Galileo/Newton agree-- 9/11 was an inside job!

[rscamp]

Be skeptical of the stated "facts".

I think we can all agree this is an excellent idea.

I think you've spoken well, even if you don't share my beliefs that the official story is bull.

I posted way back about conspiracy theorists, you should watch out if you think they're wrong, maybe turn that skeptical mind up a notch- because you could be one of them too, by believing the official story

That's why the term is another example of 'doublespeak.' An oxymoron. Conspiracies go on all the time; to conspire that they don't, calling others 'theorists', kinda makes you worse than the guy that thinks roger rabbit did it :lol:

And honestly, I have no clue that someone willing and with half a brain cell can't see the potential of the situation. See thru the official. And you call us tinfoil bla bla- pffhhht!

Sometimes in this life, nothing is harder to be sure of than the truth. Our best option is to go by the preponderance of quality evidence. Simpler answers are more likely to be correct but certainly not guaranteed so. For this I like the example of a TV that doesn't work. It is entirely possible it isn't working because space aliens have projected a ray beam and changed the molecular structure of a semiconductor component. Or maybe it is got unplugged.

Not all of us are equipped (by knowledge, skill or experience) to evaluate these things. For some things, almost none of us are. There aren't enough hours in a day to learn and really understand everything about everything. For practicality, what we know (or think we know) is a made up version or story in our own heads. Sometimes the most confident in their abilities are the most ignorant. A high degree of knowledge in one area says little or nothing about our knowledge in another area. Our abilities are very finite. Our propensity for making assumptions, drawing incorrect conclusions and making errors is almost without bounds - hence the requirement for processes like the discipline of the scientific method to create a higher quality of knowledge that we are more likely to be able to hang our hat on and use to move forward.

 

[nutnspecial]

Not all of us are equipped (by knowledge, skill or experience) to evaluate these things. For some things, almost none of us are. There aren't enough hours in a day to learn and really understand everything about everything. For practicality, what we know (or think we know) is a made up version or story in our own heads. Sometimes the most confident in their abilities are the most ignorant. A high degree of knowledge in one area says little or nothing about our knowledge in another area. Our abilities are very finite. Our propensity for making assumptions, drawing incorrect conclusions and making errors is almost without bounds - hence the requirement for processes like the discipline of the scientific method to create a higher quality of knowledge that we are more likely to be able to hang our hat on and use to move forward.

Extremely well put! I would also add this should backup/ coincide with never being too 'sure' of yourself hence you miss some Truth. All is faith imo. Only proofs are in alcohol and math. Faith in science, physics, reality. I have my beliefs, but I am always ready to improve/modify/change- and I wouldn't call any one that doesn't believe as I do a name, or judge them for not believing as I do.

Thinking no one else could be right, will cause you to get stuck, and have unresolvable arguments. I would hedge a bet that in big picture stuff NOONE has it right, but different views have different things right, and if all could work together, we might understand more. On all things, not just this topic. And imo this is what many of the 'nuts' think too. They are theoretical, and admit it. This allows them often a deeper understanding because they're able to absorb and compute more information. I do think this pertains to 911 and what people believe or don't.

I honestly don't believe in actual space aliens, but wouldn't call somebody that believes or has seen them a liar. Is it not possible they have? I say it is possible. But that example is another topic entirely, although I have delved into it and spirituality in order to at least have a working opinion on the taboo subject as well as some other taboo 'theories'.
BEST advice for anybody: don't let others do your thinking for you- use your godgiven sense to impartially review and draw your own conclusions based on verifiable evidence, also using whatever the best version of you is at your core, all while realizing you still have more to learn.

 

[Hillhater]

I'd expect two or three out of the three to collapse sideways, as almost every compromised vertical structure does.

Why ?
You have several hundred thousand tons of material being pulled vertically by gravity and impact loads from the falling floors above.....huge vertical forces in action .
What force is being generated horizontally, to make those thousands of tons go anywhere other than straight down ?

 

[rscamp]

Not all of us are equipped (by knowledge, skill or experience) to evaluate these things. For some things, almost none of us are. There aren't enough hours in a day to learn and really understand everything about everything. For practicality, what we know (or think we know) is a made up version or story in our own heads. Sometimes the most confident in their abilities are the most ignorant. A high degree of knowledge in one area says little or nothing about our knowledge in another area. Our abilities are very finite. Our propensity for making assumptions, drawing incorrect conclusions and making errors is almost without bounds - hence the requirement for processes like the discipline of the scientific method to create a higher quality of knowledge that we are more likely to be able to hang our hat on and use to move forward.

Extremely well put! I would also add this should backup/ coincide with never being too 'sure' of yourself hence you miss some Truth. All is faith imo. Only proofs are in alcohol and math. Faith in science, physics, reality. I have my beliefs, but I am always ready to improve/modify/change- and I wouldn't call any one that doesn't believe as I do a name, or judge them for not believing as I do.

Thinking no one else could be right, will cause you to get stuck, and have unresolvable arguments. I would hedge a bet that in big picture stuff NOONE has it right, but different views have different things right, and if all could work together, we might understand more. On all things, not just this topic. And imo this is what many of the 'nuts' think too. They are theoretical, and admit it. This allows them often a deeper understanding because they're able to absorb and compute more information. I do think this pertains to 911 and what people believe or don't.

I honestly don't believe in actual space aliens, but wouldn't call somebody that believes or has seen them a liar. Is it not possible they have? I say it is possible. But that example is another topic entirely, although I have delved into it and spirituality in order to at least have a working opinion on the taboo subject as well as some other taboo 'theories'.
BEST advice for anybody: don't let others do your thinking for you- use your godgiven sense to impartially review and draw your own conclusions based on verifiable evidence, also using whatever the best version of you is at your core, all while realizing you still have more to learn.

I don't put much stake in beliefs - mine or anyone else's. Beliefs close doors. Beliefs can block reason. I know that what I believe is useless if it is wrong. In my view, beliefs can be just as disposable as opinions which are also often wrong. Regardless, any beliefs we do have must be discarded in the face of good contradictory evidence. Human weakness makes this difficult.

"Space aliens" is sort of a funny term which I used intentionally. Given the "near infinite" size and age of the observable universe, it would seem vanishingly unlikely that life doesn't exist elsewhere. So I guess I do believe strongly in the possibility of "space aliens". I also believe it is vanishingly unlikely we have been visited by any intelligent ones on our home planet. But that's another topic...

 

[nutnspecial]

Why ?
You have several hundred thousand tons of material being pulled vertically by gravity and impact loads from the falling floors above.....huge vertical forces in action .
What force is being generated horizontally, to make those thousands of tons go anywhere other than straight down ?

It's because when you figure in the complexity of the structure, it would take a miracle to collapse perfectly like that due only to gravity and structural failure. A miracle for a failure so balanced, perfect, and sustaining. Buildings have never done that before or since, save for controlled demolition.

I'm not gonna bother to link them- find em for yourself:

*any other steel highrise structure that burned - collapsed or didn't

*any demolition videos where the building went askew; or the demolition stopped midway, as does collapse.

Are you forgetting also at the speed they came down? Near freefall. Even if the building could structurally fail and collapse into dust in it's own footprint , it couldn't have happened that fast.
Each and every floor would have needed time to collapse from the weight above it. Does that look like what happened when you watch the videos?

Guys- has anyone looked into the earthquake monitors? If it's true what I was told, the 500000ton buildings didn't even register, and all that supposed weight and debri didn't even go 2 stories underground. What you saw on the surface was IT!

 

[Eclectic]

So if the building and the debris are both in free fall, they should both be accelerating at the same rate. How did the debris get ahead of the building? Are they accelerating at different rates?

 

[nutnspecial]

near freefall

Imo from that picture alone, it is very apparent to me it was not a structure collapse as nist claims (along with MANY others). That's not counting all the other video and information that was pointed out in this thread.
Hey, you might be right. But because I like to entertain as many different views/facets as possible, and having done so, the official story seems pretty dam unlikely in comparison to a multitude of others.


If you guys think it's a simply a structural collapse, I'll shutup.
People have to makeup their own minds about it. And it looks like more people are.
Poll: http://rethink911.org/news/new-poll-finds-most-americans-open-to-alternative-911-theories/

 

[amberwolf]

Maybe someone should build a large-scale model and test whether the plane damage and fire *could* cause the collapse like that?

Anybody got a whole bunch of money to spare?

 

[rscamp]

Why ?
You have several hundred thousand tons of material being pulled vertically by gravity and impact loads from the falling floors above.....huge vertical forces in action .
What force is being generated horizontally, to make those thousands of tons go anywhere other than straight down ?

It's because when you figure in the complexity of the structure, it would take a miracle to collapse perfectly like that due only to gravity and structural failure. A miracle for a failure so balanced, perfect, and sustaining. Buildings have never done that before or since, save for controlled demolition.

Unsubstantiated claim stated as fact. It would depend on the nature of the damage incurred and the failure mode(s) for this particular structure.

Are you forgetting also at the speed they came down? Near freefall. Even if the building could structurally fail and collapse into dust in it's own footprint , it couldn't have happened that fast.

Check facts. Did it really fall that fast? What is the evidence the rate was that close to g? Other material fell faster than the core as shown in all photos. And even if it did, why couldn't a buckling mode failure fall near g? Buckling requires little distortion energy and would therefore remove little energy from the material and upper structure that is falling.

Each and every floor would have needed time to collapse from the weight above it. Does that look like what happened when you watch the videos?

Honestly, it looks like a perfectly feasible failure to me. Think of how quickly you would buckle if tens of thousands of tons of material was bearing down on you. We are talking instantaneous shock loads here - the entire upper portion of the building starts to descend and lands on the level below it and so on. Failure at each level would be very violent and very short. Hence the misinterpretation as "controlled demolition".

Guys- has anyone looked into the earthquake monitors? If it's true what I was told, the 500000ton buildings didn't even register, and all that supposed weight and debri didn't even go 2 stories underground. What you saw on the surface was IT!

Not sure what you are trying to say here. With all the material broken up by violent crushing failure during descent there isn't such a large mass left to "pile drive" into the ground.

 

[nutnspecial]

I can't believe you guys are serious.

Are you ready for what is sure to come? I didn't used to be, and I sounded just like you.

 

[Punx0r]

rscamp, you make some excellent points, but I fear you are wasting your energy. These people cannot/will not be swayed by a sufficient explanation - nothing you, or anyone, can say will ever change their minds. It is a sad deficiency.

The seismic gambit is complete B.S. the "truthers" misinterpreted a seismic chart and claimed support from two seismologists. In fact, the chart recordings clearly show the collapse of both towers and the seismologists were angry they had been misrepresented. Full explanation and charts approx. two thirds down this page:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/

Annoyingly, this popped up with another 10 second google search. This information has been widely distributed in the public domain for many years, yet these idiots continue to claim the complete opposite.

Incidentally, the whole article is worth a read: http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a50/1230517/

The following quote is from an FAQ about the above article and I think it is revealing:

We spoke to the photographers and investigators who documented the jet wreckage and registration numbers. For insight into controlled demolition theories, we spoke to the largest demolition firms in the United States. We studied schematics and design elements for the World Trade Center, and spoke to leading professors and engineers to learn more about how the floors sagged and the steel warped in the fires.

Some critics claim that we "cherry-picked" sources who would be favorable to our "agenda." The fact is, for each question we studied, we simply approached the top experts in that particular field. The irony is that we were unable to find anyone with any degree of authority, in the public or private sector--first responders or university professors, engineers or flight instructors--who agreed with the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a2043/4220721/

Of course the "truthers" claim to have "debunked" the P.M. report by claiming they are under the control of the Government. Or the Illuminati. Or the New World Order. Or the ZOG machine. I forget.

But what of these supposed thousands of architects and engineers who supposedly support the conspiracy theories? I guess none of them were involved or relevant. They're probably like Chuck Boldwyn "Retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor." who posted a comment here (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fahrenheit-2777), quoted verbatim below for shear giggles:

The internet repeatedly established weight of a single Twin Tower is 500,000 Tons.

DL(110) = 500,000 Tons

The weight of the 16 Floor alleged falling block is much less than 73,000 Tons, as the steel is only .25 inches thick at the top, but we will consider the whole Tower to be of uniform thickness.

DL(16) = 73,000 Tons or less

The weight of the lower WTC 94 floor block is 430,000 Tons or more as the steel gets progressively thicker and thicker,until it reaches 4 inches thick toward the bottom floors.

The top alleged falling 16 floor block is less than (1/6) the weight of the lower 94 block.

Even though the top block was very massive, on a comparitive scale to the lower 94 floor steel, highly intact block, according to the laws of Physics, it could never collapse the topmost 94th floor, floor 94, with its gravity weight of force alone, much less the entire 94 floor steel tower below.

The Tower could support 20 times its Live Load (LL)weight.

CL = Collapse Load

CL(94) = 20 x LL(94) (via John Skilling, WTC Cheif Enginer, deceased, but published everywhere)

The Live Load is confirmed by NIST 911 Commision Report Science Guy, Ronald Hamburger to be:

LL(94) = 5 x DL(94)

therefore:

CL(94) = 20 x LL(94)

and therefore:

CL(94) = 20 x (5 x DL(94))

and therefore:

CL(94) = 100 DL(94)

According to the above, the very unique Safety Factor is the Collapse Load Factor, whis is:

100 x DL(110)

It is not 5 DL(110)

It is not 20 DL(110)

It is 100 DL(110)

& it is 20 x 5 x DL(110)

Get over it OCT misguided dupes and misguided PHDs.

This means the the lower 94 block of steel could support 100 blocks of 94 floors before possible total collapse could occur.

This also means that the lower 94 block of steel could support 588 blocks of 16 floors before possible total collapse could occur, since one 94 block is equal to 5.88 16 floor blocks.

588 Vector Force units of upward support (stressed Normal Force)against 1 Vector force unit of downward gravity weight force, all by its lonesome.

Now apply Vector math Addition to opposing Forces to find that the top block could never in one's wildest dreams totally collapse the lower 94 floor block of powerfully strong and very thick,

4 inches, steel.

588 Force units of upward support

minus

1 force unit of downward weight Force

gives 587 force units of non-collapsing support.

1 Force Unit(FU) = 1 DL(16)

(588 FU up) - (1 FU down) = 587 FU up.

No collapse can possibly occur...

CL(94) = 588 DL(16)

That is crushing and most devastating news for the Original Conspiracy Theorists in the Government and in the Mass Media.

They no longer have a lying and deceitful or ignorant leg to stand on.

Amen, story over using Vector Forces Physics. the Ultimate Truth and Proof.

That is the Final & Ultimate answer as to why the twin towers could never, ever collapse under the conditions offered by NIST, the Government, the Mass Media, and the big name University and corporate PHDs.

Since the confirmed discovery of the red and gray nano Thermite active and explosive particles in the WTC dust samples, there is no leg to stand on by the NIST, government and all the "quack" PHDs hired by the Government to do their lying diry work with the Mass Media.

Game over. Get the Gallows and Guillotines ready!!

Here is a little bit of shocking information for you OCT people and non physicists to digest.

You would have to raise the top 16 floor block, the alleged falling block, to a height of 120 miles above the 94 floor block and then drop it. The 16 floor block would drop for 200 seconds and collide with the top of the lower 94 block at a velocity of 4,500 miles per hour with a colliding energy of 1.5 x 10^14 Joules of energy before total collapse could occur.

That collision energy, 1.5 x 10^14 Joules, is the energy equivalent of 2.4 Hiroshima Atomic bombs or the equivatlent energy of 36,000Tons of TNT or a very large number of mini nuclear devices.

This is attained only if there is no air resistance, in ideal conditions of Free Fall. Because there is air resistance, the Terminal velocity of about 1200 miles per hour will prevent the top 16 floor block from attaining the required collision velocity and the required collision energy to totally collapse the botton 94 floor steel tower.

In other work, under any conditions it will be impossible to totally collapse the lower 94 floor tower.

Amen....End of the Official Conspiracy Unscientific Theory of NIST, the Government, the Mass Media and the retarded PHDs from the Universities and Industry.

All of those PHDs are shot down in flames, becoming the laughing stock of their students and peers. They all need to retire and spend the money they got for writing and supporting tnose stupin and foolish ideas and theories they have corruptly put forward. Their careers are doomed.

Chuck Boldwyn

Retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor.

cboldwyn@bellsouth

You may request my detailed PDF research report to be emailed to you if you send me your email address at cboldwyn@bellsouth.net.

You will be amaze and shocked when evaluating my blockbuster research findings.

Bring on the debunkers, if they are brave and foolish enough to try their foolish best...

The natural reaction is to laugh at his comical level of wrongness, but you have to stop and consider that this man probably taught science-subjects to thousands of impressionable young minds. He ought to be beaten over the head with one of the physics textbooks he obviously never read.

 

[Punx0r]

The sad thing is the damage these cranks do to legitimate issues such as climate change. Why should your average Joe be convinced it's a good idea to buy an electric car, or cycle to work when the same person also claims Elvis shot J.F.K. to prevent him revealing the plan to fake the moon-landing. Oh, and they're controlling your mind with chemtrails and are about to heard the population into FEMA deathcamps.

Oh, and I remembered the quote I was looking for a while ago. It's Shanks Law:

Shank's Law is internet shorthand for a common response to the logical fallacy of Argument from authority. It states:

“The imaginative powers of the human mind have yet to rise to the challenge of concocting a conspiracy theory so batshit insane that one cannot find at least one Ph.D holding scientist to support it."

Proponents of conspiracy theories often attempt to lend their swivel-eyed nonsense credibility by citing the "findings" of one or more Ph.D professors. However, they fail to appreciate that the fact that a person holds a Ph.D doesn't necessarily mean they aren't crazy.

 

[Eclectic]

On September 11, 2001; I was working from home. I had the TV on when they showed the 1st tower on fire as a breaking news story. Fascinated, I began to watch. I started to think about the Empire State building and how well it survived a somewhat similar event. I was wondering about how someone could accidently crash into that tower in clear weather.

Then the second plane hit. Within moments I said out load “OMG he f**king did it! That Mother F**cker did it! So that’s what a Jihad cruise missile looks like!” The “he” I was referring to was Osama bin Laden.

I had been watching his exploits for years (including his attempts to topple the tower with a truck bomb) and had predicted that he was going attack the US with Jihad cruise missiles. I predicted this after watching bin Laden’s reaction to his wife and children being killed by the cruise missiles sent by Bill Clinton. I knew within moments who was responsible and why. It was pretty obvious who had the Motive, the Opportunity and the Means to do this.

I spent much of the morning watching the first tower collapsing over and over again. At first I surprised but as I watched, I could see that the first point where the catastrophic failure started was at the exact point where the outer structure was compromised by the plane. The upper portion of the building started to tilt to the left. The right side then failed and it centered itself so that the building collapsed straight on itself (I guess there could have been some human intervention that caused this but it seemed more natural than that).

They showed footage of George W. Bush when he was told about the attack, his reaction seemed very genuine. If he had foreknowledge of the attack, why would have chosen to act like an ineffective fool paralyzed by fear with absolutely no idea of what to do next?

The NIST report may some have flaws and errors (who’d of thought that a government report could have errors?) but does that mean that the errors were intentional and put there because of a government conspiracy that slaughtered thousands of innocent Americans.

Like I said, I was surprised by the towers collapsing. Once I understood how they were constructed, it wasn’t surprising at all. These towers were the first super lightweight skyscrapers. The Empire State building was built using a simple box structure (20 foot beams and girders if I remember correctly). If some of those boxes were compromised, the load just shifted to the boxes around them. The World Trade Towers were built as 2 lightweight steel tubes joined together with the floor trusses. It was designed as a complete system in order to maintain its strength. Once enough of that system was compromised, the entire building suffered a catastrophic failure (in place as it was designed to do).

Did the towers collapse very quickly? Yes. Where they in free fall? No.
Do I believe that jet fuel burns hot enough to melt steel? No. Do I believe that the fires were hotter than jet fuel? Yes.
Did I see a lot of blow outs as the tower collapsed? Yes. Do I believe they were caused by explosives? No (more likely compressed air from the building collapse).
Do I believe in government conspiracies? Yes (Oliver North Iran/Contras comes to mind). Do I think that a conspiracy perpetrated by members of the US government was probable in this case? No.
Does the fact that ~0.166% of the world’s architect believe in the conspiracy theory convince me that it is true? No.

If I look at this event like a cop, the first things I would look at would be Motive, Means and Opportunity. Osama bin Laden had a lot of al of those qualities; not to mention a track record of similar dealings. When I look at the popular alternatives, motive seems to be lacking. Motives like this usually require a significant quantity of hatred and fanaticism (or ultra-pragmatism like WWII and A-bombs). I find simple greed or temporary political gain a difficult motive to justify an event of this magnitude.

As for means; the bin Laden scenario required a couple dozen hate filled fanatics and maybe $100,000. There were even advanced clues as to what was going to happen but were ignored. The alternative theory requires 100s of diverse conspirators, and thousands of hours of planning and preparation. A minor list of the conspirators involved would have to include: The George W. Bush and his staff, CIA, DOD (victims), The Joint Chiefs of Staff, dozens of military personnel, Port Authority (victims), tenants of the towers (victims), Rudy Giuliani, Larry Silverstein, Leslie E. Robertson, the producers at PBS, Nat Geo and Mythbusters. All of them would have to be psychopaths with no empathy or so fanatical as to be blind to the horror. Anyone having misgivings could have easily been a whistle-blower, but that didn’t happen.

After 14 years of looking at this and revisiting the question and evidence several times, I keep coming to the same conclusion. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer. An angry, fanatical terrorist found a couple of suicide bombers and sent them to flight school so they could learn enough to steer a big plane in to a very big building. Jihad Cruise missiles.

 

[rscamp]

I can't believe you guys are serious.

Are you ready for what is sure to come?

Yes. A troll.

 

[markz]

Osama bin Laden did it!
Need a "perp" he is it.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-18/australia-backs-afghan27s-struggling-miners/4698082

Afghanistan expects to begin the first commercial oil production in its history in a little under two months.

Afghanistan has untapped mineral and energy reserves estimated to be worth up to $US3 trillion with vast deposits of resources including oil and gas, iron ore, gold and copper.

The biggest challenge facing the industry is the lack of security due to the Taliban insurgency and the operations of private militias run by warlords, such as Abdul Rashid Dostum.

Makes ya think huh, this was when? During Bush admin, where there were no WMD's found in Iraq.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production

1 Russia 10,107,000 1212 14.05% 3/2015.[6] 10,107,000 (3/2015)
2 Saudi Arabia 9,735,200 1168 13.09% 12/2014.[6] 9,900,000 (1/1980)
3 United States 9,373,000 1124 12.23% 4/2015.[6] 9,422,000 (3/2015)
4 China 4,189,000 502 5.15% 5/2015.[6] 4,189,000 (5/2015)
5 Canada 3,603,000 4.54% 12/2014.[6] 3,603,000 (1/2015)
6 Iraq 3,368,000 4.45% 5/2015.[6] 3,368,000 (5/2015)
7 Iran 3,113,000 4.14% 12/2014.[6] 6,060,000 (1/1974)
8 United Arab Emirates 2,820,000 3.32% 12/2014.[6] 2,820,000 (1/2013)
9 Kuwait 2,619,000 2.96% 12/2014.[6] 2,650,000 (1/2013)

Looks like they (USA) scored a two for one. Iraq #6 and Kuwait #9.

 

[ErnestoA]

eTrike Your persistence is admirable but in a way, you're like the American that goes to Mexico and just starts talking louder when a Spanish speaker isn't understanding you. lol Some people just don't do the logic thing. I guess that if their brains have been programmed by years and years of elite propaganda telling them the same things over and over again, there's a possibility that stating the facts over and over again might work, but you'll need a captive audience to keep their attention.

Also, I saw a funny and thought of this thread. Just in case some would consider it not safe for work, I'll link it.

******Possibly NSFW (if you work with fundamentalists, but anyway)*********
http://new2.fjcdn.com/pictures/Investigate+3+11_8ad9b2_5445344.jpg
(if this too risque, I'll delete asap)

 

[nutnspecial]

Lol ernesto. I was first slightly alarmed, then had to laugh when I read it. Thanks. Needed that.

rscamp, punxor, eclectic, markz. I'm sorry but I have completely changed my viewpoint from that of your own. And nearly every 'truther' (your words not ours) is coming from that same view (your view), and has rearranged and changed their beliefs on things they feel are VERY valid tangible evidence.
If you don't agree, don't want to, think we're tinfoil guys etc, it does sting us alittle. Not that we care about what you think of us, but mostly because many of us have moved on to what we think is a bigger picture, which sees thru many of the lies and propaganda that are designed to control masses and steer nations. It's because there were too many sheep that we're even in such a mess now.

Peace

 

[marty]

.

3 buildings collapsed. Group of people came up with all kinds of conspiracy theories as to why they fell down. These people have come to be known as "Truthers". If Star Trek followers are Trekkies? Why do we not call Truthers, Truthies?

eTrike, take a few steps back and think. Will try to explain this as simply as possible.

FREE FALL HAS BEEN PROVEN-- see previously linked NIST report. This happened only because of the work of a independent investigator-- a high school physics teacher. This page describes the history of that revelation accurately: http://rememberbuilding7.org/free-fall-collapse/

Think about what these building were constructed from. By volume the biggest part of the buildings is air. Yep air. Puff and the building is gone.

This is building 7. WTC1 and 2 fell slightly slower than free-fall-- the explosive portion can be seen beneath the falling debris cloud. This happened 56 minutes after the plane impact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA

Note that all the explosions you are seeing make no sound. Just a big cloud of dried rat poop, assorted dirt, and building materials.

What rscamp and others are describing is a type of failure which has no equal-- yet we have dozens of examples showing how buildings collapse-- including failures to compare to-- one video I showed compares a small masonry silo-- it takes about as long to collapse as 110-story WTC buildings, yet it only does so because it fell sideways (a later silo given similar demo treatment does not collapse because it does not fall sideways). Directly after that example is a building which has several bottom floors demo'd-- the building falls and stops-intact. Many examples like this exist and these buildings were surely inferior to steel-framed highrise construction.

Different types of buildings behave differently when they catch on fire. Fire is unpredictable. Ever see a fire on a windy day?

We also have much longer and hotter fires of steel-framed highrises to compare to-- why did they not collapse?

Different types of buildings behave differently when they catch on fire.

Consider that the debris which is blown outward is not contributing to the load on the remaining portion of the building. Consider conservation of energy.

Overload of the word consider. Considering that I do not understand the statement. I will just copy and paste.... Puff and the building is gone.

Molten steel-- where did it come from if the fires were not hot enough, as all sources seem to agree?

One Truther with a over active imagination typed Molten steel on the internet. 10 Truthers read molten steel and they type molten steel. More truthers read and type molten steel. The internet becomes filled with TONS of molten steel TEXT. The TRUTH is that there was no molten steel. Bent and broke steel yes. No melted steel. Perhaps some Truther got the aluminum and steel mixed up? Remember my dinosaur? Before I cleaned if off, visually it looked like a melted blob of who knows what?

Free-fall acceleration should be proof enough for anyone who understands. Videos should be proof enough for anyone with a question. The twin towers turn into dust and peel apart in mid-air while building 7 collapses in identical fashion to controlled demolition.

That's it! Collapse of these 3 buildings looks exactly like a controlled demolition because that is how this type of building looks when it falls down.

Newtonian physics bends for no building, no matter the size. As I previously stated, the towers fell as if their entire supporting structure was weaker than pudding.

As the guy who builds buildings I can tell you that the way architects and engineers design a building is not the way that they get built. Who looks at drawings? Shortcuts get taken. Concrete contractors in New York City would add pudding to concrete if pudding was cheaper then sand and stones.

 

[Arlo1]

The steal structure that holds the building up in the first place will not allow free fall speeds.
As well they should not have all fallen equally and evenly at least 1 of the buildings should have leaned over to the side or something as the structure was not damaged evenly from the planes.

And the third building was just a simple office fire and they have extinguisher systems in place do they not? Your telling me building 7 doesn't at least raise some suspicion? Anyone who doesn't question what happened that day needs to give their head a shake. If you want to blindlessly believe what the government is telling you, you will be in for another holocaust!

 

[Eclectic]

Here is a fire at a mattress factory that was started by fireworks on the 4th of July in Los Angeles.

[youtube]MT_pp2Ovn-0[/youtube]

It is a steel building and mattresses were the fuel (sorry I don't know what temperature mattresses burn at).


If you look at this area in the video at about the 3:30 time, it looks just like molten steel dripping down the building. Is it molten steel? Probably not. Does it look like molten steel? To me it looks as much like molten steel as the clip eBike just posted.

To me the clip eBike posted looks a lot like Hot Wheels track that I used to burn when I was a kid. At least that is what I thought about it on Sept 11, 2001...long before anybody was telling me what I was suppose to think (whether it was the mainstream media or alternative concepts).

 

[Eclectic]

So I really enjoy the debate but these last few comments I do find offensive.

Some people just don't do the logic thing. I guess that if their brains have been programmed by years and years of elite propaganda telling them the same things over and over again, there's a possibility that stating the facts over and over again might work, but you'll need a captive audience to keep their attention.

rscamp, punxor, eclectic, markz. I'm sorry but I have completely changed my viewpoint from that of your own. And nearly every 'truther' (your words not ours) is coming from that same view (your view), and has rearranged and changed their beliefs on things they feel are VERY valid tangible evidence.
If you don't agree, don't want to, think we're tinfoil guys etc, it does sting us alittle. Not that we care about what you think of us, but mostly because many of us have moved on to what we think is a bigger picture, which sees thru many of the lies and propaganda that are designed to control masses and steer nations. It's because there were too many sheep that we're even in such a mess now.
Peace

Just because I disagree with you does not mean I “don't do the logic thing”. I find that you would infer that is offensive. My entire belief system is based on logic over emotion. Life is a series of statistical probabilities. I have spent my life questioning authority, religion and what was taught in school. I have been punished all of my life for “Thinking Out of the Box”.

The fact that you infer that I am just sheeple and a product of propaganda I also find very offensive. That was the reason I went to such great lengths to explain the process I went through to come to the conclusions I have come to. The timeline alone (I reached most of these conclusions within hours of the event) is evidence that propaganda (there wasn’t time for the propaganda engine to get started yet) was not a factor in my decisions.

Unfortunately I don’t find your “valid tangible evidence” to be valid or tangible. I have tried to present what I believe to be valid evidence and yet no one addressed much of it. There have been some attempts to redirect the conversation using some of my statements but not much of actually debating the issues I have raised.

BTW – I don’t believe that nutspecial is a troll. He seems to genuinely believe in what he posts and is NOT doing it just to a rise out of others. And yes I do believe “It's because there were too many sheep that we're even in such a mess now. “ Not because a larger percentage of the population are blindly following but because there are just too many sheep (people).

 

[nutnspecial]

Thanks for the vid Etrike, there is so much evidence of melted and impossibly twisted girders. I know for a fact j.wood covers some weird stuff like that too, right before she mentions hutchinson reproducing similar effects with resonance and rf.

Eclectic, that was a great post above (yesterday) about your initial and current beliefs/impressions. I held some of the same initial thoughts. Even if we don't agree on too much now, I just wanted to say it was very well written and without bias/blame. (except for binladen of course, and who can blame you for that?)
Hey, how much truth do you think there is behind alquieda (sp) actually being created by the cia as a tool? If there actually was cia involvement, wouldn't that make it so much easier to flip a covert drill 'live' and have a great patsy?

 

[markz]

reproducing similar effects with resonance and rf.

Awww yessss, so the WTC were not only controlled demolition, Hutchinson is saying they were also taken down by resonance and rf?
Interesting theory(ies).

 

[nutnspecial]

BTW – I don’t believe that nutspecial is a troll. He seems to genuinely believe in what he posts and is NOT doing it just to a rise out of others. And yes I do believe “It's because there were too many sheep that we're even in such a mess now. “

Thankyou, I think you have a responsible and mature nature in your involvement as well. I certainly don't want anyone to be personally offended by my words/beliefs.

I don't think the 'sheep' problem is so much as too many people- just too many people not being responsible, imo by following blindly. No offence to actual sheep of course- their nature has good things too, that they are very trusting. They just need the right shepard, and applied to humans around the world now, even in the 'of,by,for" US, it seems there are not too many good 'shepards'.

 

[nutnspecial]

Re: markz- I don't think judy or hutchinson say that. Judy points out what she feels is very strong evidence on many questionable things, while never actually pointing fingers. She shows pictures of beams twisted in supposedly impossible ways, and gives evidence that hutchinson supposedly can do the same thing on a small scale with that weird concoction of sound and radio waves (I think).

I personally don't see enough evidence to say that a deathray from space dematerialized the buildings, but. . . . . I think odds are we will see even more and weirder things in our lifetimes. This seems only logical based on the acceration and direction of science and knowledge. I am talking about many things labeled 'theoretical' presently.