that bombs were blowing up the tower levels before each one fell;

- Concrete is a mix of cement, lime and water and aggregate. You can cut into concrete with a saw, it's by no means indestructible - it's basically powder with glue in it. Also the demolition theories claim the white was ash was from the thermite reaction, so yer this doesn't add up that it's now concrete...

- Steel doesn't have to melt to lose structural integrity. The towers were built to hold certain loads under certain conditions - when these are breached slightly, it causes like a mudslide effect - stacking ontop of each other. Also as far as steel goes, if you look at something like warehouse fires, you'll notice it takes bugger all to make a steel roof collapse. And well when your roof collapses, the thicker structural columns with much stronger latant heat properties still standing doesnt mean a lot.

- Your final point i could probably try to touch on with bending moments (note: probably. I'm not overly confident with this) in framed steelwork, but I don't have time and it would be hard for me to talk that advanced. Basically (I emphasise how basic this explanation is) I'll say though that the design theory is that if the outside framework of the building recieves the blunt of the force from the floors above collapsing, the energy sorta 'maxes out' the structural members and the floors that were before supported by bending moments pushing against the structural members now buckle without proper support, providing the outside frame with a slightly longer withstandability(?) to the falling of the tower above, kinda making sure the building pancakes.

So yeah, at a quick glance, while your points are as plausible (without strong knowledge on the details of the event - I can't be arsed reading all these papers and watching these videos people are posting in full), they seem to have as much evidence to provide alternate explanation as my theory. To lol at someone when both sides of the argument are hypothesised explanations (none of these papers I have actually read have claimed to be truth yet, only the media sources are claiming that), is a tad childish? if you like.


WOAH!!! HOLD ON A MINUTE. I just clicked the link at the bottom... You cut and pasted the argument? I thought I was talking directly with you on these theories lol :( Just incase you didn't know, so you don't take what the article says for gospel - Jim Hoffman is a software engineer. So while he does have a very strong knowledge on certain aspects, he's no more and possibly even less qualified to talk about construction materials, SDS and const. tech than myself - meaning what he knows is based on what he's read - The same as Will, Charlie and yourself (Note this is not me saying that I'm 100% correct and am some kind of super expert on this).

[Victis]

let me just try and cover the falling speed. ok, id like to cover this as easy as i can. i understand people who believe in this shit may be somewhat slow. ok, when the floors above the crashes give way and collapes suddenly on the floors below, the first floors would create little resistance for that much weight and force. as you move down the tower, the damage done may have been much less than above. however, as floors falls, and gain more debris with more floors, the weight and force grows exponentially. it wouldnt take long before even an undamaged support structure wouldnt buckle under that weight. thats the pancake theory. thats not even a theory, thats what the buildings are designed to do. if the bottom floors didnt buckle and pacake with that weight, the floors that had fallen above them, would have fallen into the surrounding area. why not just hand it to the designers for creating a building that did what it was supposed to? give under its own weight and pancake in on itself. so to clarify, the reason why there was little resistance, is because it was designed to be that way. the floors gave out as the floors above fell onto them. since they were designed to give, they did little to slow down the fall. if the falling debris was slowed too much or stopped completely, theres nothing to stop it from tipping off.

This theory is null and void due to the fact that the 'piston effect' of the top floors causing the bottom floors to pancake and stack (adding more and more weight) would have taken much longer to completely collapse.. you would have seen inconsistencies in the way it fell.. not a smooth transition all the way down.. no resistance would suggest that the floors were pulverized (and they were, into dust) ahead of the collapse.

he reason why there was little resistance, is because it was designed to be that way.

The building is designed to collapse in a somewhat controlled manner, if it does come to that.. it is NOT designed to just give way in a continuous free fall, that isn't design dude, shit doesn't work that way...

The building was designed to be able to withstand an impact from an aircraft.. the final explanation was that the fires weakened the support columns by extreme heat (apparently from temperatures those fires weren't capable of reaching)..

Simply stating there were VERY BIG FIRES.. and A FUCKING PLANE HIT IT .. HELLO!?! doesn't satisfy the growing number of people who are looking at the numbers and saying.. this doesn't add up. :/

I'm not denying that they took advantage of it, I whole heartedly agree, and quite frankly I think Bush, and his administration, should be brought to trial over it. I don't think they planned it, I don't think they told someone else to do it. Perhaps I'm a little naive in thinking that. There have been a multitude of American conspiracies throughout history, a smaller event would be easier to believe, but as all of us have stated in one of Will's threads, or another (and yes, we've all attempted to discuss with Will at one point or another), the sheer number of people needed to pull this off makes keeping it a secret impossible. Someone out there would have blown the whistle by now. If it comes to light that it was them, I will be shocked, appalled, and think even less of the government to the south. The "greatest" nation in the world will have killed 3000 of their own people, all for oil.

You're still under the assumption that the President is in control, he isn't.

[Victis]

Victis, I got from you what I wanted with my question to you - Some kind of actual response and not just a 'loling' at Charlie, so I'm happy and I'll leave the derailing of this discussion by questioning your expertise, alone.

Now I'm at work so I don't really have time to go through all the links you provided and write an in depth response at the moment (by the way it was a fairly nice argument, regardless of if I tend not to agree with it), but picking up on a couple of things:

- Your theory seems to ignore the planes actually hitting the towers - like chowder said (nice simple posts by the way chowder), an enormous amount of force, and as I've stated before that energy can't just go nowhere, and yeah basically fire isn't the sole cause (can't be arsed recapping the effects of the energy);

- From the demolition theories I've read they believe it was thermate (thermite with sulfur I believe) which basically melts stuff. The theories don't say that bombs were blowing up the tower levels before each one fell;

- Concrete is a mix of cement, lime and water and aggregate. You can cut into concrete with a saw, it's by no means indestructible - it's basically powder with glue in it. Also the demolition theories claim the white was ash was from the thermite reaction, so yer this doesn't add up that it's now concrete...

- Steel doesn't have to melt to lose structural integrity. The towers were built to hold certain loads under certain conditions - when these are breached slightly, it causes like a mudslide effect - stacking ontop of each other. Also as far as steel goes, if you look at something like warehouse fires, you'll notice it takes bugger all to make a steel roof collapse. And well when your roof collapses, the thicker structural columns with much stronger latant heat properties still standing doesnt mean a lot.

- Your final point i could probably try to touch on with bending moments (note: probably. I'm not overly confident with this) in framed steelwork, but I don't have time and it would be hard for me to talk that advanced. Basically (I emphasise how basic this explanation is) I'll say though that the design theory is that if the outside framework of the building recieves the blunt of the force from the floors above collapsing, the energy sorta 'maxes out' the structural members and the floors that were before supported by bending moments pushing against the structural members now buckle without proper support, providing the outside frame with a slightly longer withstandability(?) to the falling of the tower above, kinda making sure the building pancakes.

So yeah, at a quick glance, while your points are as plausible (without strong knowledge on the details of the event - I can't be arsed reading all these papers and watching these videos people are posting in full), they seem to have as much evidence to provide alternate explanation as my theory. To lol at someone when both sides of the argument are hypothesised explanations (none of these papers I have actually read have claimed to be truth yet, only the media sources are claiming that), is a tad childish? if you like.


WOAH!!! HOLD ON A MINUTE. I just clicked the link at the bottom... You cut and pasted the argument? I thought I was talking directly with you on these theories lol :( Just incase you didn't know, so you don't take what the article says for gospel - Jim Hoffman is a software engineer. So while he does have a very strong knowledge on certain aspects, he's no more and possibly even less qualified to talk about construction materials, SDS and const. tech than myself - meaning what he knows is based on what he's read - The same as Will, Charlie and yourself.

I was loling at 1 comment made by tassles.. I don't know if you missed it but, he was comparing Charlie to all the engineers and architects in the world (well, all of em as he stated).. thats what I lol'd at, not Charlie's ability to absorb and interpret information (and retain it!)..

I don't take anything as gospel, but, I do know some basic information (aside from ALL the other shit that doesn't add up.. some of these hijackers are alive? wth?.. hard to believe).. I take it for what it is..

I could see if there was 1 thing, or maybe a handful of issues that didn't have a clear explanation.. there is TONS of shit that doesn't make any sense.. how can an entire 767 disappear into the pentagon.. why won't they release the numerous angles that would show quite simply, a plane smacking straight into the pentagon.. or the flight that crashed out in that field.. no bodies, no aircraft..

To sum it up.. a LOT of things happened for the first time in history in that day.. an entire plane was vaporized, 3 buildings perfectly collapsed ontop of themselves, 1 not even being hit by an aircraft, and another aircraft crashed into a field and all its passengers, and the plane.. weren't to be found..

Here let me start a new thread that will throw even more shit into this storm.

[Damarus]

Lol ok my bad, I misinterpretted your original comment a little. As far as the pentagon and the plane in the field and that shit goes - I dont want to debate that. My field is basically architecture - I don't have the patience to study things like the planes dissapearing and that, I just wanted to share my views on the tower collapses.

One interesting thing I did read about tower 7 though, is that there was possible gains from blowing it up by citizens (note: not goverment), because of certain major records kept there, or debt collectors or something. So I couldn't put it past someone to look at what was happening around them and decide to run in with a few grenades and try to help a damaged building fall (yes thats farfetched, but so is this whole demolition conspiracy ;)).

[LordChowder]

This theory is null and void due to the fact that the 'piston effect' of the top floors causing the bottom floors to pancake and stack (adding more and more weight) would have taken much longer to completely collapse.. you would have seen inconsistencies in the way it fell.. not a smooth transition all the way down.. no resistance would suggest that the floors were pulverized (and they were, into dust) ahead of the collapse.
ok, so the initial claim is its thermite that brought down the towers. thermite does not pulverize jack shit. thermite is hot yes, but doesnt carry any explosive force, its not something that will pulverize an entire floor. sadly your ignorance clearly ignores the forces i mentioned. any idea how much force even just a few whole floors worth of concrete and steel weigh? there would be no inconsistencies because the towers were not designed to support that much force from the top. they were designed to GIVE under that kind of weight. and they did. any pulverization you see, would be caused by hitting the ground and being crushed by other debris. so both you and will claim to know the REAL TRUTH. which is it? thermite? or dynamite. keeping in mind itd take a while for thermite to eat through steel, and timing so precise itd have to be to the thousandth of a second to time those thermite reactions PERFECTLY. or, it could be dynamite which most implosions use. unfortunatly that doesnt work because anyone that has eyes, or ears can tell that wasnt used. check out some actual videos from implosions, and keep in mind youd need countless more explosives to bring down these towers. niggers like will hinge on these secondary explosions. well, the secondary explosions were probably caused as was pointed out before, the fire igniting what could have been many different things that could explode in a building. why couldnt it have been planted explosives? because the "secondary explosions" were minutes apart. not fractions of a second which is what is needed for directing the fall of buildings. why does everyone think its so easy to implode a building? do you know how much time, effort, and planning goes into it? first off! they strip the buildings drywall and such to get to the support beams. they weaken its structure over the course of weeks. then, they set up the explosives, which requires alot of drilling, pounding and other deconstruction. they gotta actually plant the tons of explosives, TONS.

so why is this not possible? because none of that shit happened. youd think in a building with thousand of people, theyd notice the entire building has been stripped and planted with explosives. while explosives may be an impractical way to bring down the building, and rather implausible. a more logical explanation may be that.. THE BUILDING FELL DUE TO THE CRUSHING FORCE OF THE FLOORS ABOVE.


The building is designed to collapse in a somewhat controlled manner, if it does come to that.. it is NOT designed to just give way in a continuous free fall, that isn't design dude, shit doesn't work that way...Yes, designed to collapse that way. and it doesnt matter, with that much force pushing down on it. its not going to give any resistance. its like putting a soda can on the ground and dropping a bowling ball on it. you can rest a bowling ball on a soda can, and it wont crush it. drop it, and the can gives nearly 0 resistance.

The building was designed to be able to withstand an impact from an aircraft.. the final explanation was that the fires weakened the support columns by extreme heat (apparently from temperatures those fires weren't capable of reaching)..it did technically withstand the impact. unfortunatly, with the continuing fire damage and the warping steel, the floors above the fires gave way triggering the pancake effect.

Simply stating there were VERY BIG FIRES.. and A FUCKING PLANE HIT IT .. HELLO!?! doesn't satisfy the growing number of people who are looking at the numbers and saying.. this doesn't add up. :/growing number of dumb shits. usually when someone says "Yeah, 2 jumbo jets slammed into the side of a building and exploded all their burning jet fuel inside" you dont think "well, atleast there was minimal damage and the building is probably still structually sound"



You're still under the assumption that the President is in control, he isn't.ok buddy.

[CharlieM]

Heres the brief dot-points of the report I fowarded to one of my professors.



Kerosene burns at roughly 468.33C.
Steel beams in WTC melt at 1,537C.
It would take 1,093C to soften the beams.
It would take half that to break down the charcoal within the steel on direct flame contact. (Sulphur dioxide within office equipment exposed to soft steel destroys the charcoal, turning the steel to brittle iron ore.).
Molten steel found in basement levels of WTC support beams.
500kg Marble Slabs blown off the walls in the lobby.
Windows blown out in the lobby.
Elevator door blown out in the lobby.
Explosions heard on ground floors.
Bomb theory takes shape.
Hard Facts:
A Boeing 767 weighs 186,883kg (max).
Its cruise speed is 854 km/h. (237 ms-1)
1kg=9.8 Newtons.
Its length is 48.5m.
The total weight of each tower was ~500,000 tons. (500,000,000 kg).
Weight in newtons is 4,900,000,000N
Momentum = Mass * Velocity (P=MV).
P = 186,883*237.
P = 44,291,271 kgm/sec.
Momentum is a potential energy of any given object, with any given velocity.
The length of a 767 is 48.5m.
If the plane is travelling at cruise speed, the impact event took 0.2 seconds.
Force=∆momentum/∆time.
Force= 44,291,271 /0.2.
Force = 221,456,355 newtons.
4,900,000,000 / 221,456,355 = 22.12.
That’s 22.12 newtons of force, acting horizontally on the building per kg of material.
What forces would the base of an anchored medium undergo, if a further 22.12 newtons acted on the tip of its unanchored section ?
Vector additions!!
9.8^2+ 22.12^2 =Weight Force.
96.04 + 489.29 =585.33.
sqrt.(585.33)= 24.2 newtons.
That’s 24.2 newtons acting per 1 normal kg of building material.

Essentially, the instant the plane hit, the towers weight force increased by 228%.
That’s equal to 2.28 kg more weight per 1 normal kg of mass.
If the tower is 500,000,000kg, and is 110 storeys high, then each floor averaged out weighs 4,545,455kg.
The new weight on impact per floor is 10,227,272 kg.
That’s an increase of 5,681,818kg per floor, or 228% more weight per floor.
Tower Floor Layout
Able to support 8,454,550kg's surplus weight.http://home.iprimus.com.au/quarrion/images/floor_layout.gif

The weight of the floor was held up by 26 angle clips.
Load per clip prior to crash is 174,825 kg.
Load limit per clip is 500,000 kg (limit at which the clips begin to break down due to stress fractures)
7 clips destroyed during crash.
Load spread amongst remaining 19 clips.
Angle clips composed of same steel in supporting collumns.
Load per clip during collision is 530,000 kgs.
Clips severly stress fractured.
Stress fractured Angle clips exposed to fire, and subsequent sulphur dioxide gasses (burning office equipment) turns the steel clips to iron, significantly reducing capability to hold weight.
Clips give way, and floor collapses, bringing down combined weight of 8 floors above it (36,363,640 surplus kg's of floor slamming onto a floor that can barely hold 8,454,550 surplus kg's, immediate structural failure, and pancakeing occurs)
Shock loading a 110 story building, weighing 500,000,000 kg, causing severe structural damage to the supporting beams, foundation, and supporting struts, with an inferno heating up severely stressed supports led to the collapse of the building.

Ill clean it up later, just got home.

Resources for the figures used were boeing for the planes stats, port authority for maximum estimated weight of the tower (and floor layout), and good ole materials and structures physics book, and knowledge of motion and heat physics for the other shit.

I didnt really explain the melted steel in the basements (which a lot of people link to thermite), but most that force during the impact, as Ive said earlier, found its way to ground, which happned to be in the basement.

That force pooled and seriously heated the steel down there, it also buckled the structure from the inside (cause of the "explosion" sounds people heard, mechanical plant taking some of the force and exploding no doubt, and marble slabs / windows being blown out at the lobby)

[LordChowder]

yeah, theres that.. or, it was explosives!1!

[CharlieM]

....Guess I killed this thread :(

[LordChowder]

basically said what i said, but with numbers and pictures.

[exiledone]

Waaaa go cry to mommy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/parenting/images/300/baby_crying_closeup.jpg

no, now we have some good points coming up besides charlies, but before that, there was nothing but back and forth argueing, so how about you stop pretending to be the whine police and go play lineage2 chronicle 2142 where you finally can pvp and not get raped by blaze pzz

[Will]

notice how i have 5k less points will

<3

I'm the first to admit I'm not strong on WTC7 (I didn't know it existed until like a year ago - I was never really that into the 9/11 attacks passed what I needed to know from the media [ie. how many were dead, what hit the towers, them falling, etc], conspiracy theories etc didn't interest me and from what I had seen I could draw enough logical conclusions to be happy).

I offer only the theory that they were brought down by controlled demolition. Many eyewitnesses (including fireman and policeman) state they heard multiple explosions before the towers came down. These are people in a position to know what explosions (that are caused by explosives) sound like. It is hard for me to discount their eyewitness accounts.

From what I've researched on the tower, it was built on top of a Con Edison substation, which had it's foundations designed to carry the load of a future building on the site. Apparently though, the final building covered a much larger footprint than planned when the substation was built in the 1960's. Now this is obviously crucial to the transfer of loads through the building, if the foundation can't cope with the load being sent through it to earth, then basically it's like overloading a circuit. You've got a whole lot of energy with no where to go. Now this probly wasn't a problem until a tonne of debris was falling onto the tower, and ontop of that it seems that debris had damaged the tower from the ground, up until about the 18th floor. When each structural column in the building was responsible for 186 square meters of floor space, it seems pretty plausible that removing a few of them wouldn't do much for your structural integrity. As for how the building fell - Again skyscrapers are designed not to topple sideways or anything, in order to limit damage to the surrounding environment.

Not sure if I can stipulate that a "tonne" of debris fell on WTC 7. If it did, and that was the cause of WTC 7's collapse, then how on earth did the debris not push the building over? Why did WTC 7 fall in exactly the same fashion as the first two towers?

why does everyone who believes in conspiracies ignore huge obvious points of information? fire damage didn't bring down the towers alone. you have VERY severe fires, tons of jet fuel, and an office building filled with furniture and paper, and other officely goods that burn quite well. now, as this is all fine and dandy, and a fire sure to cause massive damage and weaken the structural integrity by itself... 2 FUCKING PASSENGER PLANES JUST CRASHED INTO THE BUILDINGS. HELLO? ARE WE FAMILIAR WITH THE AMOUNT OF FORCE THAT WOULD BE IN A FUCKING PASSENGER PLANE TRAVELING THAT FAST, SMACKING INTO THE SIDE OF A BUILDING!? why is this so hard for people. fire damage alone wouldnt even have to take it down. shit was a flying bomb.

First, thanks for joining the discussion. Perhaps now we can dispense with the insults.

As to "sever fire damage", Ill grant you that on the first two towers, but not in WTC 7 (the fire was limited to two floors). How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?

I'm not denying that they took advantage of it, I whole heartedly agree, and quite frankly I think Bush, and his administration, should be brought to trial over it. I don't think they planned it, I don't think they told someone else to do it. Perhaps I'm a little naive in thinking that. There have been a multitude of American conspiracies throughout history, a smaller event would be easier to believe, but as all of us have stated in one of Will's threads, or another (and yes, we've all attempted to discuss with Will at one point or another), the sheer number of people needed to pull this off makes keeping it a secret impossible. Someone out there would have blown the whistle by now. If it comes to light that it was them, I will be shocked, appalled, and think even less of the government to the south. The "greatest" nation in the world will have killed 3000 of their own people, all for oil.

Anyways, Will, you are by definition, insane. You keep posting these threads on this board, expecting a different result every time. Until there is some independent report that holds some clout, I won't be giving into the conspiracy machine that is the Internet.

Dude, who are you trying to kid? You never attempted to discuss anything with me, not in this lifetime. All you have ever done is suggest, as loudly as you possibly could, that my subject matter (and my mere presence for that matter) was inappropriate for the people here; no one wants to hear it; yadda yadda yadda; as though you were some supreme director of content or something. You furthermore advised me personally of what I should do with both myself and my ideas. You did all this while I will simply trying to have a collegial discussion. Don't be a hypocrite and pretend you have been mature when these threads appear.

one should probably note, you may want to postpone opening your eyes. this plan was rejected by kennedy, and the creator of the plan was made to step down. also, any bit of research into the plan will point out it wasnt on us soil, and the plan didnt call for the murder of american civilians. it was a plan for america to go to war with cuba... wow its the cold war, we did lots of logical things during the cold war when our entire foreign policy is based on preventing the spread of communism. it called for things like sinking an unmanned us naval ship near cuba, staged attacks on a military base on cuba. etc etc if your dumb fucking ass thinks this is in some way justification that the federal government would kill 3000 american lives youre a fucking retard.

I posted Northwoods to prove elements of the US govt (here, I know you like caps) HAVE PLANNED TO EXECUTE ATTACKS ON US CITIES AND CIVILIANS IN ORDER TO GENERATE A PRETEXT FOR WAR. Hopefully, you can now incorporate that into your vast wealth of knowledge. Did you know Kennedy was murdered soon after he rejected this plan?

I don't use this as justification, since you still seem slightly slow on the uptake, I use this as proof that we have planned to in the past.

[Grindrolas]

I offer only the theory that they were brought down by controlled demolition. Many eyewitnesses (including fireman and policeman) state they heard multiple explosions before the towers came down. These are people in a position to know what explosions (that are caused by explosives) sound like. It is hard for me to discount their eyewitness accounts.
So now explosions sound different? Furthermore, firemen and policemen, who at the time are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, have the time to stop and analyze whether that sounded like dynamite or, ya know, something inside the building exploding (something like what Polarised has pointed out, someone who has a degree and can talk about structural design with some form of expertise?) Your argument is that policemen and firemen claim that they heard dynamite going off, in all of the hell that was ensuing?

Not sure if I can stipulate that a "tonne" of debris fell on WTC 7. If it did, and that was the cause of WTC 7's collapse, then how on earth did the debris not push the building over? Why did WTC 7 fall in exactly the same fashion as the first two towers?
How many times do people have to tell you that that is what buildings of that size are designed to do. They are designed to fall straight down if they're going to fall at all.

First, thanks for joining the discussion. Perhaps now we can dispense with the insults.

As to "sever fire damage", Ill grant you that on the first two towers, but not in WTC 7 (the fire was limited to two floors). How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?
See above.

Dude, who are you trying to kid? You never attempted to discuss anything with me, not in this lifetime. All you have ever done is suggest, as loudly as you possibly could, that my subject matter (and my mere presence for that matter) was inappropriate for the people here; no one wants to hear it; yadda yadda yadda; as though you were some supreme director of content or something. You furthermore advised me personally of what I should do with both myself and my ideas. You did all this while I will simply trying to have a collegial discussion. Don't be a hypocrite and pretend you have been mature when these threads appear.
Will, you've been posting these threads since the blah days. I'm fairly certain I tried to have some form of a conversation with you on it back then, but I learned pretty quickly that you are the type of person that gets one of these conspiracy theories in his head, and thats the truth, nothing else is. Whats next, are you gonna join the kids who say the moon doesn't exist, or that Armstrong never walked on it?

I posted Northwoods to prove elements of the US govt (here, I know you like caps) HAVE PLANNED TO EXECUTE ATTACKS ON US CITIES AND CIVILIANS IN ORDER TO GENERATE A PRETEXT FOR WAR. Hopefully, you can now incorporate that into your vast wealth of knowledge. Did you know Kennedy was murdered soon after he rejected this plan?

I don't use this as justification, since you still seem slightly slow on the uptake, I use this as proof that we have planned to in the past.
Did you even bother to read what Chowder said?
one should probably note, you may want to postpone opening your eyes. this plan was rejected by kennedy, and the creator of the plan was made to step down. also, any bit of research into the plan will point out it wasnt on us soil, and the plan didnt call for the murder of american civilians. it was a plan for america to go to war with cuba... wow its the cold war, we did lots of logical things during the cold war when our entire foreign policy is based on preventing the spread of communism. it called for things like sinking an unmanned us naval ship near cuba, staged attacks on a military base on cuba. etc etc if your dumb fucking ass thinks this is in some way justification that the federal government would kill 3000 american lives youre a fucking retard.

[Talorth]

WTC 7 (the fire was limited to two floors). How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?

Do you even listen to anyone for crying out loud?

[LordChowder]

I offer only the theory that they were brought down by controlled demolition. Many eyewitnesses (including fireman and policeman) state they heard multiple explosions before the towers came down. These are people in a position to know what explosions (that are caused by explosives) sound like. It is hard for me to discount their eyewitness accounts.


any level of literacy would help to answer your questions here. i already stated, EVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN TESTIMONY THE EXPLOSIONS WERE MINUTES APART.
so what does this mean? well VERY VERY clearly its shit inside the building buckling and exploding due to.. oh i dunno... THE HUGE FUCKING FIRE!?!?! if they were demolition explosions, you'd here HUNDREDS of explosions within seconds. OR, if it was thermite you'd here somewhere between the number of 0 and say... 0. what theory are you even following? thermite? or explosives? do you even know? do you even know what thermite is? do you know what an explosive is? DO YOU KNOW SHIT AT ALL? wheres the expert here? and one final fucking question. ARE YOU NEW?

Not sure if I can stipulate that a "tonne" of debris fell on WTC 7. If it did, and that was the cause of WTC 7's collapse, then how on earth did the debris not push the building over? Why did WTC 7 fall in exactly the same fashion as the first two towers?

again, LITERACY IS A VIRTUE. its not "some fires, and minimal debris" you have very severe fires burning at the base of the building near CRITICAL support beams. you have NO WORKING FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM DUE TO A BROKEN WATER MAIN. you have BUTT FUCKING TONS OF DEBRIS FROM 2 GIANT SKY SCRAPERS falling onto the building. again, how wouldnt it fall?





First, thanks for joining the discussion. Perhaps now we can dispense with the insults.


GET BETTER, GET SMARTER.


As to "sever fire damage", Ill grant you that on the first two towers, but not in WTC 7 (the fire was limited to two floors). How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?

SEVERE, yes SEVERE. again! did you know the effort that goes into a building implosion?!?!?! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA!? HUH MISTER EXPERT(LOL!)?

no? well heres some images from a building set for implosion

http://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/+02.jpghttp://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/testshot.jpghttp://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/columns.jpg
Important things to point out! OH, YEAH, LOOK! NO WALLS!? huge pieces of support beams REMOVED? MASSIVE DECONSTRUCTION? none at WTC7 either. give these implosion EXPERTS (real experts) some credit. the amount of math, engineering, and know-how is absurd. george bush putting a stick of TNT down the elevator shaft of WTC7 aint gunna bring it down idiot.



Dude, who are you trying to kid? You never attempted to discuss anything with me, not in this lifetime. All you have ever done is suggest, as loudly as you possibly could, that my subject matter (and my mere presence for that matter) was inappropriate for the people here; no one wants to hear it; yadda yadda yadda; as though you were some supreme director of content or something. You furthermore advised me personally of what I should do with both myself and my ideas. You did all this while I will simply trying to have a collegial discussion. Don't be a hypocrite and pretend you have been mature when these threads appear.

You're not in any position to have any conversation above the kindergarten level.



I posted Northwoods to prove elements of the US govt (here, I know you like caps) HAVE PLANNED TO EXECUTE ATTACKS ON US CITIES AND CIVILIANS IN ORDER TO GENERATE A PRETEXT FOR WAR. Hopefully, you can now incorporate that into your vast wealth of knowledge. Did you know Kennedy was murdered soon after he rejected this plan?

I don't use this as justification, since you still seem slightly slow on the uptake, I use this as proof that we have planned to in the past.

holy shit you really are a dumb, illiterate, ignorant, arrogant nigger. DONT ABUSE CAPS, I USE THEM TO POINT OUT OBVIOUS THINGS THAT ARE TRUE. YOU'RE DEGRADING THEM BY POINTING OUT FALSE INFORMATION. AGAIN, READ THE DETAILS OF THE PLAN. ITS NOT USE CITIES, IT ISN'T US CITIZENS, AND ITS NOT MASS MURDER. can someone please translate this into spanish or something? i don't know what will's first language is, but it clearly isn't english.


EXPERTS LOL!

[Damarus]

We've offered our explanations for the falling of all 3 towers including the way the fire damage was a cause and the extent to which it was a cause, talked about the debris falling on the WTC7 tower, the debris damaging the base of the tower, the limited capacity of the foundations of the tower and the massive amounts of force present (obviously it all comes down to this - any load on a building is a force. all construction is based on distributions of force when you break it down).

To disbelieve our theory is fine, as we do not have discernable proof (just mathematically deduce and logical results) but to continue to ignore our conclusions and continue to question our theories (ie. "How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?") after we have explained them is... I dunno ignorant? Might not be the word... But yeah you are apparently failing to register chunks of the arguments here - I think we are going to tire of recapping the same points over and over soon...

You're just trying to further this thread in order to gain more points from it and try to overthrow me as Richest user >.>

[BLACK]

Why did you capitalize richest? D:

[Damarus]

I meant to capitalise user aswell >.>

Because Richest User is like my official title!!! Oh and King of Arcade aswell :p

[BLACK]

You make me horny.

[damme]

Do you even listen to anyone for crying out loud?

Thats the thing with believers in conspiracy theories, you can disprove them over and over again and they'll still use the same circular arguments. It's impossible to change their minds.

[CharlieM]

Did you even read my post Will ?????????????

[Talorth]

Thats the thing with believers in conspiracy theories, you can disprove them over and over again and they'll still use the same circular arguments. It's impossible to change their minds.

I like conspiracy theories, but the 9/11 conspiracy theories are .... so far from the truth they make jehovah's look rational.

[CharlieM]

Address my post will.
Thanks.

[Inxile]

lol @ will calling black chubby cheeks

i call my nephew thats 9 months old that >.> lolz!

[Will]

So now explosions sound different? Furthermore, firemen and policemen, who at the time are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, have the time to stop and analyze whether that sounded like dynamite or, ya know, something inside the building exploding (something like what Polarised has pointed out, someone who has a degree and can talk about structural design with some form of expertise?) Your argument is that policemen and firemen claim that they heard dynamite going off, in all of the hell that was ensuing?

"Explosions" and "crashes" can sound different, believe it or not. I didn't say they heard dynamite....I said they heard explosions.

How many times do people have to tell you that that is what buildings of that size are designed to do. They are designed to fall straight down if they're going to fall at all.

Well if that was the case, which it wasn't, then how come we bother with controlled demolition at all? If all the buildings are designed to just come straight down regardless of how they may become unstable, then what's the point of tsking days (in some instances) setting up all that demo?

Will, you've been posting these threads since the blah days. I'm fairly certain I tried to have some form of a conversation with you on it back then, but I learned pretty quickly that you are the type of person that gets one of these conspiracy theories in his head, and thats the truth, nothing else is. Whats next, are you gonna join the kids who say the moon doesn't exist, or that Armstrong never walked on it?

You shouldn't be so certain on this but If you would like, I'll pretend you did. I remember you as one of the very first to denigrate. If you recall the text of my first blah thread (I do, it was a painful experience), I stated it as a challenge in hopes someone could prove me wrong on my assertions. No one did. We discussed the towers falling, much as we are doing now, largely because it is the only debatable area of the day imo. Everything else is so ridiculously cut and dry that people just avoid it at all costs.

[Will]

ok, so the initial claim is its thermite that brought down the towers. thermite does not pulverize jack shit. thermite is hot yes, but doesnt carry any explosive force, its not something that will pulverize an entire floor. sadly your ignorance clearly ignores the forces i mentioned. any idea how much force even just a few whole floors worth of concrete and steel weigh? there would be no inconsistencies because the towers were not designed to support that much force from the top. they were designed to GIVE under that kind of weight. and they did. any pulverization you see, would be caused by hitting the ground and being crushed by other debris. so both you and will claim to know the REAL TRUTH. which is it? thermite? or dynamite. keeping in mind itd take a while for thermite to eat through steel, and timing so precise itd have to be to the thousandth of a second to time those thermite reactions PERFECTLY. or, it could be dynamite which most implosions use. unfortunatly that doesnt work because anyone that has eyes, or ears can tell that wasnt used. check out some actual videos from implosions, and keep in mind youd need countless more explosives to bring down these towers. niggers like will hinge on these secondary explosions. well, the secondary explosions were probably caused as was pointed out before, the fire igniting what could have been many different things that could explode in a building. why couldnt it have been planted explosives? because the "secondary explosions" were minutes apart. not fractions of a second which is what is needed for directing the fall of buildings. why does everyone think its so easy to implode a building? do you know how much time, effort, and planning goes into it? first off! they strip the buildings drywall and such to get to the support beams. they weaken its structure over the course of weeks. then, they set up the explosives, which requires alot of drilling, pounding and other deconstruction. they gotta actually plant the tons of explosives, TONS.

I see you are back to name calling, oh well, I tried. Still butthurt at getting mentally owned I guess...very well Mr Ahmadinijad, if you are such an expert on Thermite and exactly how it reacts (also, the types of Thermite/thermate munitions the us govt has at it's disposal) please provide some links; I can't take anything you say as gospel...sorry.

so why is this not possible? because none of that shit happened. youd think in a building with thousand of people, theyd notice the entire building has been stripped and planted with explosives. while explosives may be an impractical way to bring down the building, and rather implausible. a more logical explanation may be that.. THE BUILDING FELL DUE TO THE CRUSHING FORCE OF THE FLOORS ABOVE.

Did you read what you wrote here? Maybe I am taking it out of context, although I can't see how....demolition is the PREFERRED method for taking buildings down for obvious reasons. Your pancake theory has been rebutted many times already....see this one which just employs common sense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdQh18kvpRU

growing number of dumb shits. usually when someone says "Yeah, 2 jumbo jets slammed into the side of a building and exploded all their burning jet fuel inside" you dont think "well, atleast there was minimal damage and the building is probably still structually sound"

You keep forgetting to explain how WTC 7 could fall in exactly the same way as the first two towers when it WASN'T hit by a plane. That's ok, so did the 9/11 commission.

[Will]

Lol ok my bad, I misinterpretted your original comment a little. As far as the pentagon and the plane in the field and that shit goes - I dont want to debate that. My field is basically architecture - I don't have the patience to study things like the planes dissapearing and that, I just wanted to share my views on the tower collapses.

One interesting thing I did read about tower 7 though, is that there was possible gains from blowing it up by citizens (note: not goverment), because of certain major records kept there, or debt collectors or something. So I couldn't put it past someone to look at what was happening around them and decide to run in with a few grenades and try to help a damaged building fall (yes thats farfetched, but so is this whole demolition conspiracy ;)).

It would have taken a lot more then grenades. It would have taken at least a day or two to plan and set up that controlled demolition.

We've offered our explanations for the falling of all 3 towers including the way the fire damage was a cause and the extent to which it was a cause, talked about the debris falling on the WTC7 tower, the debris damaging the base of the tower, the limited capacity of the foundations of the tower and the massive amounts of force present (obviously it all comes down to this - any load on a building is a force. all construction is based on distributions of force when you break it down).

To disbelieve our theory is fine, as we do not have discernable proof (just mathematically deduce and logical results) but to continue to ignore our conclusions and continue to question our theories (ie. "How do you explain this when WTC 7 didn't get hit by a plane but fell the EXACT same way the first two towers did?") after we have explained them is... I dunno ignorant? Might not be the word... But yeah you are apparently failing to register chunks of the arguments here - I think we are going to tire of recapping the same points over and over soon...

You're just trying to further this thread in order to gain more points from it and try to overthrow me as Richest user >.>

The entire reason I have tried to move away from the towers and discuss the many other anomalies of the day is because of what you state. You and Charlie M's theoretical beliefs as to what could have brought the towers down are hard for me to attempt to discount. I can go and find other people's research but I would much prefer to focus on areas that don't require a degree in physics or structural engineering. Example:

How is it so many of the 19 hijackers are still alive?

[Will]

Address my post will.
Thanks.

Which? Hard to keep track of them all :/

Hey wait, did you address mine on some of the "alleged" hijackers being alive to this day?

I like conspiracy theories, but the 9/11 conspiracy theories are .... so far from the truth they make jehovah's look rational.

That sounds very rational of you.

[CharlieM]

You know...the one that proves mathematically how a plane can bring down a tower....page 16..

..This one.
http://www.themondrated.com/showpost.php?p=51379&postcount=313

I dont need to address the claim, as its no evidence whatsoever towards a theory that the govt. orchestrated a controlled demolition in light of provable maths that dictates the tower would collapse when struck by a 767 airliner.

Not to mention that names are not wholely unique identifiers of a human being, if you look hard enough you can find plenty of George Washington Bush's around the world, both alive and dead...does this indicate that they too, are all totally incompetant presidants of the current administration within the united states of america ???

[Will]

any level of literacy would help to answer your questions here. i already stated, EVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN TESTIMONY THE EXPLOSIONS WERE MINUTES APART.
so what does this mean? well VERY VERY clearly its shit inside the building buckling and exploding due to.. oh i dunno... THE HUGE FUCKING FIRE!?!?! if they were demolition explosions, you'd here HUNDREDS of explosions within seconds. OR, if it was thermite you'd here somewhere between the number of 0 and say... 0. what theory are you even following? thermite? or explosives? do you even know? do you even know what thermite is? do you know what an explosive is? DO YOU KNOW SHIT AT ALL? wheres the expert here? and one final fucking question. ARE YOU NEW?

You seem to be ranting and angry, maybe you should take a break. The explosions being minutes apart means what exactly? Again with the HUGE fire insinuation, but not in WTC7. BTW thermate is a brand name for thermite (the material). Thermate can and is used for, wait for it, explosives:

Thermate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermate#column-one), search (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermate#searchInput)
Thermate is an incendiary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incendiary) compound used for military applications. Thermate, whose primary component is thermite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite), also contains sulfur and possibly barium nitrate, both of which increase its thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature. Various mixtures of these compounds can be called thermate, but, to avoid confusion with Thermate-TH3, one can refer to them as thermite variants or analogs. The composition by weight of Thermate-TH3 (in military use) is 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium_nitrate), 2.0% sulphur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur) and 0.3% binder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binder_%28material%29).



again, LITERACY IS A VIRTUE. its not "some fires, and minimal debris" you have very severe fires burning at the base of the building near CRITICAL support beams. you have NO WORKING FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM DUE TO A BROKEN WATER MAIN. you have BUTT FUCKING TONS OF DEBRIS FROM 2 GIANT SKY SCRAPERS falling onto the building. again, how wouldnt it fall?

Ok tool boy, show me the raging inferno in WTC 7. Also, show me proof of this ton of debris falling on WtC7.

SEVERE, yes SEVERE. again! did you know the effort that goes into a building implosion?!?!?! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA!? HUH MISTER EXPERT(LOL!)?

no? well heres some images from a building set for implosion

http://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/+02.jpghttp://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/testshot.jpghttp://www.pacificblasting.com/implosion/columns.jpg
Important things to point out! OH, YEAH, LOOK! NO WALLS!? huge pieces of support beams REMOVED? MASSIVE DECONSTRUCTION? none at WTC7 either. give these implosion EXPERTS (real experts) some credit. the amount of math, engineering, and know-how is absurd. george bush putting a stick of TNT down the elevator shaft of WTC7 aint gunna bring it down idiot.

I'm sorry, were these pics of the towers and wtc 7, they sure don't look like it. Maybe you just really confused. Perhaps you should go smoke some more ganja or something, take the edge off.

holy shit you really are a dumb, illiterate, ignorant, arrogant nigger. DONT ABUSE CAPS, I USE THEM TO POINT OUT OBVIOUS THINGS THAT ARE TRUE. YOU'RE DEGRADING THEM BY POINTING OUT FALSE INFORMATION. AGAIN, READ THE DETAILS OF THE PLAN. ITS NOT USE CITIES, IT ISN'T US CITIZENS, AND ITS NOT MASS MURDER. can someone please translate this into spanish or something? i don't know what will's first language is, but it clearly isn't english.


EXPERTS LOL!

Hey raghead, I'LL ABUSE CAPS ALL I FUCKING WANT, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT? YOU USE CAPS TO MAKE YOURSELF FEEL IMPORTANT, MUCH THE SAME WAY YOU USE INSULTS. I'D WAGER THIS CONDITION EXISTS BECAUSE YOU WERE EITHER DROPPED ON YOUR HEAD OR DIDN'T GET ENOUGH ATTENTION AS A CHILD.

I HAVE YET TO SEE YOU PROVE ANYTHING I HAVE SAID TO BE FALSE. YOU HAVE YET TO ADDRESS ANYTHING OTHER THEN THE TOWERS. SOME HAVE OFFERED ALTERNATIVE THEORIES AS TO THE COLLAPSE OF THE BUILDINGS BUT YOU SEEM TO BE CONVINCED OF YOUR OWN SUPERIOR INTELLECT IN THIS REGARD. YOU ARE A YOUNG KID WHO DOESN'T KNOW SHIT BUT THINKS HE DOES. I CAN EMPATHIZE, I HAVE BEEN YOUR AGE. I REMEMBER FEELING THE EXACT SAME WAY. HOPEFULLY, IF YOU EVER GET A LITTLE LIFE EXPERIENCE, YOU WILL SNAP OUT OF IT, UNTIL THEN...FUCK YOU.

[Grog]

"Explosions" and "crashes" can sound different, believe it or not. I didn't say they heard dynamite....I said they heard explosions.
oooo! OOOOOO! something i know about!
just bear in mind eye witness testimonies are not very reliable
you can change what someone remembers simply by the way you phrase a question
hell i might even dig out that vid of the australian guy going around new york asking people what month 9/11 happened

also bear in mind i'm not too interested in debating with you, just interjected with a relevant point (for once)

[Will]

You know...the one that proves mathematically how a plane can bring down a tower....page 16..

..This one.
http://www.themondrated.com/showpost.php?p=51379&postcount=313

I dont need to address the claim, as its no evidence whatsoever towards a theory that the govt. orchestrated a controlled demolition in light of provable maths that dictates the tower would collapse when struck by a 767 airliner.

Not to mention that names are not wholely unique identifiers of a human being, if you look hard enough you can find plenty of George Washington Bush's around the world, both alive and dead...does this indicate that they too, are all totally incompetant presidants of the current administration within the united states of america ???

As to your explanation, it's wonderful :) I have already stipulated there is no clear cut answer we are gonna come up with regarding the actual collapse of the towers. There is tons of evidence that the government orchestrated these attacks.

Were you aware that Cheney, who was in charge of Norad at the time of the attacks, ordered our fighters to stand down? Some interesting things here:

Cheney Caught Ordering Air Force Stand down
on September 11, 2001

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm
9/11 Commission Report
Chapter 1, Page 31

"The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols."

**Cheney lies about his activities to coverup conversation overheard by Mineta. http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/11/ar911.king.cheney/
Cheney recalls taking charge from bunker
WASHINGTON (CNN) --As horrified Americans watched the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, unfold on their television sets, Vice President Dick Cheney directed the U.S. government's response from an emergency bunker.
......
After the planes struck the twin towers, a third took a chunk out of the Pentagon. Cheney then heard a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington. A military assistant asked Cheney twice for authority to shoot it down.
"The vice president said yes again," remembered Josh Bolton, deputy White House chief of staff. "And the aide then asked a third time. He said, 'Just confirming, sir, authority to engage?' And the vice president -- his voice got a little annoyed then -- said, 'I said yes.'"
It was a rare flash of anger from a man who knew he was setting the tone at a White House in crisis.

**This isn't the Pennsylvania plane, its the Pentagon plane. And this isn't a shoot down order. Why would a defense order be questioned 3 times? This can only be an AF Stand Down order. http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES
Public Hearing; Friday, May 23, 2003, Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216
Washington, DC
MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --
MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --
MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.
MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

If this is a shoot down order, whats the urgency at 10 miles? There was no plane engaging at that distance.
Why did Cheney lie and say this was referring to United Airlines flight 93 when clearly he is referring to American Airlines 77 heading towards the Pentagon.
Why does this discussion upset Cheney? Why does he silence the aide? Is he scared the aide will reveal what the orders are to Transportation Secretary Mineta?
The Pentagon defensive system was not activated. Jets at Andrews Air Force base sat on the ground. The plane is 10 miles out, do the orders still stand, Mr. Cheney?
Pre-existing protocols were not followed. AF Jet engagement was standard protocol, there is no need for Cheney to order standard protocol.

[Damarus]

RnP0snh_1cU

[Will]

RnP0snh_1cU

And some people wonder how the government ever thought they could get away with something like this.....

[Grindrolas]

As to your explanation, it's wonderful :) I have already stipulated there is no clear cut answer we are gonna come up with regarding the actual collapse of the towers. There is tons of evidence that the government orchestrated these attacks.

Were you aware that Cheney, who was in charge of Norad at the time of the attacks, ordered our fighters to stand down? Some interesting things here:

Cheney Caught Ordering Air Force Stand down
on September 11, 2001

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm
9/11 Commission Report
Chapter 1, Page 31

"The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols."

**Cheney lies about his activities to coverup conversation overheard by Mineta. http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/11/ar911.king.cheney/
Cheney recalls taking charge from bunker
WASHINGTON (CNN) --As horrified Americans watched the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, unfold on their television sets, Vice President Dick Cheney directed the U.S. government's response from an emergency bunker.
......
After the planes struck the twin towers, a third took a chunk out of the Pentagon. Cheney then heard a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington. A military assistant asked Cheney twice for authority to shoot it down.
"The vice president said yes again," remembered Josh Bolton, deputy White House chief of staff. "And the aide then asked a third time. He said, 'Just confirming, sir, authority to engage?' And the vice president -- his voice got a little annoyed then -- said, 'I said yes.'"
It was a rare flash of anger from a man who knew he was setting the tone at a White House in crisis.

**This isn't the Pennsylvania plane, its the Pentagon plane. And this isn't a shoot down order. Why would a defense order be questioned 3 times? This can only be an AF Stand Down order. http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES
Public Hearing; Friday, May 23, 2003, Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216
Washington, DC
MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --
MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --
MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.
MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

If this is a shoot down order, whats the urgency at 10 miles? There was no plane engaging at that distance.
Why did Cheney lie and say this was referring to United Airlines flight 93 when clearly he is referring to American Airlines 77 heading towards the Pentagon.
Why does this discussion upset Cheney? Why does he silence the aide? Is he scared the aide will reveal what the orders are to Transportation Secretary Mineta?
The Pentagon defensive system was not activated. Jets at Andrews Air Force base sat on the ground. The plane is 10 miles out, do the orders still stand, Mr. Cheney?
Pre-existing protocols were not followed. AF Jet engagement was standard protocol, there is no need for Cheney to order standard protocol.
Hold on, one minute you're arguing that it might not have even been a plane, and the next you're saying it was and that Cheney ordered the Airforce to stand down, therefore telling them to let it hit the pentagon? Make up your mind Will, was it a plane, or was it something else?

[Will]

Hold on, one minute you're arguing that it might not have even been a plane, and the next you're saying it was and that Cheney ordered the Airforce to stand down, therefore telling them to let it hit the pentagon? Make up your mind Will, was it a plane, or was it something else?

At this point, I am arguing Cheney was directly responsible for our air defense's stand down on 9/11. W/E was moving 'tword the Pentagon was clearly not to be shot down.

[Extarian]

I learned the following from this thread;

- if someone knows how to use Windows NT servers and host a web site, they must be qualified to talk about building construction;

So, since someone who knows how to administer a Windows NT server is qualified to speak about building construction, and I administrate multiple NT/2000/2003 servers, I think I am qualified to talk about everything from biological decay in labrats through to the atomic structure of this universe.

[Damarus]

Good. Coz I need a second opinion on this rash on my balls...

[Archeia]

I learned the following from this thread;

- if someone knows how to use Windows NT servers and host a web site, they must be qualified to talk about building construction;

So, since someone who knows how to administer a Windows NT server is qualified to speak about building construction, and I administrate multiple NT/2000/2003 servers, I think I am qualified to talk about everything from biological decay in labrats through to the atomic structure of this universe.

How dare you trick me into coming to Mondrated to read something of no significance. OH FOR SHAME! As if you couldn't freely express this in our nightly ramblings among the pixels of msn.

[CharlieM]

As to your explanation, it's wonderful :smile: I have already stipulated there is no clear cut answer we are gonna come up with regarding the actual collapse of the towers.

Actually, yes there is. A plane destroying the supporting clips, shifted the shock load onto remaining support clips, severly stressing them out, and then the fire heated the steel up to a point where the sulphur dioxide destroyed the charcoal within the steal, turning it to brittle mettle, and the floors collapsed.

Thats a clear cut explanation, you cant get any more simple than that.

What chowder was trying to say, is that in controlled demolitions, the demolitions teams remove significant portions of the structure before they attempt to bring it down, as the charges that they use, will not bring down a building without SIGNIFICANT weakening of the buildings key supports. They can bring it down without removing a damn thing, but they need a LOT more time in the building than a day or 2 to wire it up (which actually takes closer to a week or 2 in real controlled demolitions).

There really is no possible, plausible way, that they could of got into both the buildings, wired up all the explosives required without removing and weakining key structural points, without ANYONE knowing about it.

There is tons of evidence that the government orchestrated these attacks.


Its all circumstancial at BEST though. Nothing is out there that substantiates any master plan to put demolition charges in, no missing orders of explosives from any military bases or construction sites, no demolition experts contracted to do the job, nowhere NEAR enough time to lay the charges in the building.

Just a huge ammount of people crying foul over the government because such a huge disaster occured.

I understand the mentality behind it, really I do....the govt. is fucking up your nations health care, your education system, and pretty much every other service, despite the severe ammount of taxes you pay (which..is still an assload less than what I pay).

An event comes along with enough lose ends and chaos that you can do a pretty good job of tieing it to the government. An outlet on the frustrations you feel as a result of such a fucked up nation you live in.

Its all honey on the surface, but the system is broke cause of corruption and inneptitude.

When you are faced with the indisputable maths behind the collapse, in how a plane and a fire can easily bring the tower down, and how the tower was designed to facilitate the pancake effect in the event of structural failure, there really is no other place to attempt to hide behind.

Without that, you got nothing.

Theres a huge paper trail and history with the hijackers, and their subsequent connections to Al Queda, and Bin Ladin, all linking back 20 years or so to the previous attempt on the WTC.

It was the same dude.

You think Bush was behind that one aswell ??

The only thing thats reprehensible (and ive said this earlier in the thread), is the way the administration took advantage of the situation, had a knee jerk reaction and tried to snowball the war into places where it was not leggitemate, nor legal to do so. Not to mention the other countless REAL infractions of the law and constitution.

Illegal Wire Tapping on US Citizens.
Kidnapping suspected terrorists, extraditing them to italy to torture them.
Attorney Firings.
Inability to track down Bin Ladin due to links between Saudi Arabia.
Prince Bandar's whole family being investigated for shady shit...and then all of a sudden not, because they threatned to stop buying weapons from the US and the UK.

The list gos on.
They should all be in prison for what they have done, they are crafty little fuckers no doubt, but they did not bring down the towers (even tower 7) with explosives, nor did they have a hand in it.

It was all a fundamentalist rich nutjob with the resources, and the disdain of US occupation and western culture invading his society, who took the initiative TWICE (first time was a failure), and finally got the job done.

[BLACK]

Will's responses show that you can lead a nigger to water but you can't force him to drink. You can, however, drown him and hang him on a tree.

[Grog]

And some people wonder how the government ever thought they could get away with something like this.....
and some people claim that they can use these people's accounts as solid evidence

[Talorth]

I learned the following from this thread;

- if someone knows how to use Windows NT servers and host a web site, they must be qualified to talk about building construction;

So, since someone who knows how to administer a Windows NT server is qualified to speak about building construction, and I administrate multiple NT/2000/2003 servers, I think I am qualified to talk about everything from biological decay in labrats through to the atomic structure of this universe.

I've hosted an NT test server on a local network...

DOES THAT MEAN I HAVE AN OPINION?!

[LordChowder]

I see you are back to name calling, oh well, I tried. Still butthurt at getting mentally owned I guess...very well Mr Ahmadinijad, if you are such an expert on Thermite and exactly how it reacts (also, the types of Thermite/thermate munitions the us govt has at it's disposal) please provide some links; I can't take anything you say as gospel...sorry.
ill get to that in a second nigger.



Did you read what you wrote here? Maybe I am taking it out of context, although I can't see how....demolition is the PREFERRED method for taking buildings down for obvious reasons. Your pancake theory has been rebutted many times already....see this one which just employs common sense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdQh18kvpRU


already shown how much effort it takes to demolish a building with explosives. its impractical. and not possible unless they already stripped support beams from the building before hand, which they didnt because the towers were fully functional obviously.

You keep forgetting to explain how WTC 7 could fall in exactly the same way as the first two towers when it WASN'T hit by a plane. That's ok, so did the 9/11 commission.

ok been covered about a dozen times now.

[LordChowder]

You seem to be ranting and angry, maybe you should take a break. The explosions being minutes apart means what exactly? Again with the HUGE fire insinuation, but not in WTC7. BTW thermate is a brand name for thermite (the material). Thermate can and is used for, wait for it, explosives:

Thermate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermate#column-one), search (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermate#searchInput)
Thermate is an incendiary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incendiary) compound used for military applications. Thermate, whose primary component is thermite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite), also contains sulfur and possibly barium nitrate, both of which increase its thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature. Various mixtures of these compounds can be called thermate, but, to avoid confusion with Thermate-TH3, one can refer to them as thermite variants or analogs. The composition by weight of Thermate-TH3 (in military use) is 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium_nitrate), 2.0% sulphur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur) and 0.3% binder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binder_%28material%29).


Yeah do you know what it is outside of the wiki definition? maybe im illiterate here, but to me it clearly doesnt say explosive anywhere in there. its just molten metal. its not an explosive. DOESNT MAKE AN EXPLOSIVE SOUND! if you put it in an explosive, youre going to just blow thermite all over the place, which does jack shit compared to placing thermite onto something and allowing it to melt through. whether you use thermite, or dynamite, in order to bring down a building you need to weaken the structure substantially. so it makes 0 difference what you think they used, since both are complete and utter bullshit. although, because it is just molten metal, alot of stuff could resemble thermite... say anything you posted in those videos claiming thats thermite falling out of building, well that could be ANY metal, or even some plastics, thats melting, and falling. the molten metal that was found, could be any metal, from anything in the building.




Ok tool boy, show me the raging inferno in WTC 7. Also, show me proof of this ton of debris falling on WtC7.

fires on floors 7-12 burning near critical support beams with no sprinkler systems in place because of no water. then you have 2 giant towers come down next to it throwing debris at it. maybe just watch any video of the collapse of the towers? kinda shows it slamming into WTC7.



I'm sorry, were these pics of the towers and wtc 7, they sure don't look like it. Maybe you just really confused. Perhaps you should go smoke some more ganja or something, take the edge off.


no, its from a much smaller building. there would have had to of been far more work done on the towers or WTC7, thanks for pointing that out!


Hey raghead, I'LL ABUSE CAPS ALL I FUCKING WANT, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT? YOU USE CAPS TO MAKE YOURSELF FEEL IMPORTANT, MUCH THE SAME WAY YOU USE INSULTS. I'D WAGER THIS CONDITION EXISTS BECAUSE YOU WERE EITHER DROPPED ON YOUR HEAD OR DIDN'T GET ENOUGH ATTENTION AS A CHILD.

THANKS FRUED, THAT OR MAYBE YOU'RE WRONG? LOL!

I HAVE YET TO SEE YOU PROVE ANYTHING I HAVE SAID TO BE FALSE. YOU HAVE YET TO ADDRESS ANYTHING OTHER THEN THE TOWERS. SOME HAVE OFFERED ALTERNATIVE THEORIES AS TO THE COLLAPSE OF THE BUILDINGS BUT YOU SEEM TO BE CONVINCED OF YOUR OWN SUPERIOR INTELLECT IN THIS REGARD. YOU ARE A YOUNG KID WHO DOESN'T KNOW SHIT BUT THINKS HE DOES. I CAN EMPATHIZE, I HAVE BEEN YOUR AGE. I REMEMBER FEELING THE EXACT SAME WAY. HOPEFULLY, IF YOU EVER GET A LITTLE LIFE EXPERIENCE, YOU WILL SNAP OUT OF IT, UNTIL THEN...FUCK YOU.

LOL? WHY WOULD I ADDRESS ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE TOWERS? IF THERES NO CRIME, WHY WOULD I LOOK FOR THE PERPETRATOR OF SAID CRIME THAT DOESN'T EXIST? IN ORDER FOR YOU TO MAKE A CLAIM THE GOVERNMENT WAS BEHIND THE DEMOLITION OF THE WTC, YOU NEED TO CLEARLY PROVE IT WAS BROUGHT DOWN THE WAY YOU SAY IT WAS CORRECT? DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO YOU? I THINK JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING YOU'VE SAID HAS BEEN CLEARLY DISPROVED BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT. I WOULD NEVER BE WRONG IF I COULDN'T READ EITHER!

and to point out about the "hijackers being alive" shit. first, ITS THE FBI! THEY FUCK UP ALOT, THEY DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT SHIT. what they DO know, is the identity of the hijackers! what they DON'T know, is if all of those identities are legit, or if any were stolen. WOW HOLY SHIT, A FAKE ID? WHY WOULD A CRIMINAL USE ONE OF THOSE? ITS NOT LIKE HE HAD TO HIDE HIS IDENTITY OR ANYTHING! but hey, if one were to read up on.. ohhh.. i dunno.. say, THE FBI REPORT ON THE MATTER, one might come to the conclusion, that since some of these hijackers were not here legally, they may have left a little lack of a paper trail to their real identity. the FBI, as incompetent as they are, tried their best. they got most right, some they still couldnt establish as fake ID's. but hey im sorry, didnt phone calls from passengers on united 93 clearly state ARAB HIJACKERS? maybe they were the only plane to be so unlucky, since the other 2 were clearly flown by a 7 year old boy with a remote control. GET REAL, YOU'RE INSANE!

[Talorth]

I am going to invent my own conspiracy...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b1/UA93_crash_site.jpg/776px-UA93_crash_site.jpg

That is the flight 93 crash site, clearly there is no debris from the crash!

oneoeneoneoenenoeneoneleelevenevoneoneo!1!!!!!!n11 !111O1n!O1Neevleven2two!!1n!!1!!three!1!213




http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8b/Wtcdebris.jpg/250px-Wtcdebris.jpg

This image clearly shows that 5 WTC had stuff on its roof! WHY DIDNT IT COMPLETELY ASPLODE LIKE EVRERYTHING ELSE!
IT ONLY COLLAPSED PARTIALLY!



Now, this leaves a big question!? WHY WOULD THE GOVARNMENT DO THIS?

[Damarus]

I went through the theory behind this all on msn with Charlie. Our end conclusion was as follows:

- The UFO's, under the instruction of the galactic overlord Xenu - brought ghosts to volcanoe's specifically located around the world that would then erupt and tactically send said ghosts into the bodies of the now cabinet of the US govt.

- This had the side effect of causing global warming and bird flu.

- Their secret leader Arnie, carefully planned 9/11 in order to declare war on the middle east to secretly mine the naquida buried deep in the ground in the region, which currently is mined under the guise of oil.

- The only people who can stop the ghosts, are the mole people. But the ghosts are trying to remove the borders between USA, Mexico and Canada so that the werewolves (who currently have a hard time with border patrol) are able to enter US soil with ease to wipe out the threat of the mole people.

- The werewolves however, are being thwarted by the Chupacabra's, so they have been forced to initiate a truce with the vampires until the threat of the mole people is extinguished.

- With many now disbelieving the 9/11 commission, Phones are being 'tapped' in order to send brain worms through the lines that control your mind and force you into downloading child porn, killing your family and other heavily penalised crimes to remove this threat from the streets without causing suspicion.

- The leader of the human resistance, James Bond, is currently working in North Korea to further the mole people's cause, but it all seems fairly futile.



The following link scientifically proves all of this:
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/

[Victis]

ok, so the initial claim is its thermite that brought down the towers. thermite does not pulverize jack shit. thermite is hot yes, but doesnt carry any explosive force, its not something that will pulverize an entire floor. sadly your ignorance clearly ignores the forces i mentioned. any idea how much force even just a few whole floors worth of concrete and steel weigh? there would be no inconsistencies because the towers were not designed to support that much force from the top. they were designed to GIVE under that kind of weight. and they did. any pulverization you see, would be caused by hitting the ground and being crushed by other debris. so both you and will claim to know the REAL TRUTH. which is it? thermite? or dynamite. keeping in mind itd take a while for thermite to eat through steel, and timing so precise itd have to be to the thousandth of a second to time those thermite reactions PERFECTLY. or, it could be dynamite which most implosions use. unfortunatly that doesnt work because anyone that has eyes, or ears can tell that wasnt used. check out some actual videos from implosions, and keep in mind youd need countless more explosives to bring down these towers. niggers like will hinge on these secondary explosions. well, the secondary explosions were probably caused as was pointed out before, the fire igniting what could have been many different things that could explode in a building. why couldnt it have been planted explosives? because the "secondary explosions" were minutes apart. not fractions of a second which is what is needed for directing the fall of buildings. why does everyone think its so easy to implode a building? do you know how much time, effort, and planning goes into it? first off! they strip the buildings drywall and such to get to the support beams. they weaken its structure over the course of weeks. then, they set up the explosives, which requires alot of drilling, pounding and other deconstruction. they gotta actually plant the tons of explosives, TONS.

This isn't a flame but can you turn this monstrosity into a couple paragraphs insteadoftalkinglikethis, not that you give a shit.


sadly your ignorance clearly ignores the forces i mentionedWhats with you and redundancy.. I lol'd at this


so why is this not possible? because none of that shit happened. youd think in a building with thousand of people, theyd notice the entire building has been stripped and planted with explosives. while explosives may be an impractical way to bring down the building, and rather implausible. a more logical explanation may be that.. THE BUILDING FELL DUE TO THE CRUSHING FORCE OF THE FLOORS ABOVE.In free fall.. all that weight in between had absolutely no effect on the rate at which it fell.. it fell as fast as gravity could possible pull it down.. no resistance. I'm not saying what it is or isn't.. Im not here calling people ignorant or calling them dumb niggers..


Yes, designed to collapse that way. and it doesnt matter, with that much force pushing down on it. its not going to give any resistance. its like putting a soda can on the ground and dropping a bowling ball on it. you can rest a bowling ball on a soda can, and it wont crush it. drop it, and the can gives nearly 0 resistance.Yes they were designed to have a failsafe - not to create a complete free-fall if they did fall.. just to clarify.. take a full soda can, and take an empty one; employ your example and notice the difference.. don't compare an empty can to a building full of different materials with different masses and densities.. yet the building comes down in a consistent free fall.. these towers aren't empty, but you knew that already.



growing number of dumb shits. usually when someone says "Yeah, 2 jumbo jets slammed into the side of a building and exploded all their burning jet fuel inside" you dont think "well, atleast there was minimal damage and the building is probably still structually sound"Yeah, we're all dumb shits for taking a look at the evidence and questioning it, wondering why there are so many missing pieces.. I never said what it is or isn't.. honestly I don't think you'd ever be cut out for a real argument.. whats with you falling back on silly little insults.. do you really think you name calling has any effect on my perspective on the situation? Get a grip.


ok buddy.The comment about the President being in control was directed towards Grindrolas, not you, just so you don't get confused and call me a dumb nigger.

Time to read the rest of what Charlie has to say, if there is anyone who can employ his knowledge and education on the subject into play, its him, at least he offers an non-egotistical perspective on things.. something you seem to be failing at.

[LordChowder]

This isn't a flame but can you turn this monstrosity into a couple paragraphs insteadoftalkinglikethis, not that you give a shit.

no, learn to read.


Whats with you and redundancy.. I lol'd at this


maybe repetition will sink in.

In free fall.. all that weight in between had absolutely no effect on the rate at which it fell.. it fell as fast as gravity could possible pull it down.. no resistance. I'm not saying what it is or isn't.. Im not here calling people ignorant or calling them dumb niggers..

it wasnt free falling, it was smashing the floors as it went down, with so much force, why the hell would there be any delay? if it was a controlled demolition, that kinda dampers the free falling theory, since they have hundreds of tiny explosions that are time lapsed, so the actual falling is slower, since they blow certain support beams before others to direct the fall of debris.


Yes they were designed to have a failsafe - not to create a complete free-fall if they did fall.. just to clarify.. take a full soda can, and take an empty one; employ your example and notice the difference.. don't compare an empty can to a building full of different materials with different masses and densities.. yet the building comes down in a consistent free fall.. these towers aren't empty, but you knew that already.


buildings arent a solid structures, theyre more akin to empty soda cans feel free to throw some balsa wood reinforcements in there lol. they can withstand their own weight just fine, but put an extensive amount of force at any point and the building easily loses its foundations. ie, from the top by falling floors. what steel do you know can withstand several floors of a building falling on it? was your answer also none? because thats the logical answer, and the real answer. what, is the steel all of a sudden gunna be able to withstand greater forces than its able to, and slow down the fall of all this rubble? nope! unfortunately physics were on the job to ensure everything happened as it should.


Yeah, we're all dumb shits for taking a look at the evidence and questioning it, wondering why there are so many missing pieces.. I never said what it is or isn't.. honestly I don't think you'd ever be cut out for a real argument.. whats with you falling back on silly little insults.. do you really think you name calling has any effect on my perspective on the situation? Get a grip.


more like ignoring reason and logic, and fabricating evidence for a crime that was never committed. there is no argument here. you and will can keep trying to focus on the insults, doesn't make then untrue, and doesn't make any of my arguments any less credible. but ignoring so much of the shits thats been posted, then saying "you have no evidence" is borderline insane, and you should look into psychiatric therapy.

The comment about the President being in control was directed towards Grindrolas, not you, just so you don't get confused and call me a dumb nigger.

as much as i dislike it, bush is in control, thats why america is suffering.

Time to read the rest of what Charlie has to say, if there is anyone who can employ his knowledge and education on the subject into play, its him, at least he offers an non-egotistical perspective on things.. something you seem to be failing at.

cry

[Victis]

And you call other people ignorant... LOL

Did I even say explosives you dumb fucking bitch? No I didn't. Did I offer an alternative explanation? No, I didn't. Did I say its this, and no that? No I didn't, I ask questions to which their are holes, get a grip

learn to readLOL! Learn to compile your thoughts into well organized paragraphs so people can readwhatyoursayinginsteadofalwayshavingtoreadyours hitlikethisyoudumbsonoftwodads.

ps: lol@ your frustration.. you're so quick to become so hostile, sounds like a cry for attention.. any chance you get your calling people dumb niggers AND HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU FUCKING DUMBASSES LEARN TO READ OR GO CRY... <--- you need therapy

[Damarus]

I understood his paragraphs rather easily...

[LordChowder]

And you call other people ignorant... LOL

Did I even say explosives you dumb fucking bitch? No I didn't. Did I offer an alternative explanation? No, I didn't. Did I say its this, and no that? No I didn't, I ask questions to which their are holes, get a grip

LOL! Learn to compile your thoughts into well organized paragraphs so people can readwhatyoursayinginsteadofalwayshavingtoreadyours hitlikethisyoudumbsonoftwodads.

ps: lol@ your frustration.. you're so quick to become so hostile, sounds like a cry for attention.. any chance you get your calling people dumb niggers AND HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU FUCKING DUMBASSES LEARN TO READ OR GO CRY... <--- you need therapy

im hostile? ok. i guess spaces are the same things as paragraphs, and actually, that paragraph was generally about the same subject, so i guess its fine to leave it as is? i guess my caps demonstrate my rage. maybe you would be smarter if you read peoples arguments instead of crying about how its hard for you to read perfectly fine english text.

[Talorth]

And you call other people ignorant... LOL

Did I even say explosives you dumb fucking bitch? No I didn't. Did I offer an alternative explanation? No, I didn't. Did I say its this, and no that? No I didn't, I ask questions to which their are holes, get a grip

LOL! Learn to compile your thoughts into well organized paragraphs so people can readwhatyoursayinginsteadofalwayshavingtoreadyours hitlikethisyoudumbsonoftwodads.

ps: lol@ your frustration.. you're so quick to become so hostile, sounds like a cry for attention.. any chance you get your calling people dumb niggers AND HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU FUCKING DUMBASSES LEARN TO READ OR GO CRY... <--- you need therapy
Victis, the reason that the towers experienced an almost free fall was because of the steel's structurally integrity being compromised in addition to the fact that the WTC design was done to be cost vs effectiveness is what lead to the collapse.


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

Here you have a floor which is held in place by something that could easily be compromised in a very hot situation.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig3-sm.gif

You don't have to agree with me. But I think logically it makes perfect sense as to how the towers could experience an almost free fall when you take into account that each floor was designed only to hold so much weight... Essentially its like taking a knife through butter.


I'm no expert on the subject, but I don't think anyone here really is. In fact, i'd say that Polar probably has the most knowledge in general. And even then thats a bit of a stretch :P (No offense Polar <3)


It is unfortunate that by some fluke chance they picked a building that probably is one of the handful in the states that can be destroyed in this way. When you think about the bottom dollar its no wonder the Towers were built that way.

[LordChowder]

victis doesnt even know what he believes, hes finding "holes" that are clearly explained with physics and engineering. try and disprove it, and apparently your lack of paragraphs brought down the towers. everyone make sure to use lots of spaces so victis can read it.

[Victis]

victis doesnt even know what he believes, hes finding "holes" that are clearly explained with physics and engineering. try and disprove it, and apparently your lack of paragraphs brought down the towers. everyone make sure to use lots of spaces so victis can read it.

Too many holes for me, and many others.. the events that transpired afterwards were.... what.. DING DING DING, thats right.. LIES. Time to invade! Time to go and waste thousands of soldiers lives BASED ON LIES.. you think they wouldn't lie out their asshole about this..

The greatest structural failure (times three!) all on the same day, for the first time in history...

I can't say I'm an expert but I saw a huge fucking fireball blast out of the side of those buildings where at least a portion of the jet fuel was immediately burned and dispersed outside of the building upon initial impact.. the Twin Towers must've been built like complete shit for other buildings to burn for 10's of hours and the WTC to go down in less than 2..

So where the fuck is this fuel from? The movie final destination? Fuel with a purpose I guess.. it found every spot it needed to complete its mission..

And I can agree that the building can come down the way it did.. but as for complete free fall being incorporated into the design? You're telling me that with the millions of variables involved between the two impacts.. that they both fell the exact same way?

Are you telling me that once a building loses its structural integrity that it load balances the remaining force to fall completely in a controlled demolition looking free fall?

I guess I'm just ignorant... er wait I'm a fucking moron (says the walmart employee)

[Talorth]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig1.gif

You are correct about the giant fireball.

The WTC design was built structurally to be 60% cheaper than other building designs at the time.

It is however, the first time in history a 767 has flown into a building.

You are far from ignorant, being questionable or skeptical is perfectly acceptable. However, Will is just being blind and won't listen to anyone's opinion but his own.

Too many holes for me, and many others.. the events that transpired afterwards were.... what.. DING DING DING, thats right.. LIES. Time to invade! Time to go and waste thousands of soldiers lives BASED ON LIES.. you think they wouldn't lie out their asshole about this..

I will agree that it certainly was a little bit of a perfect opportunity to force people into a war (Which btw, gulf war#2 has very little to do with the overall war on terror.). But, the motive stinks. If a government was that corrupt we would see expressive elements come out of the woodwork....

I just fail to see how you could do it... for the time and money invested there is ways of building pre-war propaganda that are ALOT easier. (Look, they turned the war on terror to the war in iraq pretty easily!).

It wasn't lies btw, the bush administration is just so fucking arrogant and idiotic that they rely on bad intel. HONESTLY, THE WORST CRIME OF ALL IS THAT THEY THINK THEY ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING. PERIOD. END OF STORY.

[Talorth]

A perfect example of their own arrogance in righteousness...


LOOK HOW LONG IT HAS TAKEN THEM TO CHANGE THE STRATEDGY IN IRAQ.


Oh how funny it is.... with that $600 bill in war costs i bet you the UN could of been funded to meet its 2015 targets. But, I guess its not in the best interests of the US to help fund an organization it co-established!

Tell me, why would the United States waste 600 billion of its own money for oil...? Or something along those lines?

People mention it like an investment opportunity.

LOL honestly.

[Talorth]

btw, did anyone not see the tests they did with the scale models of both buildings?

It doesn't take into account WTC7. However, the identical thing happened in both tests. (This was an independent study not backed by the US government.)
Granted, it didn't take into account the steel and the needed temperatures.

However, 900 degrees is all that it takes to WEAKEN the structural integrity of steel. That is lower than what jet fuel burns at.

[Talorth]

i mean look... the US has fucked its own dollar now...


canadas is high again.... it went from its lowest point in 2001(i believe?) to recently the highest it has been in 30 years.

OWNED imo.


bush administration=worst government the United States has seen in recent history.

[Talorth]

And I can agree that the building can come down the way it did.. but as for complete free fall being incorporated into the design? You're telling me that with the millions of variables involved between the two impacts.. that they both fell the exact same way?

Are you telling me that once a building loses its structural integrity that it load balances the remaining force to fall completely in a controlled demolition looking free fall?

The variables stack in both situations as to cause the buildings to fall down, the WTC was not designed to withstand that much force + jet fuel temperature.

It was not a requirement of the design.

And yes to the last question, it does fall in an almost free fall much akin to what happens in controlled demos.

[LordChowder]

hitler did it

[Talorth]

hitler did it

BINGO!

[LordChowder]

are you coming on to me?

[Damarus]

One thing that is getting to me... CONTROLLED DEMOLITION DOES NOT EQUAL CONTROLLED BUILDING IMPLOSION. I know this is being nit picky, but controlled demolition is ANY form of demolition that is purposefully performed and controlled, ie. deconstruction with high reach excavators, or hitting a building with a wrecking ball. I think you will find it hard to defend a claim of this happening... Again, I know - nit picky, but when you're trying to use it as the basis for a technical argument it works to your advantage to look like you know what you are talking about.

Now as far as controlled building implosion goes, you do realise that in ALL cases of high rise demolition the interior support of the building MUST be weakened in order to achieve said implosion and not achieve a highly dangerous and out of control explosion. Provide me proof of the pre-demolition works and I will believe this theory. You can't possibly just spend all day slandering a mathematically calculated and plausible theory without anything other than random accounts of why this and that internet journalist/software technician/deli owner thinks that the buildings looked like they were demolished purposefully...


As far as comments requestioning why and how over and over again with all the posts already made, and also comments such as "the Twin Towers must've been built like complete shit for other buildings to burn for 10's of hours and the WTC to go down in less than 2" - fuck did you read the thread at all? Please stop being so ignorant and blatantly unknowledgeable on the subject matter you are speaking of if your going to slander others about it... Questionable or skeptical? Sure go for it, but no one is going to believe any argument you spew if you not only cannot disprove others' theories, but cannot prove your own theory either (or in some cases, not even have a theory).


Oh and one thing I just noticed skimming over the last couple of posts, load balancing was mentioned. This is not a construction term. It's a computer term... The towers did not 'load balance' quite obviously as they FELL DOWN. There was no uniform distribution of forces from the planes hitting the building, or we wouldn't have seen structural damage to the building and it wouldn't have fallen. Structures cannot do this, not as far as the term 'load balancing' goes anyway, I may not be interpretting the way you meant it.

The maximum structural loads of all of the structural components of the building as it collapsed, were exceeded. Now I'm pretty sure this will be fairly obvious for someone with no construction knowledge - all materials DO NOT have the same structural integrity characteristics. Like Charlie said, the members failed in a certain order, creating a purposeful implosive collapsing sequence if you like, and then causing all the forces to act on the floor below it (ie repeating the process), and viola - pancake. This is in no way a 'load balancing' excercise (obviously you don't have balance if your structure collapses), its more of a structural failure sequence I guess (example: truss fixings fail; trusses collapse and place all their load on the core; core fails; floor above has nothing supporting it and pulls outer frame down with it onto the next floor; process repeats)..

[Damarus]

Oh and I've been thinking of a way to show that the tower should infact 'freefall' as it did. I've devised this little experiment for you to try at home:

You're going to need square/rectangular crackers and something small and squarish preferable - like dice or chunks of cheese, sugar cubes etc.

Now what you want to do is place a cube on each corner of the cracker and then place another cracker ontop of this. Repeat the process until you have a tasty cracker tower! Now what you are going to do is karate chop the tower! Or if you are boring you can drop a heavy object on the tower, but I always find karate to be more fun. Upon unleashing the dragon on the tower, notice how your judo hand isn't dettered by each layer of cracker and its descent is subsequently not slowed?

Hmm now is this because you laced the crackers with thermite explosives? Or perhaps because your hand was carrying more force than required to overcome the towers mass...

[Grog]

2 more!

[Will]

To Everyone:

This is absolutely amazing to me. Those who believe the official conspiracy theory absolutely will not stray from the towers. Not CharlieM, Chowder, Polarised, Talorth, Grindrolas, or any of them. I can post info regardging Norad and what Cheney's documentd role was but it is ignored. I can stipulate the towers have no clear cut explanation (except if you take one theory over another that none of us have even worked out ourselves (save CharlieM). Emillia can post an account she experienced on Sep 11th which flies in the face of the official conspiracy theory but she too, is ignored. I'm so glad Chowder didn't call her a dumb nigger.

This is exactly the tactic the mainstream media, the white house, the 9/11 commission, popular mechanics, and everyone else who has ever attempted to rebut the "so called" conspiracy theories (9/11) uses; stick to the towers and marginalize everything else. Mix insults in with righteous indignation and repeat. Inject a semi plausible theory (at best, that is what they are) on why the towers collapsed and call "Truthers" nuts.

Truthfully, I am amazed that the discussion has progressed this far and that, in spite of some of the sheeple here, we were able to look at some things with a fresh perspective. I am a bit unhappy that we can't seem to get off the towers though. There is more to 9/11 then how the towers actually fell, which in my estimation, represents about 15% of what we should actually cover. I think this 15% has been covered.

And now for the awards:

Thread MVP Award To CharlieM: if not for you actually trying to argue intelligently, I fear there would have been no galvanization of the side that believes what the white house has told us. Thank you.

Thread Wingman Award To Victis: didn't really think I would find another "truther" out there in this "community". Also, I appreciate your attempts at quelling the racial onslaught. No worries, I have dealt with it my entire life.

Thread Deralier Award To Talorth: for derailing every point I made and doing it in such a "Mondrated" fashion. For dropping from sight after I proved to you it was in fact plausible the us govt ordered the attacks of 9/11 ( by showing you operation northwoods) and then you returning several pages later when you though no one would notice, thank you.

Thread Asshat Award To Chowder: I drop the lord from your name because it makes me lol irl. First, if you hadn't kept coming into my threads (which covered other topics like taxation) and calling me a 9/11 conspiracy idiot, I never would have started the thread (hear that guys, it's his fault), thank you for the inspiration. By constantly goading me, you must have been one of those that had questions on the day. Perhaps subconsciously, you needed to see everything you saw here. I never could figure out why you are so angry though, and your constant need to insult and denigrate (as though you were actually part some master race yourself) is astounding. You, like no other, managed to drag this thread into the gutter of human conversation. However, I have always understood that if you are gonna crawl with slugs, you are bound to get slimy. You still don't know jack shit kid, but you still think you do....I can only hope for your sake that your arrogance leads you to a life experience to place it in check.

Irrelevant to the Thread Award To Black/Inxile: A tie ladies and gentlemen! Whenever others were attempting to discuss something, we could always count on these subhumans to try to derail it; first by attacking me, then by attacking all of you for talking to me!!! Black and Inxile also deserve special mentions for consistently interjecting the word nigger into the thread. Black is very cautious now, and is loathe to challenge me directly, for he knows what happens when he does. He has to wait for other people (never him) to make (what he thinks) is a point before he can interject his random dumb nigger comments. He seems to be afraid of actually joining the discussion though. Inxile still isn't sure if he is a racist, folks, help him out, I tried.

Honorable Mention to Grindrolas for sort of trying to argue things at the end. A word of advice, you are not the voice of the Mondrated community. If you wish to stifle debate, do it within your family, not with people you don't know. It makes you look very foolish.

To everyone else: If you joined in progress you might have made the assumption that there are racists here on Mondrated. There are, but rest assured, I am not one of them. I'm getting off the forums for the weekend and going down to the beach; I hope everyone here enjoys their weekend as well. Be safe and God Bless.

[CharlieM]

The greatest structural failure (times three!) all on the same day, for the first time in history...

It was also the FIRST TIME IN HISTORY that giant sky-scrapers had been subject to the full force of a collision with 767 airliners.
Coincidence ????

[Damarus]

I don't care about the other fucking conspiracies. Your government are cunts, and they probly did make up a whole lot of shit, and maybe the attacked the pentagon and 'invented' the 4th crash out in the middle of nowhere to make it some kind of real attack from which to base a war on. Maybe after the first two attacks they didnt expect the damage to be as severe as it was (ie. not knowing the towers would collapse) and decided they'd need more terror!

Maybe they could've prevented it all but were too dumb, maybe at the last minute some of your government cunts couldve done more but chose not to stop the terrorists to give them this fuel for war or whatever the fuck you want to call it. As a design draftsperson in the construction industry it peaks my interests when idiots want to talk out of their ass about demolition and planned collapses and all this fucking jargon. I honestly have no idea why (after I stated the towers were all that interested me) you would expect me to address anything else...

On top of that, without the towers being caused by the government your conspiracy isn't much is it... It's almost something people would accept over time if all they organised were the other minor attacks (in comparison). So yeah, tell me why I would need to do anything other than discuss the WTC collapses to do damage to your theory?... I think you just want us to leave the towers alone because you are fighting a losing battle on that front ;)

[CharlieM]

I can post info regardging Norad and what Cheney's documentd role was but it is ignored. I can stipulate the towers have no clear cut explanation (except if you take one theory over another that none of us have even worked out ourselves (save CharlieM).

Well, really you cant stipulate that, as it has been proven that even when the odds are in favor of the tower standing after the collision, the towers still fall down.

Disputing evidence like that is like saying that you can catch a bullet fired from a gun in your teeth...and I just got done watching that episode on mythbusters, that shit is impossible!!!



This is exactly the tactic the mainstream media, the white house, the 9/11 commission, popular mechanics, and everyone else who has ever attempted to rebut the "so called" conspiracy theories (9/11) uses; stick to the towers and marginalize everything else.

The reason everything else is marginalised, is because of the towers themselves.
When the planes are proven to of done the dammage pupported by the government in independant investigation, then the crux of the argument, nay, the foundation of the argument that the attack was a government sanctioned and orchestrated event, is a slap in the face to anyone who has even the slightest insight into what it would take to set something like that up, let alone taking into account further work required to get away with it.

Darth Cheny's actions on the day are nothing short of a confused politician jammed in the seat of a military commander's job when thousands of lives are being lost. He had no fucking idea what to do, cause politicians are not military men.

Wouldnt be the first time ive seen a politician lie about what they have done in the past.


Truthfully, I am amazed that the discussion has progressed this far and that, in spite of some of the sheeple here, we were able to look at some things with a fresh perspective. I am a bit unhappy that we can't seem to get off the towers though. There is more to 9/11 then how the towers actually fell, which in my estimation, represents about 15% of what we should actually cover. I think this 15% has been covered.

Talk about marginalising people.
Anytime a descenting, logical voice gets thrown into the works of your theories of conspiracy to kill thousands, tens of thousands (including the war toll's) of your own citizens, only to turn a proffit, is just rediculous.

If the government wanted to make money, they raise taxes on rich folks, or start putting tarrifs on goods imported / exported.

Talk to an economist, theres plenty of ways to make a FUCKLOAD more money than whats been squandered in the war in iraq so far, all without lifting a single sword.

You are not free from the "marginalising" issue here will.
Refusing to take the maths on face value as evidence that the planes bought the towers down, in turn shifting focus onto other inconsitancies of the day (which was one of the most chaotic days in US history), is as close to irony and hypocracy you can get.

I am well within my right to consider those secondary events marginal once the foundation of your theory is dead.

The question is...are you within your limits to marginalise my maths, and plenty of others who, like myself, have done an independant check on the numbers, and still beleive that it was all a government sanctioned mega-conspiracy, despite the single largest peice of evidence you had, not even being remotly true ?

[Talorth]

This is exactly the tactic the mainstream media, the white house, the 9/11 commission, popular mechanics, and everyone else who has ever attempted to rebut the "so called" conspiracy theories (9/11) uses; stick to the towers and marginalize everything else. Mix insults in with righteous indignation and repeat. Inject a semi plausible theory (at best, that is what they are) on why the towers collapsed and call "Truthers" nuts.

So cheney knew what was going on and stood by at Norad? Possible, but the evidence is very circumstantial.

I'll ask you again, what motive does the Bush administration have if they took advantage of the situation? I don't get it. I'd like an explanation.

Also, thanks for the award. Can I get that in gift format? And the reason I didn't respond to your operation northwoods post was because I felt that lordchowder made it pretty obvious why using that as 'evidence' is retarded.

[Talorth]

are you coming on to me?

yes.

[Grog]

will seems to whine alot about insults

[LordChowder]

will seems to whine alot about insults

it gives him a reason to ignore the quite obvious explanations to anything hes said.

[LordChowder]

so lets get a real summary of the thread.

1. will posts video that thermite brought down towers
disproved, too slow of a reaction to create the "free fall" shit you were bringing up. and far too hard to time it since its a melting substance and would need time to melt through very thick support beams. which is why its used in the military to mostly take out large gun barrels etc.

2. will brings up it may be explosives like dynamite
disproved, and even disproves his own previous theory. takes hundreds of small explosions to demolish a building, none of this was heard. and it can be explosives or thermite, which is it?

3. WTC7 was imploded with explosives
disproved, as was all explosives-bringing-shit-down theories, since the amount of work that goes into demolition is so great, and theres no evidence of any of this deconstruction prior to 9/11. severe fire damage to critical support beams, on an already unstable foundation, compounded by tons and tons of falling debris from 2 large towers... ok already answers itself.

4. northwoods?
disproved. LOL!? will doesnt even know what northwoods stated to do. didnt plan any mass murder, didnt plan any attacks whatsoever on us soil. but somehow gave the government the foundations to mass murder 3000 americans, just to start a war and kill thousands more.

5. LORDchowder called me a nigger, therefore i can ignore facts
disproved. you can close your eyes in front of a mirror as long as you like, but when you open them, you'll still be a nigger.

6. hijackers alive
disproved. FBI's own report says they may have made an error in establishing which of the identites of the hijackers may be stolen identities. because fake ID's are hard to get. could have walked into a pawn shop and got one made for 5 bucks and a big mac. they're criminals, no, terrorists. they HAD to be careful with their identity, its what they do. plus, united 93's phone calls clearly stated arab hijackers.

7. norad and cheney.
doesn't even need to be disproved, cheney is incompetent, his status quo would be to remain incompetent, which he did.

8. crying about people not focusing on other things, once the tower theories were
disproved. how can you look for a criminal for a crime that wasn't committed?

9. paragraphs are the same as spaces
the jury is still out on this, but general consensus is that people who believe this are retards.

10. black was somehow irrelevant to this thread.
this thread is an equal opportunity employer, and he was the first to acknowledge you may be a nigger, and thus explain your stupid theories. he opened our eyes to the touchy subject, thats invaluable for race relations.

the rest of this thread is just you making stupid arguments, them being clearly, and concisely answered, then you ignoring that and claiming you are right. this repeating itself, indefinitely until now. also victis looking for someone to disprove theories and accusations that he doesn't even have. because we all love to copy and paste arguments here, especially when someone disproves it then you say, "hey i was just asking the question, i don't know what to think, i just don't want to believe the explanation given to me". im sorry, but thats PRECISELY WHERE CONSPIRACY THEORIES BEGIN.

so a quicker summary

Will's a dumb nigger.

[Inxile]

can i lock this?

[//Antisaint]

can i lock this?

You would give me nothing to read in the morning before work..

[Inxile]

lol i dunno i got a email about offensive posts in this thread, look through it all i could see was bullshit

lots and lots of bullshit and way to many quotes.

[//Antisaint]

There is a good chunk of bullshit, and will doesn't know how to multi-quote.. But no locky D:

[LordChowder]

pretty sure i covered everything anyways.

[Talorth]

STOLELDLELD YOUR POINTS!

[Damarus]

I'm happy to have it locked - I've said what I want, Chowder has said what he wants, Charlie has said what he wants and Will has too! That pretty much leaves Victis and then all the main debaters have had their piece. Mind you it will probly die now anyway... I don't think we can all argue much longer when we'd just be regurgitating our previous points :p

[Grog]

the will posts have dried up, meaning there isn't a great deal to respond to

[Grindrolas]

Until of course he posts something like this again, and then we'll all just rehash these points.

[BLACK]

This WTC thing is growing to Walker proportions as far as dead horse beating.

[damme]

http://www.dareolonoh.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/broken%20record.jpg
IMO

[BLACK]

Yeah, that too.

[Inxile]

lolz i wasn't gonna lock it =p

more of a point this thread is pretty gay

[Gafaton]

ok i read up to page 4 and got a headache....so if this has been addressed..sorry.

Charlie, i recognize you as one of the brighter people on this site, and you always do meticulous research. I can understand the floors collapsing around the inner core...but not the inner core itself. I find it very very hard to believe that in 30 minutes time, 70-80 floors worth of steel can become hot enough to fold in on itself at freefall speed. I dont remember which tower was hit on the corner at an angle...but how would the opposite side of the building be hot enough to weaken the steel? From my basic understanding of physics...the upper floors of that tower should have fallen off the rest of the building....not gone straight down like that. Anyway, I wont go on and on about some of the other holes in the story cause its all been said before, and dismissed just as fast as conspiracy. Its just that too many times in US history have the truths of great tragedies been shielded from the public and then forgotten just as fast as they happened. Right now the front page reads "Paris' last day in prison!!!" /puke.

If the public had gotten explanations for everything that happened on that day and leading up to that day, there wouldn't be so many conspiracy theories. The fact that the massive failure in intelligence has never been considered criminal is a travesty. No one burned for 9/11 except for the people in those buildings and planes, and our soldiers in Iraq. That is why there is so much anger...there has been no closure and no justice.

[BLACK]

THE CONSPIRACY THEORY IS REAL, WILL WAS KILLED BY THE GOVERNMENT THIS MORNING!!

http://www.deathvalley.com/gold/images/skidoo/lynched.jpg

[LordChowder]

pretty much covered. it doesnt particularly matter where the plane hits. that initial impact will weaken the structure considerably. also, the plane is jam packed with fuel, think of it as a hypodermic needle inserting flaming jet fuel all up inside the building. the entire building is filled with paper, and office materials that burn easy, and at high temperatures and intensity. the fire spreads easily and soon its out of control. once the first floors fall, that initial impact on the floor below is FAR too great to cover the force coming down on it from on top, even if it was undamaged. the center of the structure still isnt going to withstand any of that force. so the floor collapses. now that floor, and all the floord above collapse to the next floor, and the next floor goes. each floor taking more and more force towards the bottom. after a few floors, theres so much force and weight that theres nothing that would prevent that shit from falling. even undamaged support structures.

[Damarus]

Lets not forget it was an open plan building from a structural point of view, meaning there was very little in the way of firewalls and dampers to isolate fires. But yeah most of this has been covered, its just unfortunate that theres 20 pages to read through to find the good posts :p

[CharlieM]

can understand the floors collapsing around the inner core...but not the inner core itself. I find it very very hard to believe that in 30 minutes time, 70-80 floors worth of steel can become hot enough to fold in on itself at freefall speed.

All floors didnt need to be hot enough to melt, just the first floor that fell.
When the steel supports in the floor that collapsed got soft enough, under the overload of the shifted weight due to the destruction of several of the supports, the floor fell, ripping the steel reinforcing out of the concrete core at its level, causing a failure in the core, whereby all floors above it fell with it.

When the 6-8 floors above it fell onto the single floor below, it caused a cascade collapse of the subsequent floors supports. They didnt need to be engulfed in flames, or even remotly weakened by the fire, as the weight from the floors above them alone was enough to instantly sheer the steel supports.



I dont remember which tower was hit on the corner at an angle...but how would the opposite side of the building be hot enough to weaken the steel?

The load shifts.
Take a table with 4 legs, with a surface top weighing 10kg.
If all legs are equi-distant apart, each one is undergoing ~2.5kg of compressive forces to support the table top.

Take one leg out, and the other 3 legs now support ~3.3kg of weight each to keep the table top up.

This is how the shifting of the load took place in the towers support structure when several of them vanished into fat air.

Eventually, those tables legs will reach a point where they can no longer support the weight, and they snap.

This is what happned to the tower.


From my basic understanding of physics...the upper floors of that tower should have fallen off the rest of the building....not gone straight down like that.

There was no where near enough sideways force to push the buildings center of gravity outside its footprint, so there was never any danger of it falling over sideways.

Consider a semi-trailer truck, loaded to the hilt.

They have to be packed a certain way so that their center of gravity is roughly at the center of their mass, so that when they turn corners, that 'normal' does not go outside the tires of the truck, otherwise it tips over.

Consider this normal to be a dead-weight hanging from a rope, thats anchored on one end at the center of gravity. When that weight is outside the tires, the truck tips over.

Same deal with the tower, only because it weighed so much, the force of the plane was nowhere near enough to shift its center of mass outside its footprint.

It survived the impact, but only to effect that it destroyed the supports enough for a fire to bring the whole thing crashing down.

Didnt help that the office equipment had some sulphur based materials in them...sulphur dioxide + steel dont mix to well.

[Gafaton]

also, the plane is jam packed with fuel, think of it as a hypodermic needle inserting flaming jet fuel all up inside the building. the entire building is filled with paper, and office materials that burn easy, and at high temperatures and intensity. the fire spreads easily and soon its out of control.

I agree that fuel would have poured down the elevator shafts and would have burned very hot. I believe I read somewhere that the drywall used in the WTC was sulfur based, and therefore would not be fireproof...something to that extent. But, my issue is the speed at which the tower fell.

once the first floors fall, that initial impact on the floor below is FAR too great to cover the force coming down on it from on top, even if it was undamaged. the center of the structure still isnt going to withstand any of that force. so the floor collapses. now that floor, and all the floord above collapse to the next floor, and the next floor goes. each floor taking more and more force towards the bottom. after a few floors, theres so much force and weight that theres nothing that would prevent that shit from falling. even undamaged support structures.

I agree with the concept of ever increasing mass. But from the videos and other reports, the concrete floors, and office furniture and supplies literally turned to dust and were expelled up to 500 feet away from the building during the collapse. Perhaps there would still be enough mass on top to collapse the entire building; I'm no structural engineer. It just seems like the floors should have fallen off around the central core supports and proceeded to "pancake". There were roughly 100 elevators in each building including freight, and 47 steel core supports. I just cant wrap my mind around that much material disappearing in 12 seconds. Obviously it happened...but it just looks like there was some assistence in the collapse from below. Were the supports compacted straight down? Why weren't they expelled outward as more and more of them were stacked on top of eachother?

[Damarus]

Read Charlie's above post :o

There wasn't enough horizontal force acting on the building/each floor/the members as they collapsed in order to push them outward. Each floor coming down ontop of another was obviously providing a vertical force. Since there was nothing displacing the floors outward as they fell (ie. they forced the structure of each floor into the open space of each floor succeeding the other, and this repeated) the tower 'pancaked' uniformly.

If however, the core was built strong enough to withstand the massive loads provided by the first floors to collapse - the above floors wouldve dropped onto the core and been pushed outwards. This wouldve obviously been even more catastrophic for the surrounding environment, hence why the core wasn't built to stay strong in the event of a collapse.

[Grindrolas]

Read Charlie's above post :o

There wasn't enough horizontal force acting on the building/each floor/the members as they collapsed in order to push them outward. Each floor coming down ontop of another was obviously providing a vertical force. Since there was nothing displacing the floors outward as they fell (ie. they forced the structure of each floor into the open space of each floor succeeding the other, and this repeated) the tower 'pancaked' uniformly.

If however, the core was built strong enough to withstand the massive loads provided by the first floors to collapse - the above floors wouldve dropped onto the core and been pushed outwards. This wouldve obviously been even more catastrophic for the surrounding environment, hence why the core wasn't built to stay strong in the event of a collapse.
amazing how much sense that makes...why can't people just accept that...

[Gafaton]

amazing how much sense that makes...why can't people just accept that...

I understand that it makes sense...it just amazes me how all that material can just land in the buildings footprint...its kinda like those prank cans that you can stuff a spring loaded puppet in, and when someone opens it, this huge whatever flies out at them....cept the compressable spring in this case becomes millions of tons of steel and concrete.
Why bother using explosives to collapse a building....just light a few floors on fire with jet fuel :p
(im jk! kay?! i know that the force of the impact would have made the building unstable.)

[Grog]

no! it was something else

[Damarus]

It was the giant butter Jesus that did it!

[Talorth]

mmm id eat butter jesus.

[Grog]

*butters

[CharlieM]

cddIgb1nGJ8
Researchers at Purdue University have created a simulation that uses scientific principles to study in detail what likely happened when a commercial airliner crashed into the World Trade Center's North Tower on Sept. 11, 2001.
Researchers:
Chris Hoffmann - Faculty
Sami Kilic - Former Member
Scott Meador
Voicu Popescu - Faculty
Paul Rosen - Graduate Student
Mete Sozen
That may help you wrap your head around what happned.