quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

right-  1000 engineers signed petition.

go figure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

See the difference....

Still pictures prove nothing. Think about this at what is described as a comparative analysis...does a single 60 ton aircraft take down by any means, more steel...then in the largest battleships ? No.

Of course. Some of your colleagues in this ridiculous conspiracy crap claim it was a missile, and a missile is a lot smaller than an airplane.

You guys just make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Every time you throw some silly-assed thing like this out there, it contradicts at least three other silly-assed things one of  you threw out earlier, and it never occurs to you guys how completely contradictory and asinine your positions become the more you twist in circles like that. Is there anything at all that's too crazy even for you guys to believe? Anything?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

See the difference....

Still pictures prove nothing. Think about this at what is described as a comparative analysis...does a single 60 ton aircraft take down by any means, more steel...then in the largest battleships ? No.

Of course. Some of your colleagues in this ridiculous conspiracy crap claim it was a missile, and a missile is a lot smaller than an airplane.

You guys just make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Every time you throw some silly-assed thing like this out there, it contradicts at least three other silly-assed things one of  you threw out earlier, and it never occurs to you guys how completely contradictory and asinine your positions become the more you twist in circles like that. Is there anything at all that's too crazy even for you guys to believe? Anything?

quote:



[image]http://www.defense.gov/graphics/DODc-small.gif[/image] U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript On the Web:
http://www.defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=3845
Media contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132
Public contact:
http://www.defense.gov/landing/comment.aspx
or +1 (703) 428-0711 +1

---

Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld October 12, 2001

---

Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine
(Interview with Lyric Wallwork Winik, Parade Magazine)
Rumsfeld: There were lots of warnings. The intelligence information that we get, it sometimes runs into the hundreds of alerts or pieces of intelligence a week.


Rumsfeld: Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
1) There was no such thing as super thermite or nanotechnology in explosives, when the wtc was constructed. How did they manage to spray all the undersides of the concrete flooring, without anyone noticing ?

2) If they did manage the above, the central structure would still have remained standing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
3) How did they control the detonation, in the right sequence, to bring down the buildings as you suggest. We both know that a controlled demolition must blast out supporting columns in a set order,  If this isnt done, they cant control the direction of the fall. I wont even get into the amount of demolition that takes place by machinery PRIOR to the actual explosion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
4) Why have none of the demolition workers who installed the charges ever spoken up. I refuse to believe that a large workforce would see thousands of civillians killed, and not one would decide to blow the whistle.

quote:

m

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrMister
(Yes, it was a 707--a smaller plane than the 757 which hit it--but the design parameters were set for a higher airspeed, which meant a higher kinetic energy.)

I'm seeing almost a 4-fold difference in gross weight.  What was the velocity spec you have?

really? whose ass did you pull that out of?  The intercon 320 was over 150 ton compared to the 757's 100 ton.

edited to add:  You also have to consider a dramatically higher fuel load - about a factor of 2

same fuel capabilities

edited again (not much sleep last night!)  The designer of the building said he accounted for structural damage from a 707, but not for fire.  And at that point he looked like a guy in the midst of a nightmare.  This was on the TLC/Discovery Channel's look at the collapse.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy
The designer of the building said he accounted for structural damage from a 707, but not for fire. And at that point he looked like a guy in the midst of a nightmare.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
Go figure.
5 billion people watched it happen either in real time or on video, over and over again on every channel for years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

right-  1000 engineers signed petition.

go figure.

Go figure.

5 billion people watched it happen either in real time or on video, over and over again on every channel for years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
1) There was no such thing as super thermite or nanotechnology in explosives, when the wtc was constructed. How did they manage to spray all the undersides of the concrete flooring, without anyone noticing ?

2) If they did manage the above, the central structure would still have remained standing.

I solved both questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
3) How did they control the detonation, in the right sequence, to bring down the buildings as you suggest. We both know that a controlled demolition must blast out supporting columns in a set order,  If this isnt done, they cant control the direction of the fall. I wont even get into the amount of demolition that takes place by machinery PRIOR to the actual explosion.

The detonators were triggered by radio, most probably by hundreds of detonator specific frequencies in a sequence specified by a computer. (That is the only credible possibility that I can think of.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
4) Why have none of the demolition workers who installed the charges ever spoken up. I refuse to believe that a large workforce would see thousands of civillians killed, and not one would decide to blow the whistle.

How large a workforce? In my estimation twenty men would be sufficient to emplace the required detonators and charges in the two towers. It seems to me that those people would have every motive to not speak out and no incentive to do speak out. I expect that even if a reward of one hundred billion dollar was put up, that still none of them would speak out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

There was no missile. There were no planes.

Undoubtedly Rumsfeld does not know how the towers were demolished. (There was no need to know for him.) He was just going with the story and either may have referred to a plane, or have been speculating himself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
Go figure.
5 billion people watched it happen either in real time or on video, over and over again on every channel for years.

So what? I have watched numerous cartoons on television, but that does not prove that Donald Duck is a real live duck. Neither does watching An American werewolf in London prove that all Americans or even one American is a werewolf or that such a change from human to non-human species is possible. Perhaps you ought to go see a documentary about special effects and magic shows?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
1) There was no such thing as super thermite or nanotechnology in explosives, when the wtc was constructed. How did they manage to spray all the undersides of the concrete flooring, without anyone noticing ?

2) If they did manage the above, the central structure would still have remained standing.

I solved both questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
3) How did they control the detonation, in the right sequence, to bring down the buildings as you suggest. We both know that a controlled demolition must blast out supporting columns in a set order,  If this isnt done, they cant control the direction of the fall. I wont even get into the amount of demolition that takes place by machinery PRIOR to the actual explosion.

The detonators were triggered by radio, most probably by hundreds of detonator specific frequencies in a sequence specified by a computer. (That is the only credible possibility that I can think of.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
4) Why have none of the demolition workers who installed the charges ever spoken up. I refuse to believe that a large workforce would see thousands of civillians killed, and not one would decide to blow the whistle.

How large a workforce? In my estimation twenty men would be sufficient to emplace the required detonators and charges in the two towers. It seems to me that those people would have every motive to not speak out and no incentive to do speak out. I expect that even if a reward of one hundred billion dollar was put up, that still none of them would speak out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

There was no missile. There were no planes.

Undoubtedly Rumsfeld does not know how the towers were demolished. (There was no need to know for him.) He was just going with the story and either may have referred to a plane, or have been speculating himself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

There was no missile. There were no planes.

Undoubtedly Rumsfeld does not know how the towers were demolished. (There was no need to know for him.) He was just going with the story and either may have referred to a plane, or have been speculating himself.

Well if there were no planes and there was no missile then what do you think brought down the WTC?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
these people are living in the stone age.

they think there were 5000 men with bell wire and generators LMAO

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

There was no missile. There were no planes.

Undoubtedly Rumsfeld does not know how the towers were demolished. (There was no need to know for him.) He was just going with the story and either may have referred to a plane, or have been speculating himself.

Well if there were no planes and there was no missile then what do you think brought down the WTC?

achewwwwwwwwwwww!

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
yeh why would any idiot think they hit it with a missile after dummy said missile?

There was no missile. There were no planes.

Undoubtedly Rumsfeld does not know how the towers were demolished. (There was no need to know for him.) He was just going with the story and either may have referred to a plane, or have been speculating himself.

Well if there were no planes and there was no missile then what do you think brought down the WTC?

achewwwwwwwwwwww!