Do you believe planes brought down the WTC?

[coastal]

To me this is most compelling evidence of a conspiracy and needs to be evaluated further within our government and for all to participate.

For I remember driving home after the planes hit and listening on the radio. I was listening to a reporter who was down in the street by the buildings. I remember hearing loud explosions and then the guy reporting that he was hearing loud explosions, and then him saying the building was coming down.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5kF9ldtgrc&NR

[Gibby]

I have nothing to say.

[coastal]

I have nothing to say.
Why is that?

[Gibby]

Okay I am not a scientist and I appreciate you refreshing people's memory of the GOP failing to protect us but it was obviously aircraft.

[Gibby]

Why is that?

see post four, I will keep it at that.

[coastal]

Are you familiar with a substance called concrete?

[Gibby]

Are you familiar with a substance called concrete?

yes, and a substance called steel. As well as something called gasoline, paper, and laws of physics. That being said thanks for reminding some of the dumber people in our nation of one of Bush's biggest crimes either through criminal negligence or personal involvement.

[petals]

The planes themselves did not bring the buildings down on their own. BUT if it wasn't for the planes crashing into the buildings the would still be standing. So yes, it was the planes.

[Gibby]

The planes themselves did not bring the buildings down on their own. BUT if it wasn't for the planes crashing into the buildings the would still be standing. So yes, it was the planes.

exactly.

[Gibby]

just one question petals? Are you a good Mercan? Or put another way do you blame Clinton? :D

[shiva2999]

Maybe someone can explain to me how a collapsing building shoots multi ton sections of steel UP and OUT?

[coastal]

Can someone explain to me how rebar reinforced poured concrete of a 100+ story building turn to dust in 10 seconds?

[petals]

just one question petals? Are you a good Mercan? Or put another way do you blame Clinton? :D

I don't like the blame game. It was our entire Goverment.

[Gibby]

Maybe someone can explain to me how a collapsing building shoots multi ton sections of steel UP and OUT?

:erm: I think Pete already has several times and so has AnEin.

[Gibby]

You must not have been paying attention son.

[Gibby]

I don't like the blame game. It was our entire Goverment.

:clapper: spot on.

[petals]

Can someone explain to me how rebar reinforced poured concrete of a 100+ story building turn to dust in 10 seconds?

Do you watch the History Channel?

[Gibby]

Can someone explain to me how rebar reinforced poured concrete of a 100+ story building turn to dust in 10 seconds?

lets get the physicists here. This would be educational.

[Gibby]

Do you watch the History Channel?

To be fair the history channel is mostly BS nowadays.

[shiva2999]

:erm: I think Pete already has several times and so has AnEin.

No they haven't.

The only one is admarc with the "spring theory".

[Gibby]

No they haven't.

The only one is admarc with the "spring theory".

Oh brother. :clamdigger:

[petals]

To be fair the history channel is mostly BS nowadays.

Around the 9/11 anniversary my boyfriend and I watched a show on the buildings. I was going to reccommend it. They explained why the buildings came down. It was interesting.

[Gibby]

Around the 9/11 anniversary my boyfriend and I watched a show on the buildings. I was going to reccommend it. They explained why the buildings came down. It was interesting.

petals, is shiva likeable? Yes, but he doesn't dwell in reality. He is a classic conspiracy nut.

[Gibby]

oh yeah and Shiva thinks that Bin Laden is an employee of Bush Co.

[uppy]

Maybe someone can explain to me how a collapsing building shoots multi ton sections of steel UP and OUT?

Shiva...go down to your Fire Department and talk to the men that have

seen what happens when a building has a fire like that.

I know you have spent a ton of time looking into this,but have you

ever talked to a professional fire man ?

[Gibby]

some of his theories are laughable and this is one of them, and I'd laugh too if it wasn't so serious.

[Gibby]

I mean wtf do the experts and fire fighters know? Oh sure they have knowledge but shiva has theories.

[coastal]

oh yeah and Shiva thinks that Bin Laden is an employee of Bush Co.

Why don't you STFU homo?

This is my thread and I want to discuss what really happened... not your mastubatory fascination with a Range icon.

[Gibby]

Oh I know they are all paid by the government to keep quiet.

[Gibby]

Why don't you STFU homo?

This is my thread and I want to discuss what really happened... not your mastubatory fascination with a Range icon.

your the one that claims to be homo.

[Gibby]

now back to your thread. Without planes those buildings don't go down and thats a fact.

[coastal]

Shiva...go down to your Fire Department and talk to the men that have


Check out this video... Ignore the first half of it... if you must. It's the first part of the series, so he had to open with his exposition and music. It's actually pretty good for some Last of the Mohican fans.

You'll have to get towards the end of it to listen to the real firefighters that were there that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eE9TWDwhTRA&mode=related&search=

[shiva2999]

Shiva...go down to your Fire Department and talk to the men that have

seen what happens when a building has a fire like that.

I know you have spent a ton of time looking into this,but have you

ever talked to a professional fire man ?

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225

[Ru]

Without the ancillary explosives, the buildings do not collapse. Has anyone explained the presence of thermite yet?

[Gibby]

coastal I am sorry but I am just not one to trust things I see on youtube.

[Gibby]

tos

lets face it the conspiracy nuts are the real ones with mental problems.

[shiva2999]

Why don't you STFU homo?

This is my thread and I want to discuss what really happened... not your mastubatory fascination with a Range icon.

It's really pretty creepy isn't it?

The kid needs help desperately.

[Gibby]

It's really pretty creepy isn't it?

The kid needs help desperately.

you've been pwnd and now you resort to your old stand by of personal attacks. Very nice.

[Al Davis]

The things you have to look at are what the owner of the WTC complex did in the prior months. He purchased the entire complex, and took out a record 3 billion dollar insurance policy on the towers, for which he's been paid. He actually tried getting 7 billion. Later on in the day, tower 7 mysteriously caught on fire, and without any serious threat from the fire, they decided to pull it. Which means bring down in a "controlled demolition". I dont know how long it takes to set up a controlled demolition, but I'm pretty sure it takes longer than the...probably 4 hours it took before tower 7 came down. The reason why they pulled it is because Larry Silverstein got his big fat payoff. Not sure, but I think the rest of the buildings in the complex eventually demolished for different reasons.

Bin-laden, and Al Queada were trained, and funded by our government. Bin-Laden has been used as a CIA asset on several occasions. It's possible 9-11 was used as a pretext to war, to scare the population, get everyone war-minded. Stage a little war in Afghanistan, then go after their real target, and last...to up the police state.

Bottom line is, there's no doubt of the corruption in our government today, and it isn't going to change, or get better unless the people do something about it.

Another theory is that Micheal Moore is used by the Government to cover up the truth. To make it appear that 9-11 happened because Bush was to busy going on vacations, and fishing too much. The fact that he didn't bring up the whole 9-11 Truth movement that was partly consisted of family members of the victims that sprung up shortly after. No mention of Norad standing down, or Bin-Laden's history working for the CIA, and him meeting with the CIA in the prior months of 9-11.

[Gibby]

So lets discuss this issue shall we. I'm willing to but I see no point because we all have our minds made up and it can only plunge into what its become. Namely a stream of personal attacks and shiva worship.

[Gibby]

I was going to say something else but some people would be too thin skinned.

[SpikedLemonade]

Maybe someone can explain to me how a collapsing building shoots multi ton sections of steel UP and OUT?

Crap!

I'm still trying to understand why there is the rare woman who can squirt to the ceiling when she orgasisms and you want me to explain this?

[Mouldsie]

you've been pwnd

how? by calling him a porn director? good one.

[Mouldsie]

So lets discuss this issue shall we. I'm willing to but I see no point because we all have our minds made up and it can only plunge into what its become. Namely a stream of personal attacks and shiva worship.

lelelelelelel

[jimmifli]

:erm: I think Pete already has several times and so has AnEin.
Pete has stated that he doesn't buy the official story.

[Gibby]

how? by calling him a porn director? good one.

no, and hows that an insult. I'm not attacking him. Hell you do those you are around women. If he thinks its an insult thats his fault. No, he's been pwnd because this conspiracy theory is just bunk.

[Gibby]

lelelelelelel

well lets discuss this, come on. Got something intellegent to say?

[shiva2999]

lelelelelelel

Gibby is a Paulist and thus is directed to lie in the service of God.

[Gibby]

Gibby is a Paulist and thus is directed to lie in the service of God.

nice insult, but I believe the category was 9/11 theories.

[coastal]

When people were watching it unfold, did how they fell not seem to make any sense?

I know it didn't to me when I saw it later.

I remember asking my ex on the phone over and over again... "They fell in on themselves?"

Finally she got annoyed as only she can and stated... "Yes. I'm not telling you again."

How come one or both of them didn't fall over sideways and take a couple of other buildings with them?

How did they fall in?

These are the excat thoughts I was having.

It didn't add up and still doesn't.

[Mouldsie]

well lets discuss this, come on. Got something intellegent to say?

you first

[coastal]

Just downloaded the theme song form Mohicans from ipod.

Badass.

[uppy]

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225

Thanks for the link...But, Bill Manning is not a firefighter plus thay had

to clean up the attack sight and find the bodys.To do the kind of

investigation some had called for would have shut down a huge part

of down town NYC, we needed to pick up the pices and move on.

[shiva2999]

... we needed to pick up the pices and move on.

Of course you did, there were wars to plan.

[Gibby]

Thanks for the link...But, Bill Manning is not a firefighter plus thay had

to clean up the attack sight and find the bodys.To do the kind of

investigation some had called for would have shut down a huge part

of down town NYC, we needed to pick up the pices and move on.

well said.

[petals]

When people were watching it unfold, did how they fell not seem to make any sense?

I know it didn't to me when I saw it later.

I remember asking my ex on the phone over and over again... "They fell in on themselves?"

Finally she got annoyed as only she can and stated... "Yes. I'm not telling you again."

How come one or both of them didn't fall over sideways and take a couple of other buildings with them?

How did they fall in?

These are the excat thoughts I was having.

It didn't add up and still doesn't.


I was not aware they fell sideways? Please explain

[Al Davis]

When people were watching it unfold, did how they fell not seem to make any sense?

I know it didn't to me when I saw it later.

I remember asking my ex on the phone over and over again... "They fell in on themselves?"

Finally she got annoyed as only she can and stated... "Yes. I'm not telling you again."

How come one or both of them didn't fall over sideways and take a couple of other buildings with them?

How did they fall in?

These are the excat thoughts I was having.

It didn't add up and still doesn't.


Exactly, they fell in a perfect freefall. Also, they were the first modern buildings to fall from fire. Buildings have burned for days, but only earthquakes, and demolitions have brought them down.

[Gibby]

Of course you did, there were wars to plan.

Sigh.

[coastal]

I was not aware they fell sideways? Please explain

read it again.

[35Pete]

Can someone explain to me how rebar reinforced poured concrete of a 100+ story building turn to dust in 10 seconds?

Because the top of the building had incredible potential energy.

1 metric ton at 350 meters has 350,000 Joules of energy. How many metric tons were the top 20 floors alone?

[Gibby]

Because the top of the building had incredible potential energy.

1 metric ton at 350 meters has 350,000 Joules of energy. How many metric tons were the top 20 floors alone?

uh, jimmi you were saying?

[jimmifli]

Pete do you believe the official story?

[35Pete]

Pete has stated that he doesn't buy the official story.

I stated that I think that they are holding out information. I never stated that they planned and executed this atrocity.

[uppy]

Of course you did, there were wars to plan.

The US has war plans already on the books for just about every country

even Cannada.

No, it was time to bury our dead and care for the living and pick up the

pices.

[35Pete]

Pete do you believe the official story?

I think the security breach may have been worse than we have been told. That's just my gut feel. Nothing else.

[Gibby]

The US has war plans already on the books for just about every country

even Cannada.

No, it was time to bury our dead and care for the living and pick up the

pices.
Very true, and matter of fact most countries- even the closest of allies- have war plans drawn up.

[coastal]

One of the most intriguing aspect of many of the videos and pictures IU have seen of the towers (all three of them) collapsing is this phenomenon called squibs.

Apparently these "squibs" are common in the world of controlled demolition.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/squibs.html

Squibs are "blasting caps (initiators) used in the explosive industry to set off high explosives." 1 Â In discussions of the collapses of the WTC skyscrapers, the term has been appropriated to describe the physical appearance of puffs or jets of dust emerging from buildings during a demolition, caused by the detonation of explosive charges. Several such "squibs" can be seen in videos and photographs capturing the collapses of the North and South Towers.

It has been suggested that the evident squibs could have been added to the photographs and videos after the fact, given that much of this evidence has found its way onto the web via undocumented routes. However, the squibs show up in many diverse videos and photographs, and we have not been able to find any showing the squibs to be absent. A conspiracy of incredible proportions would be required to forge such convincing evidence of squibs in such diverse sources."

...more...

[Gibby]

Here's a question Why TF do so many Canadiens care about what happened on 9/11?

[Carl J. Ironsides]

For answers to this and more of life's questions, fly to Minnesota, find Tedy Bruschi and ask the almighty No. 54. He knows all and sees all.

[coastal]

I stated that I think that they are holding out information. I never stated that they planned and executed this atrocity.

what makes you say this Pete?

[coastal]

Here's a question Why TF do so many Canadiens care about what happened on 9/11?

Because it affected the whole world.

[Gibby]

Okay, I can respect that.

[jimmifli]

I think the security breach may have been worse than we have been told. That's just my gut feel. Nothing else.
In other words something inside the building contributed to bringing them down. This doesn't mean you believe the entire busco story (obviously you don't), but you do believe that the planes in and of themselves don't explain the building collapse.


Is that correct?

[petals]

read it again.

Reading comprehension.....my bad!

[Al Davis]

Some of you guys should check out Infowars.com. Alot of people call Alex Jones crazy, but I think he makes alot of good points. He's been going at it for awhile, here's a video of him being arrested for asking Bush a question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKnJHqBgk5E

[35Pete]

Concrete has a mass of 2.3 metric tons/ meter cubed. Assuming 100 cubic meters/floor thats 2.3*100*350,000 = 81,000,000 Joules/floor roughly. That's a lot of energy.

[35Pete]

In other words something inside the building contributed to bringing them down. This doesn't mean you believe the entire busco story (obviously you don't), but you do believe that the planes in and of themselves don't explain the building collapse.


Is that correct?


Well the more I look at this Jimmi the more it seems entirely plausible that the mass of the buildings themselves were enough to cause them to implode.

[uppy]

For answers to this and more of life's questions, fly to Minnesota, find Tedy Bruschi and ask the almighty No. 54. He knows all and sees all.


I'd ask Bellichick

[shiva2999]

The US has war plans already on the books for just about every country

even Cannada.

Duh!

[35Pete]

what makes you say this Pete?

Gut feeling. I think more was going to happen that day to be honest. I just think that they are sugarcoating this.

[uppy]

Because it affected the whole world.


How so ?

[jimmifli]

Well the more I look at this Jimmi the more it seems entirely plausible that the mass of the buildings themselves were enough to cause them to implode.
So you no longer agree with Dr Jones? What has changed your mind?

[Carl J. Ironsides]

I love the South Park episode in which 9/11 conspiracy theorists get absolutely ripped apart. If you haven't watched it, I recommend doing so.

[Gibby]

Duh!

but why would we? Where's the challenge?

[coastal]

Concrete has a mass of 2.3 metric tons/ meter cubed. Assuming 100 cubic meters/floor thats 2.3*100*350,000 = 81,000,000 Joules/floor roughly. That's a lot of energy.

I'm not arguing that their was a lot of weight above the impact zones on those buildings.

But the damage wasn't uniform. It was very much assymetircal.

Yet the fall was entirely uniform.

Both times even though the planes damaged the buildings in entirely different ways and at different heights.

[uppy]

Duh!

lol

Congrats, thats the best 9/11 post from you yet.

[Gibby]

Hope you grow a brain someday shiva, and if he is an icon then I pity all of you.

[shiva2999]

Concrete has a mass of 2.3 metric tons/ meter cubed. Assuming 100 cubic meters/floor thats 2.3*100*350,000 = 81,000,000 Joules/floor roughly. That's a lot of energy.

Argh. This is so dumb.

"Buildings are heavy!" ~Pete the Super Genius

[Gibby]

Goodbye, I hate you all, see you around. I'll be back in a few days.

[35Pete]

Argh. This is so dumb.

"Buildings are heavy!" ~Pete the Super Genius

From the savant that didn't know what measurement error was.

The MAGNITUDE of energy Shiva, the MAGNITUDE. Coastal asked a question, I answered.

[shiva2999]

I love the South Park episode in which 9/11 conspiracy theorists get absolutely ripped apart. If you haven't watched it, I recommend doing so.

I liked the last season of 24 where the President was a lying, cheating, murdering scumbag.

[Al Davis]

Just watch Bush's reaction to this question...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j9Bj8JJwco

[coastal]

Gut feeling. I think more was going to happen that day to be honest. I just think that they are sugarcoating this.

Cmon Pete... you aren't being candid about this.

Tell me what you think.

[coastal]

Goodbye, I hate you all, see you around. I'll be back in a few days.
You need to leave shiva alone when you do come back.

Its uncomfortable to watch, and totally unentertaining.

[35Pete]

Concrete has a mass of 2.3 metric tons/ meter cubed. Assuming 100 cubic meters/floor thats 2.3*100*350,000 = 81,000,000 Joules/floor roughly. That's a lot of energy.

Forgot to multiply by gravity. 789 MJ/floor.

[35Pete]

Cmon Pete... you aren't being candid about this.

Tell me what you think.

I think they knew it was coming, tried to stop it, couldn't, and then hid away a lot of "facts" to keep the public from knowing about the incompetency of allowing the breech. That is why I think they are overreacting now.

[Al Davis]

Last video I'm posting. Alex Jones on how 9-11 was carried out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmQxl-Mse5E

[shiva2999]

From the savant that didn't know what measurement error was.

The MAGNITUDE of energy Shiva, the MAGNITUDE. Coastal asked a question, I answered.

Gee, those pro demolition guys sure are dumb, doing all that special rigging of multiple charges.

All they need to do is blow one floor near the top and the whole building comes down in it's footprint!

Why?

Because buildings are heavy and contain eleventy jillion billion Joules of potential energy!

[coastal]

I think they knew it was coming, tried to stop it, couldn't, and then hid away a lot of "facts" to keep the public from knowing about the incompetency of allowing the breech. That is why I think they are overreacting now.

Whatever.

Back to the buildings...

The interior of the buildings was nothing but concrete. I can see how the outside structures could have collapsed but all of the interorio concrete just disinigrated in DUST in seconds.

that makes no sense, even if all the concrete on one level was destroyed during the impacts... which it wasn't.

[35Pete]

Gee, those pro demolition guys sure are dumb, doing all that special rigging of multiple charges.

All they need to do is blow one floor near the top and the whole building comes down in it's footprint!

Why?

Because buildings are heavy and contain eleventy jillion billion Joules of potential energy!

You are acting paranoid again. :)

[coastal]

Gee, those pro demolition guys sure are dumb, doing all that special rigging of multiple charges.

All they need to do is blow one floor near the top and the whole building comes down in it's footprint!

Why?

Because buildings are heavy and contain eleventy jillion billion Joules of potential energy!

:rofl:

[Al Davis]

I think they knew it was coming, tried to stop it, couldn't, and then hid away a lot of "facts" to keep the public from knowing about the incompetency of allowing the breech. That is why I think they are overreacting now.


Do you really think they tried? Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD on 9-11, and they were conducting drills the same morning with hijacked aircrafts, and targets including the WTC, and Pentagon. It talks more about this in the video I just posted^.

[35Pete]

Whatever.

Back to the buildings...

The interior of the buildings was nothing but concrete. I can see how the outside structures could have collapsed but all of the interorio concrete just disinigrated in DUST in seconds.

that makes no sense, even if all the concrete on one level was destroyed during the impacts... which it wasn't.

You can tell this from watching a video? Clouded with dust?

[jimmifli]

Pete I think you missed my post.

Well the more I look at this Jimmi the more it seems entirely plausible that the mass of the buildings themselves were enough to cause them to implode.
So you no longer agree with Dr Jones? What has changed your mind?

[coastal]

You can tell this from watching a video? Clouded with dust?

You never watched any of the videos i linked in this thread and everyone knows that ALL of lower manhattan was covered in dust immediately following the collapses.

The buildings sisn't fall down Pete.

They disinigrated.

Weird to me.

I know its got to be weird for you as a scientist to watch.

[SpikedLemonade]

Gee, those pro demolition guys sure are dumb, doing all that special rigging of multiple charges.

All they need to do is blow one floor near the top and the whole building comes down in it's footprint!

Why?

Because buildings are heavy and contain eleventy jillion billion Joules of potential energy!


Between the Demolation Industry and the Explosives Industry.

They really only need 1/100th of the explosives that they typically use, but to jack up the price of the demolition they use more and get a kickback from the explosives supplier.

Shiva, I think you are onto something here.

[uppy]

Do you really think they tried? Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD on 9-11, and they were conducting drills the same morning with hijacked aircrafts, and targets including the WTC, and Pentagon. It talks more about this in the video I just posted^.

A Canadian general was in command of NORAD on 9/11

[SpikedLemonade]

A Canadian general was in command of NORAD on 9/11


There you go!

Canada rather than the Taliban should have been attacked.

At least we got some oil.

[JLB]

Ok whatever your all smoking pass that stick around.
Save the conspiracy crap for tha late night comedians.

[uppy]

The floors are only about 4-6" thick thay can only carry so much, when the

floors started to fall it caused a chain rection.I core and cut holes in building

floors for my pipes and ducts all the time.I know how thin and infact weak

thay are...like I said before go ask a fire fighter what happens.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Ok whatever your all smoking pass that stick around.
Save the conspiracy crap for tha late night comedians.

How can you support a president who was initially against a 9/11 investigation?


LOL

[uppy]

There you go!

Canada rather than the Taliban should have been attacked.

At least we got some oil.

In time..in time

[coastal]

what about the core uppy?

[TheGoodShepherd]

The floors are only about 4-6" thick thay can only carry so much, when the

floors started to fall it caused a chain rection.I core and cut holes in building

floors for my pipes and ducts all the time.I know how thin and infact weak

thay are...like I said before go ask a fire fighter what happens.

You don't even know how to spell or use capitals half the time. Who cares what you think...LOL


You're not even close to being unqualified....you're like... nothingness. Non-existant. A forgotten memory. Being unqualified is still 30 times ahead of you...LOL


WHO ARE YOU?


LOL

[uppy]

How can you support a president who was initially against a 9/11 investigation?


Yawn...people saw the plans hit the buildings nothing to investigate

move along people

[uppy]

You don't even know how to spell or use capitals half the time. Who cares what you think...LOL


You're not even close to being unqualified....you're like... nothingness. Non-existant. A forgotten memory. Being unqualified is still 30 times ahead of you...LOL


WHO ARE YOU?


LOL

Not a chimp

[SpikedLemonade]

You don't even know how to spell or use capitals half the time. Who cares what you think...LOL


You're not even close to being unqualified....you're like... nothingness. Non-existant. A forgotten memory. Being unqualified is still 30 times ahead of you...LOL


WHO ARE YOU?


LOL

Safety glasses are strongly advised.

[JLB]

How can you support a president who was initially against a 9/11 investigation?


LOL

Would you want to be investigated I don't think so lol.

[JLB]

Safety glasses are strongly advised.

Spiked you know the conspiracy theorists are fools c'mon.

[JLB]

You don't even know how to spell or use capitals half the time. Who cares what you think...LOL


You're not even close to being unqualified....you're like... nothingness. Non-existant. A forgotten memory. Being unqualified is still 30 times ahead of you...LOL


WHO ARE YOU?


LOL


Who are you no need to shout so who are you?

[JLB]

Comments c'mon tell me all about the magic used to bring down the WTC buildings lol.

[JLB]

I didn't think so.

[JLB]

http://www.monkeytrain.com/images/funny/monkey_poop.jpg

He's reading about the conspiracy theories and this is what he thinks of them all he's crapping.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Yawn...people saw the plans hit the buildings nothing to investigate

move along people


I wasn't even talking about a conspiracy. DUH.


I was talking about the fact Bush was initially against a 9/11 investigation...LOL...he fought it every step of the way....

But it's nice to see that as an American YOU DONT OR DIDNT SUPPORT an investigation into 9/11....

LOL

HAHAHAAH

OMG....you're a cartoon charachter


Do you want to take that comment back upstart?

[coastal]

I think they knew it was coming, tried to stop it, couldn't, and then hid away a lot of "facts" to keep the public from knowing about the incompetency of allowing the breech. That is why I think they are overreacting now.

What if I can show you this group had a pattern of lieing to promote wars?

Would you then take the next step and admit they probably didn't try and stop it?

[coastal]

what about the concrete core uppy...

and the squibs...

[uppy]

what about the core uppy?

My guess is that if fell in on its self

[JLB]

I wasn't even talking about a conspiracy. DUH.


I was talking about the fact Bush was initially against a 9/11 investigation...LOL...he fought it every step of the way....

But it's nice to see that as an American YOU DONT OR DIDNT SUPPORT an investigation into 9/11....

LOL

HAHAHAAH

OMG....you're a cartoon charachter


Do you want to take that comment back upstart?


We all supported the investigation but those damn democrats said no.

[JLB]

http://www.monkeytrain.com/images/funny/monkey_poop.jpg

This was the only democrat willing to go forward with the propaganda.

[uppy]

Who are you no need to shout so who are you?

this is what he does

http://edushop.edu4kids.com/catalog/images/products/LT_4375_big.gif

[coastal]

My guess is that if fell in on its self

How?

I mean... take a solid concrete core... 100+ floors of it. Then take away say 20% of one of the edges from one side at lets say four or five of those 100+ levels.

Explain to me how it then collapses in on itself.

[JLB]

this is what he does

http://edushop.edu4kids.com/catalog/images/products/LT_4375_big.gif


ROFLMAO!!

http://www.monkeytrain.com/images/funny/monkey_poop.jpg


In his sparetime he has his lead investigator read up on all the newest conspiracy theories.

[coastal]

We all supported the investigation but those damn democrats said no.

what exactly is your purpose in this thread?

[shiva2999]

My guess is that if fell in on its self

Why would the core fall in on itself?

It was immensely strong.

[JLB]

How?

I mean... take a solid concrete core... 100+ floors of it. Then take away say 20% of one of the edges from one side.

Explain to me how it then collapses in on itself.

Explain why it can't.

[JLB]

Why would the core fall in on itself?

It was immensely strong.

Not strong enough apparently.

[coastal]

Explain why it can't.

blow me.

[shiva2999]

what exactly is your purpose in this thread?

He's the 55 year old version of gibby.

Victory through inanity.

[JLB]

what exactly is your purpose in this thread?


Same as yours in the exact opposite direction.

[JLB]

You see as far as I am concerned any and all conspiracy theories are bs.

[Smash]

hippies, everywhere i look its nothing but hippies.

face it, your revolution's over, the bums lost. Do what your parents did, and get a job!

[shiva2999]

Not strong enough apparently.

Indeed.

[JLB]

what exactly is your purpose in this thread?

So why are you here? This has been gone over 100's of times what new information do you have to offer if any?

[coastal]

So if I'm a smart ass, that would make you a...

[JLB]

Indeed.

Indeed!!

[shiva2999]

You see as far as I am concerned any and all conspiracy theories are bs.

Victory through inanity.

[JLB]

So if I'm a smart ass, that would make you a...

the same no better no worse.

[JLB]

Victory through inanity.

intelligent design?

[SpikedLemonade]

Why would the core fall in on itself?

It was immensely strong.

Shiva, can you please replace immensely with some mathematical equation or physics measurement so that it has the crediability of Pete's earlier posts.

The monkey on the toilet prefers numbers to wipe his ass with.

Thank you.

[shiva2999]

So why are you here? This has been gone over 100's of times what new information do you have to offer if any?

Are you the thread police?

Is it your job to shut down discussions of ideas you don't wish to entertain?

[uppy]

Why would the core fall in on itself?

It was immensely strong.

Coastal,Shiva,I can only guess but the weight from the floors pulled them

as thay fell.

I bet if the buildings were hit lower the tops would have toppled down intact

[Ru]

Why was there thermite present? Why was there molten steel in the rubble for weeks after the attacks?

[coastal]

Coastal,Shiva,I can only guess but the weight from the floors pulled them

as thay fell.

I bet if the buildings were hit lower the tops would have toppled down intact
the core was reinforced with steel.

[shiva2999]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/april2006/240406thermite1.jpg

http://www.thepowerhour.com/images/9-11_thermite2.jpg

http://www.bcrevolution.ca/images/240406wtc.jpg

[SpikedLemonade]

the core was reinforced with steel.

So is my forehead, but my head will still crush with a good swing from a baseball bat.

[coastal]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/april2006/240406thermite1.jpg

http://www.thepowerhour.com/images/9-11_thermite2.jpg

http://www.bcrevolution.ca/images/240406wtc.jpg

That third picture just looks beyond weird.

Why is it blowing out it total pieces and not big fat ****ing chunks?

[Ru]

I like the steel beams cut at exact right angles.

[coastal]

I remember watching some show one night on the Titanic.

They were looking for the keel plate where the ship came apart.

They actually found the ****er on the last day of the expedition and then went through all kinds of metalurgical forensic examination of the steel and the bends and stretches in it.

Rivetting stuff! ;)

I have yet to see the same kind of look at the steel of the WTC's.

[uppy]

the core was reinforced with steel.

Steel bends with heat also with out the floors the core will not stand

alone.

Look,I have talked with Firefighters and Engineers about this subject

and not one thinks it was a controlled demo.

Shiva,coastal and others, I respect the time you guys have put into this

I just don't agree.

[Victor7]

Shiva: What are the numbers on your second picture ??

[coastal]

Steel bends with heat also with out the floors the core will not stand

alone.

Look,I have talked with Firefighters and Engineers about this subject

and not one thinks it was a controlled demo.

Shiva,coastal and others, I respect the time you guys have put into this

I just don't agree.

Have you ever seen concrete poured on a large scale commercial project?

The impression it leaves it with is that... ain't nothing bringing this ****er down!

Not only did 100+ floors of it come down in 10 seconds.

It turned to dust.

That's ****ing awesome!

[coastal]

Fly a plane into this ****er and I'd put a ten spot on not only this building not turning into dust, but in it holding together too.

http://www.wnfm.com/Hoover%20Dam%20pics/2a.jpg

[Al Davis]

I have talked with Firefighters and Engineers about this subject

and not one thinks it was a controlled demo.



Plenty of them have gone public stating their doubts about what were told happened, of course your not gonna hear about it on the mainstream news.

[coastal]

Plenty of them have gone public stating their doubts about what were told happened, of course your not gonna hear about it on the mainstream news.

watch the vidoes I linked.

[deconstruction]

hippies, everywhere i look its nothing but hippies.

face it, your revolution's over, the bums lost. Do what your parents did, and get a job!

Apparently, Smash has just woken up from the last time he smashed into a brick wall and has rejoined with yet another pointless comment. Need any ointment for that bruise?

[uppy]

Have you ever seen concrete poured on a large scale commercial project?

The impression it leaves it with is that... ain't nothing bringing this ****er down!

Not only did 100+ floors of it come down in 10 seconds.

It turned to dust.

That's ****ing awesome!

A dam is soild concrete...a building is not.

The Pats game is on...GO PATS GO !!!!!

[deconstruction]

Have you ever seen concrete poured on a large scale commercial project?

The impression it leaves it with is that... ain't nothing bringing this ****er down!

Not only did 100+ floors of it come down in 10 seconds.

It turned to dust.

That's ****ing awesome!

Yeah, umm, it didn't come down in 10 seconds, it took almost an hour.

[coastal]

Yeah, umm, it didn't come down in 10 seconds, it took almost an hour.

Too bad you don't have enough self-awareness to realize how boring you are.

[Gibby]

hippies, everywhere i look its nothing but hippies.

face it, your revolution's over, the bums lost. Do what your parents did, and get a job!

I see stupid people, so don't worry you aren't hallucinating.

[Lucidvizion]

Why was there thermite present? Why was there molten steel in the rubble for weeks after the attacks?

Since thermite is just a simple mixture of iron oxide and aluminum I don't think anybody would have to stretch to come up with an answer to that one.

[Lucidvizion]

That third picture just looks beyond weird.

Why is it blowing out it total pieces and not big fat ****ing chunks?

Big ****ing chunks of what exactly? By volume, office buildings are mostly empty space.

It looks like the building is getting ripped apart like a zipper would open.

[coastal]

It looks like the building is getting ripped apart like a zipper would open.
Great analogy.

[Ru]

Since thermite is just a simple mixture of iron oxide and aluminum I don't think anybody would have to stretch to come up with an answer to that one.

What? How was there thermite reactions without the presence of explosives? Why was there molten steel for up to six weeks after the attacks? Why the hell was there molten steel and thermite found at WTC #7 which supposedly just fell because of structural damage?

[Al Davis]

What? How was there thermite reactions without the presence of explosives? Why was there molten steel for up to six weeks after the attacks? Why the hell was there molten steel and thermite found at WTC #7 which supposedly just fell because of structural damage?

Their was a small fire in the building, so they decided to pull it, or demolish it. That is fact, and admitted by owner Silverstein.

[Ru]

Their was a small fire in the building, so they decided to pull it, or demolish it. That is fact, and admitted by owner Silverstein.

Well, it was an obvious controlled demolition, but I've never seen anywhere where anyone ever admitted it being so. And if it was, then the explosives had to have been wired beforehand.

[coastal]

Their was a small fire in the building, so they decided to pull it, or demolish it. That is fact, and admitted by owner Silverstein.care to link this?

[shiva2999]

care to link this?

Google "Larry Silverstein pull it".

[Al Davis]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

I think this is the video where he says it, not sure, its blocked because I'm in school.

[Lucidvizion]

What? How was there thermite reactions without the presence of explosives? Why was there molten steel for up to six weeks after the attacks? Why the hell was there molten steel and thermite found at WTC #7 which supposedly just fell because of structural damage?

Woah, slow down for a second. I only addressed your question asking why thermite reactions were present. I cannot answer the other questions.

A thermite reaction requires iron oxide, aluminum and heat, all three of which I can say for a fact were present in the building. Explosives aren't necessary; you can ignite do-it-yourself back yard thermite with a strip of magnesium.

Large sections of steel rail are also welded using thermite reactions. It could simply be residue from the construction of the building. I don't know how the building was constructed so I can't state this as a fact... but IMO this is most likely why there was evidence of thermite reactions.

[Ralonzo]

The breakdown of this poll is too perfect.

One fourth of the population is retarded. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhwPLJky6oQ)

Or... was it Bush after all? (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/10/11/video-south-park-spoofs-truther-morons/)

[JayHall93]

what type of articles are there from the people who built the twin towers. any videos / articles from their thoughts?

[coastal]

The breakdown of this poll is too perfect.

One fourth of the population is retarded. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhwPLJky6oQ)

Or... was it Bush after all? (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/10/11/video-south-park-spoofs-truther-morons/)
:rofl:

Clue glue!!!

:rofl:

[BanditsRock11]

I think planes did it, yes, however I dont think a plane hit the Pentagon, I think it was a missle directed at the plane and missed it.

[coastal]

I think planes did it, yes, however I dont think a plane hit the Pentagon, I think it was a missle directed at the plane and missed it.

then where's the ****ing plane?

Here's a hint...

http://www.athlonsports.com/images/articles/Cleveland%20Indians10.png

[admarc]

Buildings are designed to resist certain forces and provide the occupants with time to evacuate in the event of a disaster but are not designed to be indestructible. I find it incredibly naive of people to believe something designed and built by man is infallible.

A building's expected live load (moveable objects like furniture and people), dead load (the weight of the building itself) and potential lateral forces (wind and earthquake) are estimated and calculated and a structural system is designed to resist those loads. The prevailing building codes determine the acceptable safety factors for designed loads and fire protection. The goal is to design the safest possible structure in the most efficient and economical way. Separate calculations are performed for each building element to determine the size, designed strength and the acceptable span between elements. Fire protection is also designed to resist heat for a given period of time. Steel is considered an excellent building material because of it's elasticity, which makes it a good choice when designing to resist lateral forces. Unfortunately, it is vulnerable to fire and can lose much of it's strength when exposed to extreme temperatures over time. Concrete fairs far better resisting fire and is a terrific material when designing to resist compressive forces. Unfortunately, concrete does not have great tensile strength and is not very elastic. Unlike steel it does not bend before breaking. Even though concrete is a great resistor of compressive forces, it's bearing capacity is not limitless. When concrete is stressed beyond its bearing capacity, it fails catastrophically.

Composite structures have the benefit of the best of both worlds. Concrete is designed to resist compressive forces, steel resists the lateral forces and the concrete can encase the steel to offer fire protection. The World Trade Center was actually a combination of all three building types. The core was really a tube within a tube comprised of an exterior band of steel columns and an interior tube of reinforced concrete. The stairs and elevator shafts existed within the reinforced concrete tube.

There was no one calculation available that could account for the combination of factors that happened on September 11, 2001, meaning the building could have survived either the plane crash or the fire, but both together was not ever accounted for in design and proved to be fatal.

Let me answer some of the questions in this thread to further explain.

I'm not arguing that their was a lot of weight above the impact zones on those buildings.

But the damage wasn't uniform. It was very much assymetircal.

Yet the fall was entirely uniform.

Both times even though the planes damaged the buildings in entirely different ways and at different heights.

Yes, the damage from the planes was asymetrical, but the damage alone did not cause the collapse. When the planes crashed into the towers, they completely knocked out several columns and beams. Obviously, this did not cause a collapse upon impact because the towers stood for a period of time after impact. The weight that those columns and beams where designed to resist was transfered to the remaining columns, beams and the tubular concrete core. The stress in the remaining structure on the damaged floor was loaded in excess of their originally designed load, but apparently not beyond their capacity and was able to support the structure initially.

Watch video of the impact and you can see that there was an explosion upon impact. The jet fuel spread over a wide area and instantly started fires on multiple floors. Unlike typical building fires that start in a specific location and spread out, the fact that the fire was instantly dispersed over a wide area put the building at greater risk because multiple structural elements were being heated and losing strength simultaneously. The steel columns were not encased in concrete, but were fire protected by a spray on coating. The impact of the planes very likely could have shaken loose the spray on column fireproofing on the effected floors leaving the steel fully exposed to the effects of the fire.

So now you have columns and beams stressed beyond their typical loads likely near their designed capacity with compromised fire protection and a raging fire that was instantly spread over a wide area. As the fire burned, the steel began to lose it's strength until finally the bearing capacity of the steel was reduced below the weight it was resisting. With a large number of the steel columns rendered useless by fire or impact most of the weight of the entire structure above was predominantly being beared by the concrete core tubes alone. The core was never designed to resist the amount of weight that it was made to bear once the columns lost most of their strength. When the concrete core reached it's maximum bearing potential and failed, it failed like all concrete structures do, catastrophically. Once the structure of the floors of impact failed the entire mass and potential energy of the floors above was unleashed and went into a free fall straight down. As a single uniform mass with incredible energy (see Pete's calcs for specifics) the upper floors smashed through the floors below with ease.



Big ****ing chunks of what exactly? By volume, office buildings are mostly empty space.

As the mass of the free falling upper tower crashed through each floor it caused the floors to pancake in rapid succession. LucidVizion correctly noted, the building is comprised mostly of air. When the floors collapsed upon themselves they instantly forced the air out the sides which likely explain the perceived squibs.

No they haven't.

The only one is admarc with the "spring theory".

This is a real crude example, but take a paper clip and straighten it out, now squeeze on both ends and release. See how far the paper clip leaps out.

Steel is elastic, when the tower mass smashed the floors it likely caused the steel to bend and squeeze between the connectors at the top and bottom. When the steel connectors failed it would likely "spring" out in a similiar fashion to the paper clip between your fingers.


That third picture just looks beyond weird.

Why is it blowing out it total pieces and not big fat ****ing chunks?

What I find interesting about that third picture is that it is clear there is no explosion visible below the floors of impact. If the building was detonated, it was only detonated at the floors of impact. If you were planning a controlled demolition, you would start at the bottom, not the upper third portion of the building. Did conspirators rig the entire building with thousands of pounds of explosives so that they could detonate the exact floor of impact to make it look good or did they know exactly what floor the planes would hit? Pretty freaking amazing feat if they pulled that one off. How do you plant thousands of pounds of explosives totally undetected in an office building? There are security cameras and thousands of workers in and out daily. If the building failed at the bottom first, even after the planes struck near the top, I would be very suspicious, but it did not. The building failed first at the floors the planes impacted, which is entirely consistent with what I would expect in my explanation above and not what I would expect in a controlled demolition.

Planes flown by islamic fundamentalist terrorists brought down the twin towers.

links:

http://concretecore.741.com/
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_keyfindings.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

[shiva2999]

This is a real crude example, but take a paper clip and straighten it out, now squeeze on both ends and release. See how far the paper clip leaps out.

Steel is elastic, when the tower mass smashed the floors it likely caused the steel to bend and squeeze between the connectors at the top and bottom. When the steel connectors failed it would likely "spring" out in a similiar fashion to the paper clip between your fingers.

"Likely"? C'mon.

The only similarity between a steel I beam girder and a straightened paper clip is they are both made of metal and their length is greater than their cross section.

This paper clip analogy is about as glib as it gets.

[uppy]

Buildings are designed to resist certain forces and provide the occupants with time to evacuate in the event of a disaster but are not designed to be indestructible. I find it incredibly naive of people to believe something designed and built by man is infallible.

A building's expected live load (moveable objects like furniture and people), dead load (the weight of the building itself) and potential lateral forces (wind and earthquake) are estimated and calculated and a structural system is designed to resist those loads. The prevailing building codes determine the acceptable safety factors for designed loads and fire protection. The goal is to design the safest possible structure in the most efficient and economical way. Separate calculations are performed for each building element to determine the size, designed strength and the acceptable span between elements. Fire protection is also designed to resist heat for a given period of time. Steel is considered an excellent building material because of it's elasticity, which makes it a good choice when designing to resist lateral forces. Unfortunately, it is vulnerable to fire and can lose much of it's strength when exposed to extreme temperatures over time. Concrete fairs far better resisting fire and is a terrific material when designing to resist compressive forces. Unfortunately, concrete does not have great tensile strength and is not very elastic. Unlike steel it does not bend before breaking. Even though concrete is a great resistor of compressive forces, it's bearing capacity is not limitless. When concrete is stressed beyond its bearing capacity, it fails catastrophically.

Composite structures have the benefit of the best of both worlds. Concrete is designed to resist compressive forces, steel resists the lateral forces and the concrete can encase the steel to offer fire protection. The World Trade Center was actually a combination of all three building types. The core was really a tube within a tube comprised of an exterior band of steel columns and an interior tube of reinforced concrete. The stairs and elevator shafts existed within the reinforced concrete tube.

There was no one calculation available that could account for the combination of factors that happened on September 11, 2001, meaning the building could have survived either the plane crash or the fire, but both together was not ever accounted for in design and proved to be fatal.

Let me answer some of the questions in this thread to further explain.



Yes, the damage from the planes was asymetrical, but the damage alone did not cause the collapse. When the planes crashed into the towers, they completely knocked out several columns and beams. Obviously, this did not cause a collapse upon impact because the towers stood for a period of time after impact. The weight that those columns and beams where designed to resist was transfered to the remaining columns, beams and the tubular concrete core. The stress in the remaining structure on the damaged floor was loaded in excess of their originally designed load, but apparently not beyond their capacity and was able to support the structure initially.

Watch video of the impact and you can see that there was an explosion upon impact. The jet fuel spread over a wide area and instantly started fires on multiple floors. Unlike typical building fires that start in a specific location and spread out, the fact that the fire was instantly dispersed over a wide area put the building at greater risk because multiple structural elements were being heated and losing strength simultaneously. The steel columns were not encased in concrete, but were fire protected by a spray on coating. The impact of the planes very likely could have shaken loose the spray on column fireproofing on the effected floors leaving the steel fully exposed to the effects of the fire.

So now you have columns and beams stressed beyond their typical loads likely near their designed capacity with compromised fire protection and a raging fire that was instantly spread over a wide area. As the fire burned, the steel began to lose it's strength until finally the bearing capacity of the steel was reduced below the weight it was resisting. With a large number of the steel columns rendered useless by fire or impact most of the weight of the entire structure above was predominantly being beared by the concrete core tubes alone. The core was never designed to resist the amount of weight that it was made to bear once the columns lost most of their strength. When the concrete core reached it's maximum bearing potential and failed, it failed like all concrete structures do, catastrophically. Once the structure of the floors of impact failed the entire mass and potential energy of the floors above was unleashed and went into a free fall straight down. As a single uniform mass with incredible energy (see Pete's calcs for specifics) the upper floors smashed through the floors below with ease.



As the mass of the free falling upper tower crashed through each floor it caused the floors to pancake in rapid succession. LucidVizion correctly noted, the building is comprised mostly of air. When the floors collapsed upon themselves they instantly forced the air out the sides which likely explain the perceived squibs.



This is a real crude example, but take a paper clip and straighten it out, now squeeze on both ends and release. See how far the paper clip leaps out.

Steel is elastic, when the tower mass smashed the floors it likely caused the steel to bend and squeeze between the connectors at the top and bottom. When the steel connectors failed it would likely "spring" out in a similiar fashion to the paper clip between your fingers.




What I find interesting about that third picture is that it is clear there is no explosion visible below the floors of impact. If the building was detonated, it was only detonated at the floors of impact. If you were planning a controlled demolition, you would start at the bottom, not the upper third portion of the building. Did conspirators rig the entire building with thousands of pounds of explosives so that they could detonate the exact floor of impact to make it look good or did they know exactly what floor the planes would hit? Pretty freaking amazing feat if they pulled that one off. How do you plant thousands of pounds of explosives totally undetected in an office building? There are security cameras and thousands of workers in and out daily. If the building failed at the bottom first, even after the planes struck near the top, I would be very suspicious, but it did not. The building failed first at the floors the planes impacted, which is entirely consistent with what I would expect in my explanation above and not what I would expect in a controlled demolition.

Planes flown by islamic fundamentalist terrorists brought down the twin towers.

links:

http://concretecore.741.com/
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_keyfindings.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm


Great Post Sir.

[ticatfan3]

The planes did it and I wish people would give up on this .There is enough evidence out there to prove it. People say that the jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt the steel, you don't need to melt it,just weaken it a bit and down she comes. And remember it was built by man and maybe it was not up to specs in the 1 st place.Remember the titanic was unsinkable, but it to was built by man and those men put in inferior rivots.

[Ralonzo]

"Likely"? C'mon.

The only similarity between a steel I beam girder and a straightened paper clip is they are both made of metal and their length is greater than their cross section.

This paper clip analogy is about as glib as it gets.

Cool, the airtight shiva counter-argument, as previously witnessed approximately (shiva.posts - 1) times on the Range. "All your facts and links are wrong because... they conflict with what I'm saying!"

[shiva2999]

Cool, the airtight shiva counter-argument, as previously witnessed approximately (shiva.posts - 1) times on the Range. "All your facts and links are wrong because... they conflict with what I'm saying!"

Too bad what I was talking about was neither a fact nor a link.

[Gibby]

good to see the liberal dipshits are as clueless as ever

[ticatfan3]

good to see the liberal dipshits are as clueless as everThey never change and that is why the world is going to the dogs.

[Gibby]

They never change and that is why the world is going to the dogs.

I agree

[sukie]

Chimp is confusing investigations. The families call for a WTC investigation and the 9/11 commission are two different things.

[shiva2999]

good to see the liberal dipshits are as clueless as ever

Is this necessary?

And who are the liberal dipshits you're referring to?

And why are they clueless? Why are they always clueless?

[Gibby]

Hey shiva why are you stalking me you ******. Its getting really creepy.

[Gibby]

Will the mods ignore similar comments made previously by the borg to me while they censure me for this? You bet, oh well its a privately owned board. Too bad some of us can't take what we dish out.

[Mouldsie]

phantom you agree with those liberal dipshits a lot

[TheGoodShepherd]

Chimp is confusing investigations. The families call for a WTC investigation and the 9/11 commission are two different things.

Once again. You have no idea what you're talking about. Bush and Cheney were initially and vehemently against a 9/11 investigation.

They even went so far as to appoint Kissinger as it's first chairman. When it was found Kissinger had busines partners by the name of "Bin Laden"....the families fiercely demanded his resignation. Kissinger then resigned.

Are you disputing this claim...don't you ever freakin read modern American history?

[jimmifli]

Admarc, I appreciate the thoughtful post.

Have you seen Dr. Jones' lecture? Many of his arguments seem logical to a layman, what are your thoughts on his presentation?

A few points he makes: the length of time required for the domino effect of each floor collapsing into the next should take longer than a freefall, but the video footage doesn't seem to support that explanation.

The info on the fire temperature and it's effect on steel was also interesting.

I found the most interesting part the molten steel in the "basement".

Your comments would be appreciated. If you need a link I'll dig one up.

[Gibby]

Once again. You have no idea what you're talking about. Bush and Cheney were initially and vehemently against a 9/11 investigation.

They even went so far as to appoint Kissinger as it's first chairman. When it was found Kissinger had partners by the name of Bin laden....the families fiercly demanded his resignation.

Then Kissinger resigned....Are you disputing this claim...don't you ever freakin read modern American history?

Oh brother :clamdigger:

[shiva2999]

Hey shiva why are you stalking me you ******. Its getting really creepy.

Will the mods ignore similar comments made previously by the borg to me while they censure me for this? You bet, oh well its a privately owned board. Too bad some of us can't take what we dish out.

Why have you been crying all over the board today?

Did someone give you a spanking?

[Gibby]

Gee there's my stalker again, damn are you a psycho or something?

[shiva2999]

Nobody's gonna tell you what to do, huh?

[TheGoodShepherd]

Oh brother :clamdigger:

Is this way your of telling us I am wrong?

Did this never happen?

[Gibby]

did you just post chimpy?

[sukie]

Once again. You have no idea what you're talking about. Bush and Cheney were initially and vehemently against a 9/11 investigation.

They even went so far as to appoint Kissinger as it's first chairman. When it was found Kissinger had busines partners by the name of "Bin Laden"....the families fiercely demanded his resignation. Kissinger then resigned.

Are you disputing this claim...don't you ever freakin read modern American history?

But the 9/11 commission investigation was NOT an investigation as to the thread premise.

[Gibby]

But the 9/11 commission investigation was NOT an investigation as to the thread premise.

good luck trying to get him to understand this.

[TheGoodShepherd]

But the 9/11 commission investigation was NOT an investigation as to the thread premise.

Sounds to me like you're backtracking sukie.

All I was saying was Bush and Cheney were vehemently against the 9/11 commision. They, unlike you, changed their minds after immense pressure from the public and the famalies of 9/11.

Would you care to change your position on the issue. Since. From what I have read in other threads. You're still against any kind of investiagtion including the initial 9/11 commision.

What kind of an American would be against such an investigation?

Oh wait...you are....LOL

[Gibby]

Sounds to me like you're backtracking sukie.

All I was saying was Bush and Cheney were vehemently against the 9/11 commision. They, unlike you, changed their minds after immense pressure from the public and the famalies of 9/11.

Would you care to change your position on the issue. Since. From what I have read in other threads. You're still against any kind of investiagtion including the initial 9/11 commision.

and it looks like your dancing again.

[TheGoodShepherd]

and it looks like your dancing again.

Wow. Still don't get it do you?

The point still refuses to be absorbed into your heartless twisted mind.

The 9/11 commission was a scam. Primarily because the BA, after being against any kind of investigation finally collapsed to public pressure. After appointing idiots like Kissinger to run it, the families screamed even louder. Protesting the involvment of Henry the idiot, forcing his resignation.

Either way, it does not change the fact Bush and Cheney were still initially against any kind of investigation. It's partly the reason it ended up being such crap. After the BA concluded they could not get away with no investigation, they did their best to stack the inevitable investigation in their favour.

Why else, would the BA appoint Kissinger as chairman at first?

Why else would Bush not agree to meet with the 9/11 commision alone and in public?

What part of that don't you understand?

[sukie]

I'm against a what brought down the WTC towers investigation

[TheGoodShepherd]

I'm against a what brought down the WTC towers investigation

Not true. You sided with upstart in another thread when he proudly proclaimed he was against any investigation into 9/11. Even the initial one.

[Gibby]

Wow. Still don't get it do you?

The point still refuses to be absorbed into your heartless twisted mind.

The 9/11 commission was a scam. Primarily because the BA, after being against any kind of investigation finally collapsed to public pressure. After appointing idiots like Kissinger to run it, the families screamed even louder. Protesting the involvment of Henry the idiot, forcing his resignation.

Either way, it does not change the fact Bush and Cheney were still initially against any kind of investigation. It's partly the reason it ended up being such crap. After the BA concluded they could not get away with no investigation, they did their best to stack the inevitable investigation in their favour.

Why else, would the BA appoint Kissinger as chairman at first?

Why else would Bush not agree to meet with the 9/11 commision alone and in public?

What part of that don't you understand?


oh brother. :clamdigger:

[sukie]

find it.

[TheGoodShepherd]

find it.

Post #60.

Your response...."I agree with Upstart. No investigation needed on the federal dime."

Now what? Gonna go back and edit your post? Say you didn't realize upstart was saying he was against any kind of investigation?

Cmon sukie. Let's hear you say you're sorry for being such a heartless American you would actually agree with someone like upstart who doesnt think the families of 9/11 deserve any kind of investigation.




http://www.buffalorange.com/showthread.php?t=100282&page=2

[sukie]

Right. The Did the WTC towers fall due to plane impact requires no investigation. Nice dance move with the "other thread crap".

[uppy]

find it.

He is so full of crap he is twisting the creation of the

9/11 commision and an investigation on why the wtc fell.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Right. The Did the WTC towers fall due to plane impact requires no investigation. Nice dance move with the "other thread crap".

Nice dance move? Wtf are you talking about now.

Those are your words in Post #60, not mine. YOU brought this on YOU. Not me.

You're gonna blame me for words YOU typed into your keyboard?

[TheGoodShepherd]

He is so full of crap he is twisting the creation of the

9/11 commision and an investigation on why the wtc fell.

Twisting the creation of the 9/11 commison? Wow. I didnt know I was part of it. I guess i must have forgot the days I worked for Bushco.

Perhaps you can remind us all?

Maybe you meant something else. But as usual, no one can tell what your really saying. Communicating clearly has never been your strength.

[sukie]

Chimpy are you lost? Why would there be a need for an investigation into the tower collapse? Enlighten us.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Chimpy are you lost? Why would there be a need for an investigation into the tower collapse? Enlighten us.

Are you lost? All I did was say you agreed with upstart that no investigation was ever needed into 9/11. I quote you on the topic in another thread dealing confirming your idiocy


As for the tower collapse investigation....that's not my business... yet.

[uppy]

Chimpy are you lost? Why would there be a need for an investigation into the tower collapse? Enlighten us.

Me thinks chimpie has been smoking some good stuff today.

[Gibby]

Me thinks chimpie has been smoking some good stuff today.

He always does.

[sukie]

Are you lost? All I did was say you agreed with upstart that no investigation was ever needed into 9/11. I quote you on the topic in another thread dealing confirming your idiocy


As for the tower collapse investigation....that's not my business... yet.

You asked that in a poll thread regarding WTC tower collapse and emoted from there. Your wekest tactic yet.

[Victor7]

For once I think chimpy is right on this one. You did say it sukie.

[sukie]

I said no investigation (that would be deserved of the families of the victims) The 9/11 commission did nothing for the families... ergo any "family" based investigation would be into the towers.... That I am opposed to.

[emo]

this is so god damned stupid. how can anyone actually believe that this was a conspiracy?

if it was why would they do it?

[coastal]

Buildings are designed to resist certain forces and provide the occupants with time to evacuate in the event of a disaster but are not designed to be indestructible. I find it incredibly naive of people to believe something designed and built by man is infallible.Don't start off the arguement by insuiating that I have a Bruce J Ismay complex.

This sort of beginning comes off as being a bit disingenuous.

A building's expected live load (moveable objects like furniture and people), dead load (the weight of the building itself) and potential lateral forces (wind and earthquake) are estimated and calculated and a structural system is designed to resist those loads. The prevailing building codes determine the acceptable safety factors for designed loads and fire protection. The goal is to design the safest possible structure in the most efficient and economical way. Separate calculations are performed for each building element to determine the size, designed strength and the acceptable span between elements. Fire protection is also designed to resist heat for a given period of time. Steel is considered an excellent building material because of it's elasticity, which makes it a good choice when designing to resist lateral forces. Unfortunately, it is vulnerable to fire and can lose much of it's strength when exposed to extreme temperatures over time. Concrete fairs far better resisting fire and is a terrific material when designing to resist compressive forces. Unfortunately, concrete does not have great tensile strength and is not very elastic. Unlike steel it does not bend before breaking. Even though concrete is a great resistor of compressive forces, it's bearing capacity is not limitless. When concrete is stressed beyond its bearing capacity, it fails catastrophically. So then... the WTC buildings were primarily elastic on the outside and rigid on the inside. Although the rigid structure was reinforced with elastic steel. I presume this is a way of cheating the poor tensile strength of concrete. Without the rebar, if one part fails, then the whole will fail. With rebar you are in essence creating many smaller segments where if one segment fails, the other will not? Also by tying together those segments with long strands of rebar, you allow the whole structure to carry the burden of those compressive forces?

Composite structures have the benefit of the best of both worlds. Concrete is designed to resist compressive forces, steel resists the lateral forces and the concrete can encase the steel to offer fire protection. The World Trade Center was actually a combination of all three building types. The core was really a tube within a tube comprised of an exterior band of steel columns and an interior tube of reinforced concrete. The stairs and elevator shafts existed within the reinforced concrete tube. I'm with you.

There was no one calculation available that could account for the combination of factors that happened on September 11, 2001, meaning the building could have survived either the plane crash or the fire, but both together was not ever accounted for in design and proved to be fatal. Says who? I'm sure you are going to get there, but again... just throwing this in the middle of the discussion is like a scientist just throwing his conclusions in the middle of the hypothesis just to remind you of where you are going.

Let me answer some of the questions in this thread to further explain.Please do.



Yes, the damage from the planes was asymetrical, but the damage alone did not cause the collapse. When the planes crashed into the towers, they completely knocked out several columns and beams. Of the elastic portion of the building.

Obviously, this did not cause a collapse upon impact because the towers stood for a period of time after impact. The weight that those columns and beams where designed to resist was transfered to the remaining columns, beams and the tubular concrete core.When the elastic beams and a small portion of the rigid interior were removed or destroyed, were the loads below that on both the elastic portion of the building and the nonelastic portion then evenly distributed?



Watch video of the impact and you can see that there was an explosion upon impact. The jet fuel spread over a wide area and instantly started fires on multiple floors. Unlike typical building fires that start in a specific location and spread out, the fact that the fire was instantly dispersed over a wide area put the building at greater risk because multiple structural elements were being heated and losing strength simultaneously. The steel columns were not encased in concrete, but were fire protected by a spray on coating. The impact of the planes very likely could have shaken loose the spray on column fireproofing on the effected floors leaving the steel fully exposed to the effects of the fire.
This is all about the elastic portion of the building and there has been much discussion about the how the fire wasn't hot enough to damage the laod bearing memebrs present. Not just that, but the fire from the fuel was burned off in a realtively short period of time.


So now you have columns and beams stressed beyond their typical loads likely near their designed capacity with compromised fire protection and a raging fire that was instantly spread over a wide area. As the fire burned, the steel began to lose it's strength until finally the bearing capacity of the steel was reduced below the weight it was resisting. With a large number of the steel columns rendered useless by fire or impact most of the weight of the entire structure above was predominantly being beared by the concrete core tubes alone. The core was never designed to resist the amount of weight that it was made to bear once the columns lost most of their strength. When the concrete core reached it's maximum bearing potential and failed, it failed like all concrete structures do, catastrophically. Once the structure of the floors of impact failed the entire mass and potential energy of the floors above was unleashed and went into a free fall straight down. As a single uniform mass with incredible energy (see Pete's calcs for specifics) the upper floors smashed through the floors below with ease.This is your conclusion and doesn't wash with me at all. The elastic portion of the building was damaged on one side and so was a small portion of the rigid interior column. It would make sense to me that the compressive forces would have increased on that side of the building and the stretching forces would have increased on the other side of the building. This is where a good study of the steel found at the site would be not only easy but telling.

They had the shit labelled. Look at the steel to see if it was being stretched or compressed and in what direction.

They did it with the Titanic. Why can't they do the same with the WTC.

Why aren't they doing it for all to see?



As the mass of the free falling upper tower crashed through each floor it caused the floors to pancake in rapid succession. LucidVizion correctly noted, the building is comprised mostly of air. When the floors collapsed upon themselves they instantly forced the air out the sides which likely explain the perceived squibs.Air caused that and the entire contents of the building including steel and concrete to go reocketing outwards and upwards?



This is a real crude example, but take a paper clip and straighten it out, now squeeze on both ends and release. See how far the paper clip leaps out.

Steel is elastic, when the tower mass smashed the floors it likely caused the steel to bend and squeeze between the connectors at the top and bottom. When the steel connectors failed it would likely "spring" out in a similiar fashion to the paper clip between your fingers.Again... show me where an indepth metalurgical analysis of all the beams found at the site has been done.




What I find interesting about that third picture is that it is clear there is no explosion visible below the floors of impact. If the building was detonated, it was only detonated at the floors of impact. If you were planning a controlled demolition, you would start at the bottom, not the upper third portion of the building. Did conspirators rig the entire building with thousands of pounds of explosives so that they could detonate the exact floor of impact to make it look good or did they know exactly what floor the planes would hit? Pretty freaking amazing feat if they pulled that one off. How do you plant thousands of pounds of explosives totally undetected in an office building? There are security cameras and thousands of workers in and out daily. If the building failed at the bottom first, even after the planes struck near the top, I would be very suspicious, but it did not. The building failed first at the floors the planes impacted, which is entirely consistent with what I would expect in my explanation above and not what I would expect in a controlled demolition.This is all over the board.

Planes flown by islamic fundamentalist terrorists brought down the twin towers.

links:

http://concretecore.741.com/
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_keyfindings.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm[/QUOTE]
You haven't sold me and neither has the 9/11 commision.

[coastal]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/100706squibs.htm

Please watch this.

[uppy]

For once I think chimpy is right on this one. You did say it sukie.

:nono:

read the thread again

[SpikedLemonade]

Don't start off the arguement by insuiating that I have a Bruce J Ismay complex.

This sort of beginning comes off as being a bit disingenuous.

So then... the WTC buildings were primarily elastic on the outside and rigid on the inside. Although the rigid structure was reinforced with elastic steel. I presume this is a way of cheating the poor tensile strength of concrete. Without the rebar, if one part fails, then the whole will fail. With rebar you are in essence creating many smaller segments where if one segment fails, the other will not? Also by tying together those segments with long strands of rebar, you allow the whole structure to carry the burden of those compressive forces?

I'm with you.

Says who? I'm sure you are going to get there, but again... just throwing this in the middle of the discussion is like a scientist just throwing his conclusions in the middle of the hypothesis just to remind you of where you are going.

Please do.



. Of the elastic portion of the building.

When the elastic beams and a small portion of the rigid interior were removed or destroyed, were the loads below that on both the elastic portion of the building and the nonelastic portion then evenly distributed?




This is all about the elastic portion of the building and there has been much discussion about the how the fire wasn't hot enough to damage the laod bearing memebrs present. Not just that, but the fire from the fuel was burned off in a realtively short period of time.


This is your conclusion and doesn't wash with me at all. The elastic portion of the building was damaged on one side and so was a small portion of the rigid interior column. It would make sense to me that the compressive forces would have increased on that side of the building and the stretching forces would have increased on the other side of the building. This is where a good study of the steel found at the site would be not only easy but telling.

They had the shit labelled. Look at the steel to see if it was being stretched or compressed and in what direction.

They did it with the Titanic. Why can't they do the same with the WTC.

Why aren't they doing it for all to see?



Air caused that and the entire contents of the building including steel and concrete to go reocketing outwards and upwards?



Again... show me where an indepth metalurgical analysis of all the beams found at the site has been done.




This is all over the board.

]
You haven't sold me and neither has the 9/11 commision.

Thanks for sobering me up you bastard!

[coastal]

sukie is getting embarrassed.

[Gibby]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/100706squibs.htm

Please watch this.

sorry to say this- not really- but you really take Alex Jones seriously. :guy:

[uppy]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/100706squibs.htm

Please watch this.


That was great.

http://dailyramblings.com/images/tinfoilhat.jpg

[emo]

honestly, so dumb

[uppy]

sukie is getting embarrassed.

I don't think so