Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
2. If it were a conspiracy, I don't think it would have required "thousands upon thousands" of people involved and "in the know"... A few dozen, at most, would have been enough. As for what's keeping them quiet: The first best two incentives are money and fear. Anyone can be blackmailed into doing anything these days - for his sake, or his family's. Or they could simply be killed afterwards. History is full of examples.

Maybe you can answer this for me since I cannot get an answer from any other consipracy theorists...

We have 4 flights that day...
United Flight 175 and United 93
American Airlines Flight 11 and 77.

You say only a few dozen would have been needed. How about those flights were published months in advance. Multiple companies sold tickets on those flights. The morning of those flights the pilots were briefed by a dispatcher, those planes were fueled and cleaned and loaded by airport and airline personnel, mechanics worked on those airplanes, gate agents loaded passengers, ATC received flight plans for those flights, the pilots contacted the FAA for permission to commence those flights, ATC assigned each airplane a transponder code to monitor its progress on radar.. etc, etc, etc

Are you telling me that every single employee of American Airlines and United Airlines were in on this conspiracy? Expedia and Orbitz must have been in on the conspiracy as well.

How could a dozen people pull that off? Answer that question for me (with logic) and I will forever believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. for the record I will also post the OP's links in my sig if you can answer that for me.

My guess is you can't.

Your post makes a good point.... unfortunately, it starts with the wrong premise. Most of the people you list did NOT have to be clued in... just collateral damage.

Also, ever since Ford instituted the concept of "limited responsibility" on the assembly line, and the model took off in many other aspects of our everyday lives, things have become much more compartmentalized, and it's easy to segregate by just using the "mind your own damn business" notion.

Many, many agencies would have had to be clued-in on what was happening including the FBI, CIA, FAA, NYPD, NYFD, US Armed Forces, NIST, FEMA, the Airlines, the WTC maintenance and janitorial crews; not to mention the large team of experts it would have required to plant the explosives in the WTC buildings. Yet not a single person from any of those groups has ever come forward. Somehow nobody in the towers noticed drywall being ripped out, explosives being planted, wiring being run and hidden, the drywall repaired, the walls repainted, and everything cleaned up and tidied so nobody would know anything happened.

Anyone that doesn't realize the amount of people involved who had to know what was going on, or at least their part in it, is glossing over the details in order to hold on to a fantasy where they can villianize Bush, the NWO, Jews, or whatever their favorite paranoia involves.

There's also one HUGE glaring problem concerning the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. They can't come to any concensus amongst themselves regarding how it all went down or who was involved. 9/11 happened one specific way and any and all "discrepancies" should point to one specific path. Yet the CT's are all over the place with their theories ranging from military planes, no planes, missiles, holographic projections, mass hypnosis, mini-nukes, thermite, thermate, super-thermite, nano-thermate, and the list of crazy notions goes on and on and their stories keep being revised over and over again. It's so obvious that instead of analysing the facts they have made up their mind what their particular version of the story is and then either shoehorn the surrounding facts in to fit the story, or more often, just ignore any facts that cause their beliefs to blow up in their face.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
4. Many aspects of 9/11 were suspicious... Why was the Pentagon lawn so quickly and conveniently swept clean (on the same day!), and the plane crash site was covered with sand? This goes against any crash investigation methodology. Also, speaking of crashes, there certainly wasn't enough debris left in either Washington DC or in Pennsylvania... I've seen only one plane crash site in "real life" before, along with many others on TV... and they looked nothing like that. Also, I do not remember any human remains being mentioned, whatsoever, and you DO come across those at a plane crash site...
.

Airplane crashing at 500 m.p.h.

Airplane bellying in short of runway @ 180mph

Looks pretty similar to me.. granted one was going at 3 times the speed pf the other and nosed in.

And you do know that airplanes are made of aluminum? they are built to be light, not to withstand 500 mph impacts with hard surfaces.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
2. If it were a conspiracy, I don't think it would have required "thousands upon thousands" of people involved and "in the know"... A few dozen, at most, would have been enough. As for what's keeping them quiet: The first best two incentives are money and fear. Anyone can be blackmailed into doing anything these days - for his sake, or his family's. Or they could simply be killed afterwards. History is full of examples.

Maybe you can answer this for me since I cannot get an answer from any other consipracy theorists...

We have 4 flights that day...
United Flight 175 and United 93
American Airlines Flight 11 and 77.

You say only a few dozen would have been needed. How about those flights were published months in advance. Multiple companies sold tickets on those flights. The morning of those flights the pilots were briefed by a dispatcher, those planes were fueled and cleaned and loaded by airport and airline personnel, mechanics worked on those airplanes, gate agents loaded passengers, ATC received flight plans for those flights, the pilots contacted the FAA for permission to commence those flights, ATC assigned each airplane a transponder code to monitor its progress on radar.. etc, etc, etc

Are you telling me that every single employee of American Airlines and United Airlines were in on this conspiracy? Expedia and Orbitz must have been in on the conspiracy as well.

How could a dozen people pull that off? Answer that question for me (with logic) and I will forever believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. for the record I will also post the OP's links in my sig if you can answer that for me.

My guess is you can't.

Playing Devil's Advocate here: the airlines and anyone associated with it wouldn't have to be involved for it to happen. The government could have easily paid off OBL to escalate his holy war against us through 9/11. Hell, get paid/financed to do what you love? Everyone has a price, including the Taliban in accepting help from the CIA in the 80's. The idea wasn't original, Clancy already wrote about it. And don't you wonder why we haven't caught OBL yet?

While there is a very small chance of conspiracy, evidence overwhelmingly leans toward an extremist religious motive with the government clearly caught with their pants down. But yes, it's possible that our government COULD have paid/financed OBL to execute it. Highly unlikely though. And even more unlikely that the buildings were brought down with anything more than the planes and an enormous amount of flammable liquid.

EDIT: Keep in mind that the towers didn't have to technically be brought down for our government to have enough ammo to declare war (which is why I definitely don't believe that they were brought down with explosives). That was just icing on the cake for OBL or whoever would have financed him (assuming conspiracy).

 

[JohnnyGage]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Again and again... I'm tempted to post my thoughts, even though I realize they're very likely to be dismissed as more paranoia, fantasy or conspiracy theory...

1. The U.S. took 9/11 as an opportunity to exert its military and economical hegemony. As the poet said, "se non e vero, e ben trovato". Plus, there were quite a few uncanny coincidences - such as the military exercise taking place at the exact time of the attacks...
2. If it were a conspiracy, I don't think it would have required "thousands upon thousands" of people involved and "in the know"... A few dozen, at most, would have been enough. As for what's keeping them quiet: The first best two incentives are money and fear. Anyone can be blackmailed into doing anything these days - for his sake, or his family's. Or they could simply be killed afterwards. History is full of examples.
3. I don't think any government is above killing its own people in order to reach political or economic gains. The U.S. is no exception...on the contrary. A quick example comes to mind, since it was used as a comparison event: Pearl Harbor. Only in recent years did it come to light that Washington knew the attack will take place, but chose to keep quiet and use it as a reason to enter WWII.
4. Many aspects of 9/11 were suspicious... Why was the Pentagon lawn so quickly and conveniently swept clean (on the same day!), and the plane crash site was covered with sand? This goes against any crash investigation methodology. Also, speaking of crashes, there certainly wasn't enough debris left in either Washington DC or in Pennsylvania... I've seen only one plane crash site in "real life" before, along with many others on TV... and they looked nothing like that. Also, I do not remember any human remains being mentioned, whatsoever, and you DO come across those at a plane crash site...
5. Follow the money. There were billions to be made from the ensuing Afghano-Iraqi debacle... Some companies and individuals got filthy rich - and, more importantly, gained a whole lot of influence.
6. Dismissing any suspicions as "outright lunacy" is counter-productive. Any half-skilled PR campaign can skew public opinion against any ideas contradicting the official version...
7. Not all those who doubt 9/11 are trolls, people with no social interaction, uneducated or naive. Many of them are not even U.S. residents - which can work for or against them, depending how you chose to interpret it.
8. As long as there's a reasonable doubt concerning 9/11, critical thinking is recommended... This was not a clear-cut "terrorist goes kaboom!" situation.

Unfortunately, it was very clear cut as "terrorist goes kaboom!". The mess you posted above is not critical thinking--just the usual tin hat paranoia. If you had used critical thinking you probably would not had posted the above nonsense.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
2. If it were a conspiracy, I don't think it would have required "thousands upon thousands" of people involved and "in the know"... A few dozen, at most, would have been enough. As for what's keeping them quiet: The first best two incentives are money and fear. Anyone can be blackmailed into doing anything these days - for his sake, or his family's. Or they could simply be killed afterwards. History is full of examples.

Maybe you can answer this for me since I cannot get an answer from any other consipracy theorists...

We have 4 flights that day...
United Flight 175 and United 93
American Airlines Flight 11 and 77.

You say only a few dozen would have been needed. How about those flights were published months in advance. Multiple companies sold tickets on those flights. The morning of those flights the pilots were briefed by a dispatcher, those planes were fueled and cleaned and loaded by airport and airline personnel, mechanics worked on those airplanes, gate agents loaded passengers, ATC received flight plans for those flights, the pilots contacted the FAA for permission to commence those flights, ATC assigned each airplane a transponder code to monitor its progress on radar.. etc, etc, etc

Are you telling me that every single employee of American Airlines and United Airlines were in on this conspiracy? Expedia and Orbitz must have been in on the conspiracy as well.

How could a dozen people pull that off? Answer that question for me (with logic) and I will forever believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. for the record I will also post the OP's links in my sig if you can answer that for me.

My guess is you can't.

Your post makes a good point.... unfortunately, it starts with the wrong premise. Most of the people you list did NOT have to be clued in... just collateral damage.

Also, ever since Ford instituted the concept of "limited responsibility" on the assembly line, and the model took off in many other aspects of our everyday lives, things have become much more compartmentalized, and it's easy to segregate by just using the "mind your own damn business" notion.

You missed my point about those flights being published months in advance. Airlines do not change schedules willy nilly. The airlines get approval from the FAA to run a route unless there is a major weather delay you can pretty much count on that flight taking off.

No one to this day has raised any question as to how a published flight did not take off on 9/11. So that means those scheduled flights took off as planned. That means the caterer (seperate company) made food for the flight, the cleaners (different company) cleaned the plane, the fuelers have a record of putting fuel into those planes, the baggage handlers loaded the airplanes, multiple gate agents loaded the passengers. What about the 4 crews? Aside from the flight numbers each plane has a registration number... now we have Boeing in on the conspiracy. Take Boston for instance... with all the news about the flight numbers in the days and weeks following 9/11... not one of those people who touched that airplane said "I never saw United Flight 93 at the airport that day." Because it was... and it took off and crashed in Pennsylvania.

I have a pilots perspective. I know what it takes to get a airliner out of a major airport and the large number of people who would have touched that airplane.

If those passengers and crew did not die on those airplanes... where are they? Did all of their family members get in on the conspiracy as well?

 

[palehorse]

Well then, I'm convinced.

 

[CLite]

These threads are great for bringing out the crazies, I didn't realize how many of the day to day posters are certifiably insane. I guess you learn something new every day.

Not that anyone's mind will be changed after 8 years of being brainwashed by youtube videos but:

1) Regarding the technical aspects please read the popular mechanics article. Of course you'll say those crazy engineers are part of the grand conspiracy, obviously they are sheep just plodding along and know nothing about building collapses. Clearly the youtube video makers are so much better versed in building structural integrity.

2) Regarding the "human" aspect realize that the men in power are humans beings like you and me, they have families and exhibit love to people close to them. They can make corrupt choices, and distance themselves from shit like invading Iraq/etc. because of xenophobia and the de-humanization of our enemies. But do you really think that there can be so many people at high levels pulling strings to dismantle the most iconic symbols in NYC while killing thousands of people, going all the way down to the grunts planting the supposed explosives.

Bleh, I don't know why I bother.... crazies are crazies, at least this thread has given me more perspective on some of the regular posters.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you can't tell the guy answering the question here is bluffing, I don't recommend ever playing poker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng#t=6m35s

^ Huh? Physics dictates a constant rate of acceleration of gravity as 9.81 m/s^2.

He was bluffing when claiming WTC7's fall took notably longer than freefall, as is made obvious by the tell of scratching his nose after his statement, along with NIST later revising their report to admit freefall.

Anyway, the amount of conflation in this thread is absurd, leaving far too much nonsense for me to bother addressing all it. However, for suggesting anyone who disputes the official story is crazy, I hope you might take the time to look though this list:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

 

[Ns1]

There have been THOUSANDS of posts and replies debunking these CT's, and there is no hope.

Best to just not reply at all.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you can't tell the guy answering the question here is bluffing, I don't recommend ever playing poker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng#t=6m35s

^ Huh? Physics dictates a constant rate of acceleration of gravity as 9.81 m/s^2.

He was bluffing when claiming WTC7's fall took notably longer than freefall, as is made obvious by the tell of scratching his nose after his statement, along with NIST later revising their report to admit freefall.

Anyway, the amount of conflation in this thread is absurd, leaving far too much nonsense for me to bother addressing all it. However, for suggesting anyone who disputes the official story is crazy, I hope you might take the time to look though this list:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Too much nonsense and weak appeal to authority at that website to address, so I'll just leave you with this:

http://www.debunking911.com/

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Ns1
There have been THOUSANDS of posts and replies debunking these CT's, and there is no hope.

Best to just not reply at all.

It's actually good that they keep posting here, we are continually reminded of which posters are completely off their rocker and can learn to avoid their future posts and opinions.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
well, its about time they came out with this. prof jones and company put this out just a few days ago. seems like jones sent some of his red chip thermite to different labs yrs ago. for those inquiring minds:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

Abstract

We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

id reccommed downloading it so u can read through the 24 pages of material.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM


here is a video presentation prof jones did about a yr ago when he found these red chips that turned out to be unreacted thermite!!
http://video.google.com/videop...d=-4186920967571123147]http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/co...001/7TOCPJ.SGM"><b"><...es/co...001/7TOCPJ.SGM</a></a>

I heard that it was actually invisible teleporting dinosaurs with laser beams attached to their heads, engineeered by the Illuminati that attacked the WTC at the same time as the planes hit. I have solid evidence from a random blog i found on the net proving the cover up.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you can't tell the guy answering the question here is bluffing, I don't recommend ever playing poker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng#t=6m35s

^ Huh? Physics dictates a constant rate of acceleration of gravity as 9.81 m/s^2.

He was bluffing when claiming WTC7's fall took notably longer than freefall, as is made obvious by the tell of scratching his nose after his statement, along with NIST later revising their report to admit freefall.

Anyway, the amount of conflation in this thread is absurd, leaving far too much nonsense for me to bother addressing all it. However, for suggesting anyone who disputes the official story is crazy, I hope you might take the time to look though this list:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Too much nonsense and weak appeal to authority at that website to address, so I'll just leave you with this:

http://www.debunking911.com/

How about you adesss the obvious bluffing in the video I posted. Better yet, watch the whole thing.

And by the way, the website was in response to the "I'm an engineer" and "I'm a pilot" comments, along with the argument about survivor's families.

 

[KlokWyze]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Again and again... I'm tempted to post my thoughts, even though I realize they're very likely to be dismissed as more paranoia, fantasy or conspiracy theory...

1. The U.S. took 9/11 as an opportunity to exert its military and economical hegemony. As the poet said, "se non e vero, e ben trovato". Plus, there were quite a few uncanny coincidences - such as the military exercise taking place at the exact time of the attacks...
2. If it were a conspiracy, I don't think it would have required "thousands upon thousands" of people involved and "in the know"... A few dozen, at most, would have been enough. As for what's keeping them quiet: The first best two incentives are money and fear. Anyone can be blackmailed into doing anything these days - for his sake, or his family's. Or they could simply be killed afterwards. History is full of examples.
3. I don't think any government is above killing its own people in order to reach political or economic gains. The U.S. is no exception...on the contrary. A quick example comes to mind, since it was used as a comparison event: Pearl Harbor. Only in recent years did it come to light that Washington knew the attack will take place, but chose to keep quiet and use it as a reason to enter WWII.
4. Many aspects of 9/11 were suspicious... Why was the Pentagon lawn so quickly and conveniently swept clean (on the same day!), and the plane crash site was covered with sand? This goes against any crash investigation methodology. Also, speaking of crashes, there certainly wasn't enough debris left in either Washington DC or in Pennsylvania... I've seen only one plane crash site in "real life" before, along with many others on TV... and they looked nothing like that. Also, I do not remember any human remains being mentioned, whatsoever, and you DO come across those at a plane crash site...
5. Follow the money. There were billions to be made from the ensuing Afghano-Iraqi debacle... Some companies and individuals got filthy rich - and, more importantly, gained a whole lot of influence.
6. Dismissing any suspicions as "outright lunacy" is counter-productive. Any half-skilled PR campaign can skew public opinion against any ideas contradicting the official version...
7. Not all those who doubt 9/11 are trolls, people with no social interaction, uneducated or naive. Many of them are not even U.S. residents - which can work for or against them, depending how you chose to interpret it.
8. As long as there's a reasonable doubt concerning 9/11, critical thinking is recommended... This was not a clear-cut "terrorist goes kaboom!" situation.

Spoken like a true insane nutjob. People in high political, corporate or military position would never harm another. Who is more trust worthy then the POTUS or the CEO of Northrop Grumman? Questioning the profiteering off of murder is unamerican. What do you think saved the US economy's ass after the tech bubble burst?

Even playing devil's advocate for this will get you ostracized. It is utterly impossible to rationally talk about this event on a public forum because of the massive logical fallacies & the vested emotional interest in it.

Rule #1 do not talk about 9/11
Rule #2 DO NOT TALK ABOUT 9/11

 

[benzylic]

I fucking love these threads...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you can't tell the guy answering the question here is bluffing, I don't recommend ever playing poker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng#t=6m35s

^ Huh? Physics dictates a constant rate of acceleration of gravity as 9.81 m/s^2.

He was bluffing when claiming WTC7's fall took notably longer than freefall, as is made obvious by the tell of scratching his nose after his statement, along with NIST later revising their report to admit freefall.

Anyway, the amount of conflation in this thread is absurd, leaving far too much nonsense for me to bother addressing all it. However, for suggesting anyone who disputes the official story is crazy, I hope you might take the time to look though this list:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Too much nonsense and weak appeal to authority at that website to address, so I'll just leave you with this:

http://www.debunking911.com/

How about you adesss the obvious bluffing in the video I posted. Better yet, watch the whole thing.

And by the way, the website was in response to the "I'm an engineer" and "I'm a pilot" comments, along with the argument about survivor's families.

What's the point of trying to rebut your intuition and opinion based on the guy's actions? A "tell." I see the conspiracy theorists have been watching a few too many episodes of Lie To Me and now imagine they are the truther versions of Dr. Lightman. You have no proof of what you claim and imagining you are some kind of human lie detector is laughable, at best. As someone who has worked with engineers pretty steadily for over 20 years I can testify that not all engineers are great public orators or presenters. In fact, quite a few are socially inept.

You claimed earlier about the amount of "conflation" (I do not think it means what you think it means.) and "nonsense" in this thread. How about addressing those instead? I would love to hear what they are. Indulge all the deniers of the truth and let us know where we are wrong. In fact, give us the big picture of what you believe happened on 9/11, in your own words. That's something every truther in here always fails to do, for some unknown reason. So I'll throw down that gauntlet again. Let's see if you'll be the first to pick it up, or if you're just another linkbot.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Something I haven't seen mentioned in these conspiracy threads before but I have considered is the placement of the demolition charges in relation to the crash points.

The demo charges would have had to be in place before the crashes. Then we have perhaps the least skilled pilots ever to fly jetliners solo guide a very large, heavily loaded, multi-engined aircraft at high speed into a predetermined point on a building quite accurately, twice. Why do I say predetermined? Because the crash point would have to be carefully calculated to the location of the demo charges to carry out the plan to conceal the demo charges. It would have been embarrassing as well as a dead giveaway if the demo charges had been 10 or 20 stories above or below the crash point. "Obvious to the most casual observer" as they say.

I suppose one might argue luck played a role with these sub par pilots. But to have 2 of them be that lucky is a really long stretch.

 

[JKing106]

We will never know exactly what happened. Never. But it looked a hell of a lot like a controlled demolition to me. I'm not saying it was. I do not know. And no one else here does either.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you can't tell the guy answering the question here is bluffing, I don't recommend ever playing poker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng#t=6m35s

^ Huh? Physics dictates a constant rate of acceleration of gravity as 9.81 m/s^2.

He was bluffing when claiming WTC7's fall took notably longer than freefall, as is made obvious by the tell of scratching his nose after his statement, along with NIST later revising their report to admit freefall.

Anyway, the amount of conflation in this thread is absurd, leaving far too much nonsense for me to bother addressing all it. However, for suggesting anyone who disputes the official story is crazy, I hope you might take the time to look though this list:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Too much nonsense and weak appeal to authority at that website to address, so I'll just leave you with this:

http://www.debunking911.com/

How about you adesss the obvious bluffing in the video I posted. Better yet, watch the whole thing.

And by the way, the website was in response to the "I'm an engineer" and "I'm a pilot" comments, along with the argument about survivor's families.

What's the point of trying to rebut your intuition and opinion based on the guy's actions? A "tell." I see the conspiracy theorists have been watching a few too many episodes of Lie To Me and now imagine they are the truther versions of Dr. Lightman. You have no proof of what you claim and imagining you are some kind of human lie detector is laughable, at best.As someone who has worked with engineers pretty steadily for over 20 years I can testify that not all engineers are great public orators or presenters. In fact, quite a few are socially inept.

While your perception of reality is apparently based off TV programing, I don't watch much at all myself, and have never even heard of the show you mention. As for your argument of intuition, you are overlooking the bolded above.

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
You claimed earlier about the amount of "conflation" (I do not think it means what you think it means.) and "nonsense" in this thread. How about addressing those instead? I would love to hear what they are.

People are combining legitimate arguments with absurd ones to dismiss them all as a whole, that is the conflation I refer to and it's there to see for yourself if you care to look. But again, there is far too much here for me to expect anything good to come from addressing it all, I'd just wind up making a huge post hardly anyone would read.

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Indulge all the deniers of the truth and let us know where we are wrong. In fact, give us the big picture of what you believe happened on 9/11, in your own words. That's something every truther in here always fails to do, for some unknown reason. So I'll throw down that gauntlet again. Let's see if you'll be the first to pick it up, or if you're just another linkbot.

I'm not claiming to be some bearer of ultimate truth here, just pointing out one obvious flaw in the official "truth", one you linkboted to compilations of dismissals which don't address my point and otherwise continue dance around rather than addressing.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Something I haven't seen mentioned in these conspiracy threads before but I have considered is the placement of the demolition charges in relation to the crash points.

The demo charges would have had to be in place before the crashes. Then we have perhaps the least skilled pilots ever to fly jetliners solo guide a very large, heavily loaded, multi-engined aircraft at high speed into a predetermined point on a building quite accurately, twice. Why do I say predetermined? Because the crash point would have to be carefully calculated to the location of the demo charges to carry out the plan to conceal the demo charges. It would have been embarrassing as well as a dead giveaway if the demo charges had been 10 or 20 stories above or below the crash point. "Obvious to the most casual observer" as they say.

I suppose one might argue luck played a role with these sub par pilots. But to have 2 of them be that lucky is a really long stretch.

I don't see anyone here claiming charges were placed specifically at the points of impact, or any reason to suspect as much. Regardless, here is a good lecture on the issues with the official story of how they did fall:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...890&index=0&playnext=1

 

[Mr. Lennon]

Refer to sig...

 

[FaaR]

Originally posted by: JKing106
We will never know exactly what happened. Never. But it looked a hell of a lot like a controlled demolition to me. I'm not saying it was. I do not know. And no one else here does either.

Here is an example of a comparatively small controlled demolition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ

Note a few things: the obvious light-flashes in windows in multiple locations of the complex (indicating a very large number of charges were needed), as well as THE EXTREMELY LOUD NOISE when said charges go off.

Then consider the towers - in both cases - start to collapse at precisely the floors affected by the plane crashes, and not at ground level (which disproves the thermite-in-the-basement conspiracies). But how do you know where in the building the planes will crash? Of course, you don't. So you have to wire most, if not all the building.

Questions that raise themselves from this:
A: How did the explosives survive hours of intense fire/heat before going off.

B: How were they planted without being noticed.

Also consider that even in a controlled demolition, significant pre-weakening of the structure takes place, or else it simply would not fall down in on itself. Not unless using so much explosives that the entire building is basically pulverized, sending debris flying all over the general landscape. As you couldn't very well pre-weaken the WTC towers, the demolition charges would neccessarily have to be LARGER than those normally used. Why didn't anyone hear or see this?

Accounts of fire fighters etc hearing "bangs" and so on - do you seriously think that compares to what you can hear in the above linked youtube vid? If anyone was to be present inside that tower when even the first round of demo charges went off they would surely have been completely deafened by the noise.

Trust me - if demo charges brought down the towers, all of lower manhattan would have heard the pre-planted bombs going off. There's no such thing as a silent explosion.

 

[jackschmittusa]

kylebisme

The collapses were filmed in real time. Demo charges might have been easily observable if not concealed by the fires. More importantly, we know where the the collapses began, and it would have been suspect if the points of origin were any distance from the impact points.

Of course the conspiracy theorists don't mention it. It would cast doubt on their arguments.

edit:

Sat on this page for a few before this post and missed FaaR's response. Good post, but I would mention that thermite doesn't make a big bang. It makes a hell of a bright light though, and sets even the hardest to combust materials alight immediately.

As mentioned, hard to imagine any detonating circuits surviving the fires for any length of time (they had to be in the fires or the collapse point would have been elsewhere). They would have to have been remotely activated since there was no guarantee that one of the planes might not be significantly delayed due to a maintenance problem or other incident ( a real "oops" if one of the towers dropped without a plane hitting it). So please, no speculation that the charges were enclosed in fireproof boxes with timers.

 

[wwswimming]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: wwswimming

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: wwswimming
one of the many things about 9-11 that seemed odd was their apparent hurry to "destroy the evidence" - to get rid of the building debris.
...

it's to the credit of the researchers that they were able to get samples to
perform the forensic analysis they managed.

Do you realize how much debris there was? You expect them to re-assemble the towers?

yes, and then to get out their Harry Potter magic wand, say "Reparo", and fix it !

what i expect them to do is investigate the crime. and that means not destroying one of the biggest piles of evidence.

Investigate the crime? They have! Are you living under a rock or in a cave with the OP?

that was not an investigation.

that was a rush to judgment.

 

[FaaR]

Originally posted by: wwswimmingthat was not an investigation.

that was a rush to judgment.

I guess it's never an investigation unless it comes to the conclusion you'd prefer to see?

Jackschmittusa:
Btw, I never said thermite makes loud noise. Maybe someone else did elsewhere in this thread, I dunno.