RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax?

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

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

Message

Arpig -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:18:03 AM)
Another really good point

sissifytoserve -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:18:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: They should do the same for us who DON'T buy the government's story instead of "you tin foil hat wearer...you are nuts" et al. Ummm.....but...you are! Whatever. Don't you have some government arse to be kissing somewhere?

Arpig -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:25:15 AM)
quote: Don't you have some government arse to be kissing somewhere? ROTMFFLAO!!!!! Oh wow!, If you only knew me, you would know just how hilarious that statement is young man.

sissifytoserve -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:28:05 AM)
I don't want to know you....old man.

phantom1 -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:28:51 AM)
Read the new book published by Popular Mechanics on the matter. It's illuminating, eminently researched scholarship that utterly and conclusively shatters the internet inspired myths surrounding the "hoax" thesis.

sissifytoserve -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:34:19 AM)
The popular mechanics article was 100% apologist propaganda for BushCo.and has been debunked. http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/09/popular-mechanics-crank-cant-admit.html http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=009309 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/100806popularmechanics.htm http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050321052700567 http://911review.com/pm/markup/index.html http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm

mnottertail -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:34:29 AM)
Real, Can you give me the specific links to each of these film clips, since I didn't see them, and the overall site link has a multitude of links and I am not going to waste my time with every small and or large misinformed statement given by some of these threads. Insofar as the kitchens being on whatever floor, the gas mains are several stories underground, at least 4 inches around and there would be several, now as far as fuses and breakers blowing, in terms of that type of disruption, you have a great chance that they will not blow before it reaches the switchgear and the ConEds mains in that area are gonna be pretty fucking hefty and not cut out before alot of shit blows, now if you are willimg to take the risk, we will slap your ass on one of those transformers in that basement and give it a go, my bets is we will be picking your ass up with donut napkins as far away as new jersey, I have seen a great deal of silvery grey smoke coming off the brush cuttings that I burn every winter, I can assure you that boxelder is lacking in thermite, but the smoke would be consistant with it. This is akin to the statement: 'Huh, look at that, a license plate REM 255, what are the chances of seeing that?' Pretty fucking good actually, I would reply. This is not a causal relation necessarily. I suspect you are going to see all kinda colors of smoke thourghout that disaster, and natural gas exploding in that volume being colorless is not the same as blowing it out in the open air. there were many tons of combustible materials that caught when it blew.... now again, I do not support the administrations version of any event, but there are misstatements and absolute falsehoods on some of these things that either side is lacking a reason to believe. I really would like the exact links to the films you talk about, I scrolled around for about 45 minutes on that site last night and didn't see any of these.....certainly not clear by any title.............. Ron

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:46:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Building are constructed so that each floor is able to withstand so many degrees for at least 2 hours to permit evacuation of the higher floors. Since Aviation fuel burns hotter than your normal building fire, that length of time was lessoned. I hope that you are sarcastic, as your signature line claims, for otherwise your ignorant remark indicates that you are not qualified to discuss 9/11. quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Combined with the number of supports that were destroyed when the planes crashed and it was only a matter of time before structural failure took it's toll. Duh. You forgot to mention the 1600 kilograms or whatever of thermate that are also required to collapse one of the towers, as the structural damage to the buildings caused by the collision was negligible. Again your ignorance disqualifies you as a participant in 9/11 discussions. quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine BTW, the Bin Laden family made their billions in construction - they understand buildings and the forces that can cause them to fall down. Clearly you never made billions in construction, as you have proven that you do not understand buildings and the forces that can cause them to fall down.

Lordandmaster -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:50:13 AM)
What exactly was ignorant about what he said? Instead of lobbing useless insults at people, you might be taken seriously if you said anything useful yourself. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Building are constructed so that each floor is able to withstand so many degrees for at least 2 hours to permit evacuation of the higher floors. Since Aviation fuel burns hotter than your normal building fire, that length of time was lessoned. I hope that you are sarcastic, as your signature line claims, for otherwise your ignorant remark indicates that you are not qualified to discuss 9/11.

Saraheli -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 8:56:24 AM)
Sorry, wrong account signed in when I opened the site

Arpig -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 9:00:48 AM)
Again your ignorance disqualifies you as a participant in 9/11 discussions.

ToGiveDivine -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 9:17:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster What exactly was ignorant about what he said? Instead of lobbing useless insults at people, you might be taken seriously if you said anything useful yourself. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Building are constructed so that each floor is able to withstand so many degrees for at least 2 hours to permit evacuation of the higher floors. Since Aviation fuel burns hotter than your normal building fire, that length of time was lessoned. I hope that you are sarcastic, as your signature line claims, for otherwise your ignorant remark indicates that you are not qualified to discuss 9/11. Thank You L&M. I think that the process of merely disagreeing with Rule is enough for him to consider anyone a lessor being. There are so many God's Gift to Humanity on these forums that I forgot I should poll the elite to find out what is approved for me to post ... or I can just think "wack job" and move onto conversations with civil people - I believe the Skipper the Penquin in the Madagascar Movie would say, "Smile and Wave Boys ... Smile and Wave"

Rule -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 9:48:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine Building are constructed so that each floor is able to withstand so many degrees for at least 2 hours to permit evacuation of the higher floors. Since Aviation fuel burns hotter than your normal building fire, that length of time was lessoned. I hope that you are sarcastic, as your signature line claims, for otherwise your ignorant remark indicates that you are not qualified to discuss 9/11. quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster What exactly was ignorant about what he said? The only significant kerosene fire was the fireball seen at the moment of impact. Soon after came the black smoke that indicates not an inferno, but an oxygen starved fire. It requires time for metal to heat, because it requires time to conduct the heat. That brief initial fireball cannot have had any effect on the metal structure of the building whatsoever. The oxygen starved fire that came after the initial fireball cannot have had any impact on the steel structure of the buildings either. Besides: nearly all of the fire was on the large expanse of floors. The steel supports were in the core and in the outer skeleton. We know that the effect of the fire on the outer skeleton was insignificant. There is no evidence at all of the fire damaging the outer skeleton. Instead we see evidence of the steel girders in the outer skeleton being severed by explosives and of being warped by explosions. Also: the second plane went through the corner of the tower: it missed the core entirely. Smoke and fire and heat should not be confused. A very small fire can produce a huge amount of black smoke and little heat. We know that firemen reported only two small pockets of fire on the 78th floor of one of the towers and that in their opinion two lines of water hoses would be sufficient to extinguish them. The truth is, that the insignificant fires in both WTC towers were burning out of their own accord at the time of the collapses. This forced the hands of the demolition team: they had to pull the towers and destroy all evidence before the fire department extinguished the remnants of the fire and gave the All clear. TGD parroted a platitude which lacked any and all indications of pertinent knowledge, observational skills, discrimination between true and false, and intelligence.

ToGiveDivine -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:17:13 AM)
Rule's profile says he's from the Netherlands - obviously the way he pounced on my post (unprovoked), I'm going to assume he doesn't mean the country, but instead the posterior.

mnottertail -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:29:17 AM)
quote: The only significant kerosene fire was the fireball seen at the moment of impact. Soon after came the black smoke that indicates not an inferno, but an oxygen starved fire. Figuring roughly 40k gallons of fuel (which them planes can carrry quite easily) you are going to need 560k gallons of available air to burn it fairly efficiently.................. so you are going to have a big explosion followed nearly instantaneously by a big implosion.... I aint got all the math to figure it out close at hand but I know how big a typical 250 gallon fuel tank is for home oil burning and I know how big a 350 propane tank is for home burning. so you would need around 160 of them 250s stacked together and about 2240 of them stacked together for air Now at around 120k btu/per gallon--- I dont much give a fuck if it was a 50 or 80% or some other burning........thats alotta heat. While I can certainly agree it was oxygen starved, I don't get the here nor there of it. Many motherfuckers are gonna singe in a deal like that, and some are gonna get away? It is unclear how this furthers the argument of any postulation so far. Ron

ToGiveDivine -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:37:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paradoxy Anything I ever tell my buddies who talk about Freemasons, Moon-landings, JFK, etc... There is no conspiracy. Conspiracies' survival require one thing. People have to keep their mouths shut. Ask yourself something: "At what point have I told something to someone something or someone else told me something and it didn't eventually come out?" The correct answer should be "never". Humans are completely unable to do this task. Massive or even small conspiracies require that everyone involved be able to keep a secret. Truth be told, most mafias in American History are always exposed by one of the top administrators of the crimes being committed. Of course, this is dependant on plea bargaining, but the point remains the same. I respectfully disagree, if you put enough differing scenarios out about an event, then when the real information is somehow released, no one knows what is real and what is driven by conspiracy mongers. That's the "can't see the forest through the trees" scenario. I don't believe our government brought down the towers, it would have taken longer than 8 months for Bush to get everything in place without anyone knowing and the site of the collapsed towers was not secured after they fell (there were hundreds of people sifting through the site) and for the government to try to find all incriminating evidence (e.g. thermite explosives, etc.) in that huge pile and get it removed without anyone noticing or anyone finding it first would be next to impossible. Edited: You also would have to assume the Clinton Administration was involved to the extent that had it known of the plot to fly planes into the tower during Clinton's time, then Bill would have to suppress that information in order to give enough time for planning. It's easier to hide / dispose of a couple of snipers on a grassy knoll than to remove all incriminating evidence from a 10 story heap of twisted metal with thousands of people and hundreds of cameras milling about. Those people that think our government set explosives (or whatnot) to bring the towers down have a lot more faith in the government's ability to accomplish monumental feats, maintain a level of secrecy that has eluded mankind in all of history, and the fact that no real pausible evidence has been found. (excluding vague circumstancial evidence, smoke and mirrors hypothesis, and "everyone should hate the U.S. government for everything they've ever done" mentality) Now, was our government involved in not stopping this attack beforehand - the jury is still out on that one.

mnottertail -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:39:03 AM)
quote: Besides: nearly all of the fire was on the large expanse of floors. The steel supports were in the core and in the outer skeleton. We know that the effect of the fire on the outer skeleton was insignificant. There is no evidence at all of the fire damaging the outer skeleton. Instead we see evidence of the steel girders in the outer skeleton being severed by explosives and of being warped by explosions. OK, this argues against you. Then any instantaneous heat was directed into the structural concrete, as well as any vibrations due the explosion and implosion..... pre-formed concrete was the floor, subfloor and stringers floating on the steel (not iron) girders Concrete is very brittle, it don't bend for shit......... it has about zero tortion ability as well, additionally..... Light a small propane torch, like you solder with and go outside to a concrete slab, and briefly point the lit torch at the concrete........ Just like water with rocks in it... Poof, big (chunks in relation to the flame) ........ I am yet to see or read anything convincing. Ron

ToGiveDivine -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:43:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: Besides: nearly all of the fire was on the large expanse of floors. The steel supports were in the core and in the outer skeleton. We know that the effect of the fire on the outer skeleton was insignificant. There is no evidence at all of the fire damaging the outer skeleton. Instead we see evidence of the steel girders in the outer skeleton being severed by explosives and of being warped by explosions. OK, this argues against you. Then any instantaneous heat was directed into the structural concrete, as well as any vibrations due the explosion and implosion..... pre-formed concrete was the floor, subfloor and stringers floating on the steel (not iron) girders Concrete is very brittle, it don't bend for shit......... it has about zero tortion ability as well, additionally..... Light a small propane torch, like you solder with and go outside to a concrete slab, and briefly point the lit torch at the concrete........ Just like water with rocks in it... Poof, big (chunks in relation to the flame) ........ I am yet to see or read anything convincing. Ron I wouldn't say zero - those buildings are built to sway so the floors have to be able to distort somewhat without breaking, but an explosion of a 747 would be more than the concrete floors could handle.

mnottertail -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:49:49 AM)
Thats why the float on pocketed lintels. And to be clearly understood, in my colloquial way of speaking, 'about zero' does not mean zero it means an insignificant amount. I understand I was not being backbited nor am I backbiting, I am clarifying what may be misconstrued as a fault in my explanatory power. Thanks, ToGiveDevine Ron

ToGiveDivine -> RE: 911 - Al-Qaeda or Hoax? (10/30/2006 10:51:53 AM)
You still made me cry you big meany [&o]

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875