RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax?

RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

swtnsparkling -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 5:31:44 PM)
just a question- don't know if it was covered and I missed it. how was the WTC heated? Gas? wouldnt the several floors the plane crashed into and demolished caused open/leaking/broken lines + fire caused some of those explosions

Arpig -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 6:01:15 PM)
quote: But as a government lacky Arpig, you should be aware of that firsthand...... Damn Ron, now my cover is blown!! I am going to have to make a whole new profile, and the brass at Homeland Security are going to want an explanation.

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 8:32:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swtnsparkling how was the WTC heated? Gas? wouldnt the several floors the plane crashed into and demolished caused open/leaking/broken lines + fire caused some of those explosions I do not think that broken gas lines would have mattered even a little bit. At that hight there is a lot of wind, and any impact damage would have made openings to the outside and to that wind. Also, as pieces of debris in both cases shot out of the opposite side of the buildings, there must have been a huge draft transporting any gas away very quickly. Gas is only dangerous when it builds up in an enclosed space with air and subsequently a spark occurs. Besides, the towers were designed with precautions against such fires in mind. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The reason that i believe this is credible is that several hundred feet of huge monster i beams will not fall nicely straight down into a nice neet pile like wtc did.... They will bend over and hang over the street etc... The only way to get hundreds of feet of steel to fall straight down is with explosives. They said the tower vibrated for several minutes after the crash which to me indicates it was still reasonably anchored to the ground. Take a long strand of dried spaghetti hold it up and plick it with your finger and it will vibrat for a while then come to a stop. however if it is broken in several places it will fall straight down. That is a great and beautiful analogy, r1. The vibrating: yes, that is a sign of great structural stability and strength. I agree that any spontaneous collapse of the floors should have left the core and perimeter supports standing. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne have so far convinced me that the combination of incendary devices + explosives brought the wtc buildings down.... Quite. I am now suspecting a two stage demolition. First melting through of numbers of columns and floorbeams by thermite (ignited by explosives?) Next explosions in a controlled sequence that brought down the already weakened building. I read somewhere that all the perimeter columns on one facade of the building and some on the adjoining sides could be cut without the towers collapsing. I have no idea, though, why they would do the demolition in two stages. Perhaps I am mistaken? In any case, if the demolition indeed occurred in two stages, then the igniting and burning of the thermite that we see falling from that office window was not premature, but as planned. We just did not see the other thermite fires, but we have witness testimonies - lots of mall fires on floors not affected by the impacts - that they did occur. Is there any temperature discoloration visible on the perimeter beams that may indicate such thermite burnings? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne and these are a very small sample of the over 503 quotes released to the public thanks to the new york times suing bloomberg for them... So far no one has touched this huge mound of testimonies in this thread.... They speak for themselves and are extremely convincing. They also indicate as regards the explosions in the basement at the core before the towers collapsed, that the demolition occurred in at least two stages.

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 11:02:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The reason that i believe this is credible is that several hundred feet of huge monster i beams will not fall nicely straight down into a nice neet pile like wtc did.... They will bend over and hang over the street etc... The only way to get hundreds of feet of steel to fall straight down is with explosives. They said the tower vibrated for several minutes after the crash which to me indicates it was still reasonably anchored to the ground. Take a long strand of dried spaghetti hold it up and plick it with your finger and it will vibrat for a while then come to a stop. however if it is broken in several places it will fall straight down. That is a great and beautiful analogy, r1. The vibrating: yes, that is a sign of great structural stability and strength. I agree that any spontaneous collapse of the floors should have left the core and perimeter supports standing. Yes if you put several spaghetties straight up say 47 of them, glue them together with floors and an outer perimeter, say if you wiped 1/2 of the core out about the spaghetti would bend over at the severed points bending the remaining ones over but it would stay like a 60 degree leaning tower of pizza... not crash downward... Most designers use that design now days because it is extremely strong and offers maximun floor space as well... quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne have so far convinced me that the combination of incendary devices + explosives brought the wtc buildings down.... Quite. I am now suspecting a two stage demolition. First melting through of numbers of columns and floorbeams by thermite (ignited by explosives?) Next explosions in a controlled sequence that brought down the already weakened building. I read somewhere that all the perimeter columns on one facade of the building and some on the adjoining sides could be cut without the towers collapsing. I have no idea, though, why they would do the demolition in two stages. Perhaps I am mistaken? In any case, if the demolition indeed occurred in two stages, then the igniting and burning of the thermite that we see falling from that office window was not premature, but as planned. We just did not see the other thermite fires, but we have witness testimonies - lots of mall fires on floors not affected by the impacts - that they did occur. Is there any temperature discoloration visible on the perimeter beams that may indicate such thermite burnings? yeh because its a cube within a cube and has some serious strength... Most buildings that are pulled are done in 2 stages... usually tho someone goes in with torches and puts initial severs on the beams as a prep before actually dropping it... It just makes sense to me that if you wanted to do it on the fly use thermite instead of torches, weaken it, then hit the charges... steel on its own accord when overloaded does not fold in on iteself, it bends over. there should have been huge hunks of iron that were twisted sticking up and it should have only partially came down, not the whole thing... Dropping it in the basement made clean up cheaper, and buildings simply do not create molten iron 3 - 4 weeks later in the basement... quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne and these are a very small sample of the over 503 quotes released to the public thanks to the new york times suing bloomberg for them... So far no one has touched this huge mound of testimonies in this thread.... They speak for themselves and are extremely convincing. They also indicate as regards the explosions in the basement at the core before the towers collapsed, that the demolition occurred in at least two stages. Well i can certainly see if there were a coverup why they would not want those statements out to the public and otherwise stall as long as possible to let the shock diffuse... The only thing that is extremely hard for me is the thought of someone on those detonators committing mass murder like its nothing more than an ant hill....

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 11:42:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The only thing that is extremely hard for me is the thought of someone on those detonators committing mass murder like its nothing more than an ant hill.... There is plenty of such people that will not lose a wink of sleep over it, but in fact will relish that memory.

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/3/2006 11:45:28 PM)
ok here ya go! This is getting seriously interesting... anyone still think there were no explosives planted? http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/#videos http://911review.org/Wget/members.fortunecity.com/911/wtc/tower-explosions.htm

mnottertail -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 5:01:03 AM)
I am going to quickly point something out, and I am working on a trivial monograph concerning some other issues that have been wearing away at me about this WTC thing.... But I wanted to point out some slippery slopes that have been introduced and while I am all for allegory in terms of an aid to understanding; spaghetti and steel girders really have so little in common, oh sure; you can find iron enriched spaghetti, and there are carbons in it, and perhaps some other gross similarities, but after that----- For a trivial example, stick a portion of I beam in water and boil for 12 minutes or even a few hundred hours, it will never be even slightly al-dente ... Its preferred method of cooking is using a dry heat. The torsion charactaristics, the breaking strength, bendability, the forces that could shatter it, failure characteristics are all quite dissimilar. So, in my mind at least, any experiment conducted by the amature scientist in the home laboratory should take some of these things into consideration at the outset. Neils Bohr

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 7:25:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I am going to quickly point something out, and I am working on a trivial monograph concerning some other issues that have been wearing away at me about this WTC thing.... But I wanted to point out some slippery slopes that have been introduced and while I am all for allegory in terms of an aid to understanding; spaghetti and steel girders really have so little in common, oh sure; you can find iron enriched spaghetti, and there are carbons in it, and perhaps some other gross similarities, but after that----- For a trivial example, stick a portion of I beam in water and boil for 12 minutes or even a few hundred hours, it will never be even slightly al-dente ... Its preferred method of cooking is using a dry heat. The torsion charactaristics, the breaking strength, bendability, the forces that could shatter it, failure characteristics are all quite dissimilar. So, in my mind at least, any experiment conducted by the amature scientist in the home laboratory should take some of these things into consideration at the outset. Neils Bohr yeh especially when cooking up a batch of steel... What i found particularly interesting is how the corner columns literaly sheared and then fell into its self.. then the next section and next section etc.... if it fell from heat i would have expected it to buckle slowly and slowly meet floor after floor till the weight overcame the abiliy to sustain itself....rather than this shearing effect.... It looks like they were sheared in sections... no bendingor breaking... anyone else notice that too? after playing thier slo-mo's in slo-mo a zillion times it looked to me like the sheared it first then blew out the level below the shear and the successove levels below that....and at the same time sheared the remaining top section so it would disintegrate... Anyone else come to a similar conclusion?

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 8:24:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne It looks like they were sheared in sections... no bendingor breaking... anyone else notice that too? Yes, one sees straight sections of beams falling down. I particularly recal the ones with hot, smoking ends. For the first stage of the demolition they put thermite against the inside of the perimeter colums. These columns were partially melted by the thermite when it ignited. Because they melted on the inside, the damage to these columns was not visible from any position outside the towers. Thus they looked as healthy as a tree that has a chunk at the bottom cut out of it by a wood logger, as seen from the side of the trunk that was not damaged. In the second stage of the demolition they ignited shearing charges that cut through the columns in other locations. The towers would fall inwards, just like the tree falls in the direction of the deepest cut in its trunk. At the location of those cuts - where the columns are partially melted - the tree and columns break because of the weight of the toppling tree and the collapsing tower.

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 12:51:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule In the second stage of the demolition they ignited shearing charges that cut through the columns in other locations. The towers would fall inwards, just like the tree falls in the direction of the deepest cut in its trunk. At the location of those cuts - where the columns are partially melted - the tree and columns break because of the weight of the toppling tree and the collapsing tower. what really caught my eye is they way one beam woudl slide past the other like an impass or as if they were stacked up one on top another and then someone just eased it over the edge and down it came... thats not the way a building would come down if it was fire or wreckage that caused it... Those were good vids imo

UtopianRanger -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 1:14:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne It looks like they were sheared in sections... no bendingor breaking... anyone else notice that too? Yes, one sees straight sections of beams falling down. I particularly recal the ones with hot, smoking ends. For the first stage of the demolition they put thermite against the inside of the perimeter colums. These columns were partially melted by the thermite when it ignited. Because they melted on the inside, the damage to these columns was not visible from any position outside the towers. Thus they looked as healthy as a tree that has a chunk at the bottom cut out of it by a wood logger, as seen from the side of the trunk that was not damaged. In the second stage of the demolition they ignited shearing charges that cut through the columns in other locations. The towers would fall inwards, just like the tree falls in the direction of the deepest cut in its trunk. At the location of those cuts - where the columns are partially melted - the tree and columns break because of the weight of the toppling tree and the collapsing tower. Regardless of what the detractors say, I think this thread has been pretty good. And I'm going to take the time to read all twenty pages before the weekend is over. { I've only read bits and pieces} - R

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 8:00:48 PM)
i cant help but wonder if seeing those buildings come down in slo-mo has affected anyones opinions who previously believed it was a plane and fire that brought them down... Personally now that i have reviewed the evidence and testimonies i am convinced that explosives brought it down and the planes were for show... But then that just brings even more insanity into the picture... That being that you would have a very hard time convincing me that a bunch of rag tag nomad cave dwelling terrorists even aproach the kind of technology it takes to drop a building like that in its basemet in the manner it was done... The slomo shows that explosives were used but in a perfect timing sequence to drop a 1000 ft tall building perfectly straight down... It seems to me that one of our us demolition companies would have had to be involved due to the complex precision required to do such a feat that literally went off without a hitch... If that doesnt make a chill run up your spine??

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/4/2006 8:15:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne It seems to me that one of our us demolition companies would have had to be involved due to the complex precision required to do such a feat that literally went off without a hitch... I doubt it. I think just one man for the towers. Possibly another did WTC7. How many men actually placed the explosives is anyone's guess. Would twenty men and three weeks be sufficient? Then of course at least one shift of the WTC-guards must be involved too, and Larry S. No, a bunch of Arabs could not have done it. These demolitions were a feat of sophisticated technology.

Arpig -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 12:42:22 AM)
quote: No, a bunch of Arabs could not have done it. These demolitions were a feat of sophisticated technology. And we all know that Arabs are incapable of dealing with any technology more sophisticated than a camel blanket.....not only are you misguided, deluded, and ignorant in the extreme, you are also a bigot.

dorsaisgirl1 -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 5:22:04 AM)
hello all first i would like to say the other post under dorsai was actuly me i did not realize i was logged in under daddys name. i have no doubt that there was people in the planes that hit the wtc and i am sure that the death toll was high probley higher then reported as i said before bush and co dont care how many have to die its an exseptable lose to them they are getting exsactly what they want .there is a reason that there has never been a war on terror befor .think about that since the whole war on terror began there have been more terrorests .bush is getting what he wants and trust me he is giveing the terrorests what they want to .yes it is posible that the world trade center was riged with exsplosives bush needed this act of terrorism to be remembered he needed it to sucseed.

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 4:15:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I am going to quickly point something out, and I am working on a trivial monograph concerning some other issues that have been wearing away at me about this WTC thing.... But I wanted to point out some slippery slopes that have been introduced and while I am all for allegory in terms of an aid to understanding; spaghetti and steel girders really have so little in common, oh sure; you can find iron enriched spaghetti, and there are carbons in it, and perhaps some other gross similarities, but after that----- Ok ron, then how about we substiture the bottom wire of a wire coat hanger. you know just take a wire cutters and clip it before it starts to make the curve to support the arm sleeves and use that for the example... The resaon i chose spaghetti is that it will vibrate if yo uplick it much in the same manner as the core of the wtc would.... a coat hanger wouldnt get that effect which was part of the point i was trying to make... would you buy into that being a little better representation for the point i am trying to make?

Sinergy -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 6:57:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne would you buy into that being a little better representation for the point i am trying to make? I do not think it would be a valid representation at all, RealOne. There is a computer program (the name escapes me) which allows one to start at 0 with basic amino acids and chemistry, and allow the simulation to run. What ends up happening are complex systems form and persist over time. What is curious is that you can take a snapshot of a persistent complex system, transport it to a bare system, start it up running, and it will not run. The conclusion that systems theorists have tended to arrive at is that persistant systems tend to be influenced by so many variables, many of which are not obvious to the people studying them. It is the interaction between these variables which determine whether a system persists or not. So your point that you can take the persistent system known as the World Trade Center and arrive at a meaningful comparison using the persistent system known as a box of spaghetti or cut coat hangers is not really possible, in my mind. There were simply far too many variables in the World Trade Center which would not exist in your spaghetti or coat hangers. Sinergy

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 7:00:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: No, a bunch of Arabs could not have done it. These demolitions were a feat of sophisticated technology. And we all know that Arabs are incapable of dealing with any technology more sophisticated than a camel blanket.....not only are you misguided, deluded, and ignorant in the extreme, you are also a bigot. i think its pretty obvious that he was talking about specific people attempting a specific role and i happen to agree. To further draw you a picture: that the arabs in question did not have the technology to do this. i called a few demolition teams around the country and they unamonuosly agree that the proper way to take a building like that down is floor by floor from the top, but in the event explosives were to be used it would take a lot of planning and work to accomplish it... Now you may have a burr up your ass about rule's shorthand but i do not believe what he said was meant the way you want to apint it... ANYWAY: for those i promised video to: Here is the live firemans testimonie immediately after it happened! They all seem to agree that there were 3 huge explosions and numerous small ones. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6791505194630193084 Of course this would be evidence of pre-planted explosives...

Real0ne -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 7:06:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne would you buy into that being a little better representation for the point i am trying to make? I do not think it would be a valid representation at all, RealOne. There is a computer program (the name escapes me) which allows one to start at 0 with basic amino acids and chemistry, and allow the simulation to run. What ends up happening are complex systems form and persist over time. What is curious is that you can take a snapshot of a persistent complex system, transport it to a bare system, start it up running, and it will not run. The conclusion that systems theorists have tended to arrive at is that persistant systems tend to be influenced by so many variables, many of which are not obvious to the people studying them. It is the interaction between these variables which determine whether a system persists or not. So your point that you can take the persistent system known as the World Trade Center and arrive at a meaningful comparison using the persistent system known as a box of spaghetti or cut coat hangers is not really possible, in my mind. There were simply far too many variables in the World Trade Center which would not exist in your spaghetti or coat hangers. Sinergy franly i dont have a problem with that, but it does show that you missed my point entirely

Sinergy -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (11/5/2006 7:22:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne franly i dont have a problem with that, but it does show that you missed my point entirely I stand corrected. Sinergy

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875