What brought down WTC7

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
[snip]

http://www.nist.gov/public_aff...eet/wtc_qa_082108.html

In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?
In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST...or_public_comment.pdf), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.

Now stop with the stupid already. I told you that you're misrepresenting the facts of the issue. That's clear to just about everyone but your blindered, foolish self.

im not misrepresenting the facts. you are. the fact is freefall occured. period.

Your dishonesty has been noted. Thanks for making it public for everyone else in here to see.

your arguement is pointless. there is truth in my points.

There sure is truth in your points. That truth is that you're intellectually dishonest scum who misrepresents facts, findings, and situations if you think they prove your claims. The truth is that you blatantly disregard the concluions of the very same experts you cite. The truth is that your responses have the grammatical structure of someone texting their 6th grade pals.

Yep, there's plenty of truth in your points.

 

[KlokWyze]

Buildings don't fall like that from minuscule damage on the side. It's obvious and there really isn't any amount of absurd pancake theories that will make me believe that it wasn't purposely demolished. One thing is clear, arguing over petty points like the differences in time of absolute free fall vs near free speeds is ridiculous. Common sense, a collection of all available/reliable evidence and plausible physics will tell you that the chances of those buildings falling in those ways (described by NIST) is pretty much impossible.

Patriotic rhetoric, fear of disseminating and money is more convincing than common sense though.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
Buildings don't fall like that from minuscule damage on the side. It's obvious and there really isn't any amount of absurd pancake theories that will make me believe that it wasn't purposely demolished. One thing is clear, arguing over petty points like the differences in time of absolute free fall vs near free speeds is ridiculous. Common sense, a collection of all available/reliable evidence and plausible physics will tell you that the chances of those buildings falling in those ways (described by NIST) is pretty much impossible.

Patriotic rhetoric, fear of disseminating and money is more convincing than common sense though.

hahahaaa....another twoother!!! rofl....and this one has the gall to use the words....COMMON SENSE!!! rofl...hahahaaaa

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
Buildings don't fall like that from minuscule damage on the side. It's obvious and there really isn't any amount of absurd pancake theories that will make me believe that it wasn't purposely demolished. One thing is clear, arguing over petty points like the differences in time of absolute free fall vs near free speeds is ridiculous. Common sense, a collection of all available/reliable evidence and plausible physics will tell you that the chances of those buildings falling in those ways (described by NIST) is pretty much impossible.

if you had used any of the above you wouldn't have posted that

 

[heyheybooboo]

I got mod-spanked for satirically bumping this ridiculous waste of bandwidth

:laugh:

We've gone through the Looking Glass. This thread in itself speaks volumes against the evolution of the human brain. It has more posts than 98.7% of threads have views .....


And TLC is the defender of rational thought ??? ---- :shocked:

Check the weather forecast for the chance of snowballs in Hell.


(no offense, Chick Man !!!)

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: LunarRay


To my knowledge there is but one video of the first aircraft hitting a tower... IT IS evidence of what it purports to be.
The key is the conditions under which the first video was taken. that condition enhances that evidence.
Everything about that video fits. The reaction to the noise of the jet and the rest.

IF one plane hits then all planes are true! [in my logic, anyhow]

I think the hypothesis for an alternative something hitting the towers is not supported by the evidence.

there is interesting evidence to where the planes hit. they both hit computer rooms. the floors on both towers were also upgraded.

"On 9/11, American Airlines Flight 11 hit the north face of the north tower (WTC 1) between floors 94 and 99. In a stunning coincidence, these floors bracket those that had been upgraded for fireproofing shortly before 9/11.[12] This coincidence was amplified by the fact that one tenant occupied all of those floors ? Marsh & McLennan (Marsh), which at the time was the world's largest insurance brokerage company. One other tenant, Sumitomo Bank, shared part of floor 96 with Marsh. "



Demolition access to the World Trade Center towers: Part one - Tenants
http://www.911truth.org/articl...tory=20090713033854249

Demolition Access To The WTC Towers: Part Two - Security
http://www.911truth.org/articl...tory=20090813150853871

9/11 Planes Flew Directly into
Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

Another amazing coincidence related to the WTC
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272
"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time? "

First let me opine that NO pilot with experience in 757, 767 that I know of can insert a 767, 757 into a predetermined place on the WTC Towers going at >250 kts. Maybe 25% of the seasoned Pilots may be able to come close. Assuming a very calm and cloudless day. And NO WAY would a pilot trained and capable of flying a Piper or similar with a 1000 hours of 757,767 Sim training could ever be able to ... At the speed they were going I'm rather amazed they actually hit the building. I've not listened to any Pilot Video other than a C130 pilot regarding the Pentagon so I'm not sure what they'd say. I've 5 Pilots who captain their crafts every day living within 400' feet of me.. I trust their judgment. One said to me that the heat rising off the buildings alone would make an approach to a building problematic so maybe going so fast precluded that affect but introduced another... I have some training in flying but not heavy passenger jets. I should mention that I did listen for the ATC call sign to the aircraft... Usually they'd refer to... say AA 11 as 'American 11 Heavy'.
I'm aware that ALL of the Tower insulation needed being torn out and replaced due to that Asbestos issue.. Cost 2+ billion. AND that it was fine for the workers to breathe that crap on site.... that is amazing but another story.

What you are suggesting is that those floors provided access to someone to do something and I guess given my above and the fact that I know that building 1's 15 story bloc had 2.1 gjoules (give or take) of potential energy and it would take 230 mjoules of heat energy to pulverize as we saw the first floor beneath and another bunch (a much more difficult task to calculate for me) of maybe 400 mjoules to 'break up' the core on that 1st floor below, I only wonder what started the event. I can see the 1100c heat causing weakened columns and the floor to buckle and the core columns to be ripped apart by the hard parts of the plane... so that that mass above COULD have come down as we saw it... below the first floor under that bloc of 15 stories... I'm not sure yet.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: jonks

And there we have it. Your position is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the dozens and dozens and dozens of unrelated public and private citizen, domestics and foreigners with eyewitness accounts are Government plants and/or lying. Not to mention the hundreds or thousands who saw the plane and told friends and family but weren't quoted in the media.

Kyle, this guy is on your team, straighten him out would ya? Remaining silent only hurts your own claims that you care about "facts." Or, if you agree with him, let us know that too so these fine folks on here humoring you can stop arguing with a crazy person.

Nowhere did I claim that those witnesses are absolutely without doubt planted, so don't put words in my mouth. My claim is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated to have a pretext for entering a war (2 wars now), and to spread fear propaganda in order to push radical legislation that would never pass under normal conditions.

I am not concerned with technical minutia such as how fast was the plane was going and at what angle it hit the building, because those still don't explain the red flags and loose ends in the official story, such as who sponsored the hijackers, who profited from the put options on the airlines, and who had early information but failed to warn the people beforehand.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: jonks

And there we have it. Your position is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the dozens and dozens and dozens of unrelated public and private citizen, domestics and foreigners with eyewitness accounts are Government plants and/or lying. Not to mention the hundreds or thousands who saw the plane and told friends and family but weren't quoted in the media.

Kyle, this guy is on your team, straighten him out would ya? Remaining silent only hurts your own claims that you care about "facts." Or, if you agree with him, let us know that too so these fine folks on here humoring you can stop arguing with a crazy person.

Nowhere did I claim that those witnesses are absolutely without doubt planted, so don't put words in my mouth. My claim is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated to have a pretext for entering a war (2 wars now), and to spread fear propaganda in order to push radical legislation that would never pass under normal conditions.

I am not concerned with technical minutia such as how fast was the plane was going and at what angle it hit the building, because those still don't explain the red flags and loose ends in the official story, such as who sponsored the hijackers, who profited from the put options on the airlines, and who had early information but failed to warn the people beforehand.

My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
what temp does gypsum become sulfur dioxide?

im bright enough to know that extremly high temps were reached during the wtc destruction and that could explain the "evaporated" and "vaporized" steel members (thats pleural).

It's spelled "plural," not pleural. I already told you previously that Astaneh-Asl never used the word "vaporized" either. It was an invention of a journalist but you continue to sling it around. Barnett also states that his used of "evaporated" was early on in the process before any actual tests had been done.

learn something:

Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction

http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Here, it most likely reached about 1,000 to 1,500 degrees. And that is enough to collapse them, so they collapsed. So the word "melting" should not be used for girders, because there was no melting of girders. I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb...07/overpass_05-10.html

And? This means what? You post a lot of shit links from twoofer websites without providing the first bit of explanation of what it means and assume everyone should be blown away by your copy & paste skills. Try providing some actual explanations of your own for once that span more than two poorly written and grammatically incorrect sentences.

my explanation is extremely high temps were reached during the wtc destruction. these truther links have valuabe information and independent studies that show high temps were achieved. i havent seen anywhere that dr astaneh denied making the "vaporized" statment. the intel gained from his observation is that 15.9 mm of A36 steel disappeared due to "burning" and then the column buckled and fell. barnett saw "steel members" that were "evaporated". how many and how much steel was "evaporated" or from the new theory "corroded" would be interesting.

and i refer you back again to:
Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

and what could cause all this high temps. something that reacts hot enough to produce iron microspheres:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

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.

Are you fucking serious? We've been through this giant steaming pile of shit before. Don't you remember the 911 truther thread that was started? Don't you remember TLC and I ripping apart this POS article because your samples of "thermite" have no chain of custody?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Are you fucking serious? We've been through this giant steaming pile of shit before. Don't you remember the 911 truther thread that was started? Don't you remember TLC and I ripping apart this POS article because your samples of "thermite" have no chain of custody?

That guy is a waste of time. He does little more than act the role of an obsessive/compulsive truther linkbot, copying & pasting the same bs links over and over again without the least capability to expound on what those links mean. When he's asked a question that he can't answer with a copy & paste job from truther websites he just ignores the questions, desperately hoping they'll go away. That points to a distinct lack of rational thinking, scientific knowledge, or reasoning skills on his part.

He also expects us to believe that he knows better than the same experts that he mines for minute pieces of data when the guy can rarely manage to string together two coherent sentences of his own making; and when he does actually manage to type out a few sentences it's generally vapid and content free, saying nothing of consequence. How or why he expects anybody to take him seriously is unfathomable. It's like a retard pretending to be Einstein and thinking he's pulling it off perfectly. He's a joke.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: jonks

And there we have it. Your position is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the dozens and dozens and dozens of unrelated public and private citizen, domestics and foreigners with eyewitness accounts are Government plants and/or lying. Not to mention the hundreds or thousands who saw the plane and told friends and family but weren't quoted in the media.

Kyle, this guy is on your team, straighten him out would ya? Remaining silent only hurts your own claims that you care about "facts." Or, if you agree with him, let us know that too so these fine folks on here humoring you can stop arguing with a crazy person.

Nowhere did I claim that those witnesses are absolutely without doubt planted, so don't put words in my mouth. My claim is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated to have a pretext for entering a war (2 wars now), and to spread fear propaganda in order to push radical legislation that would never pass under normal conditions.

I am not concerned with technical minutia such as how fast was the plane was going and at what angle it hit the building, because those still don't explain the red flags and loose ends in the official story, such as who sponsored the hijackers, who profited from the put options on the airlines, and who had early information but failed to warn the people beforehand.

My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

Why because he has a different view then your fascist ideology! This country is going in the toilet all thanks to the feds, but it's ok keep it up Jimmy boy if things turns really bad you can always use your IDF passport and move to your Avalon!! :roll:

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: LunarRay


To my knowledge there is but one video of the first aircraft hitting a tower... IT IS evidence of what it purports to be.
The key is the conditions under which the first video was taken. that condition enhances that evidence.
Everything about that video fits. The reaction to the noise of the jet and the rest.

IF one plane hits then all planes are true! [in my logic, anyhow]

I think the hypothesis for an alternative something hitting the towers is not supported by the evidence.

there is interesting evidence to where the planes hit. they both hit computer rooms. the floors on both towers were also upgraded.

"On 9/11, American Airlines Flight 11 hit the north face of the north tower (WTC 1) between floors 94 and 99. In a stunning coincidence, these floors bracket those that had been upgraded for fireproofing shortly before 9/11.[12] This coincidence was amplified by the fact that one tenant occupied all of those floors ? Marsh & McLennan (Marsh), which at the time was the world's largest insurance brokerage company. One other tenant, Sumitomo Bank, shared part of floor 96 with Marsh. "



Demolition access to the World Trade Center towers: Part one - Tenants
http://www.911truth.org/articl...tory=20090713033854249

Demolition Access To The WTC Towers: Part Two - Security
http://www.911truth.org/articl...tory=20090813150853871

9/11 Planes Flew Directly into
Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

Another amazing coincidence related to the WTC
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272
"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time? "

First let me opine that NO pilot with experience in 757, 767 that I know of can insert a 767, 757 into a predetermined place on the WTC Towers going at >250 kts. Maybe 25% of the seasoned Pilots may be able to come close. Assuming a very calm and cloudless day. And NO WAY would a pilot trained and capable of flying a Piper or similar with a 1000 hours of 757,767 Sim training could ever be able to ... At the speed they were going I'm rather amazed they actually hit the building. I've not listened to any Pilot Video other than a C130 pilot regarding the Pentagon so I'm not sure what they'd say. I've 5 Pilots who captain their crafts every day living within 400' feet of me.. I trust their judgment. One said to me that the heat rising off the buildings alone would make an approach to a building problematic so maybe going so fast precluded that affect but introduced another... I have some training in flying but not heavy passenger jets. I should mention that I did listen for the ATC call sign to the aircraft... Usually they'd refer to... say AA 11 as 'American 11 Heavy'.
I'm aware that ALL of the Tower insulation needed being torn out and replaced due to that Asbestos issue.. Cost 2+ billion. AND that it was fine for the workers to breathe that crap on site.... that is amazing but another story.

What you are suggesting is that those floors provided access to someone to do something and I guess given my above and the fact that I know that building 1's 15 story bloc had 2.1 gjoules (give or take) of potential energy and it would take 230 mjoules of heat energy to pulverize as we saw the first floor beneath and another bunch (a much more difficult task to calculate for me) of maybe 400 mjoules to 'break up' the core on that 1st floor below, I only wonder what started the event. I can see the 1100c heat causing weakened columns and the floor to buckle and the core columns to be ripped apart by the hard parts of the plane... so that that mass above COULD have come down as we saw it... below the first floor under that bloc of 15 stories... I'm not sure yet.

no pilot? did i get that right? maybe your on to something!!
maybe you need to look into this man and his System Planning Corporation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_S._Zakheim

 

[LunarRay]

Regarding WTC 7, Has anyone seen the NIST Simulation thingi that goes beyond the 3ish seconds and shows the building falling all that way down?
Regarding WTC 1, 2 has anyone seen a simulation of those building from the plane hit until the event was over? I don't see too much in the way of data or information regarding the core fall sequence and beyond. Has anyone seen any calculations regarding the floor by floor pancaking event? Perhaps they simply figured that once it started with way enough energy to do the first floor below that Momentum would insure enough energy to crumple the building all the way down. I was thinking that with each floor collision that mass of the floor hit is pulverized and blown out adding no mass to the bloc and the floor doing the hitting loses some mass too and eventually should run out of mass. So, if you know of any calculations done [I cant seem to find them] at NIST or FEMA.

You don't have to produce a link. Just tell me they exist and I'll try to find them myself

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

no pilot? did i get that right? maybe your on to something!!
maybe you need to look into this man and his System Planning Corporation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_S._Zakheim

I think I remember him involved with the 9/11 Commission as Executive Director. EDIT: Just remembered it was Zelikow.

The evidence is sufficient to convince me (prove) that Four Aircraft with Passengers deviated from their vector instructions and two ran into two WTC buildings, One into the Pentagon and One into a field. The evidence is strong that they were piloted by terrorists. But there are some details to be sorted out for me to be able to say the same as with the planes but I feel so close to being convinced I'm not sure I can say that I'm not... So, I go with Terrorists flew the planes into buildings, field and Pentagon.

I believe that the Governments Conspiracy Theory is correct and pending some troubling issues... like Building 7 or WTC 1, 2's remarkable symmetrical fall that point to some other Theory I'll stay with that.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
what temp does gypsum become sulfur dioxide?

im bright enough to know that extremly high temps were reached during the wtc destruction and that could explain the "evaporated" and "vaporized" steel members (thats pleural).

It's spelled "plural," not pleural. I already told you previously that Astaneh-Asl never used the word "vaporized" either. It was an invention of a journalist but you continue to sling it around. Barnett also states that his used of "evaporated" was early on in the process before any actual tests had been done.

learn something:

Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction

http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Here, it most likely reached about 1,000 to 1,500 degrees. And that is enough to collapse them, so they collapsed. So the word "melting" should not be used for girders, because there was no melting of girders. I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb...07/overpass_05-10.html

And? This means what? You post a lot of shit links from twoofer websites without providing the first bit of explanation of what it means and assume everyone should be blown away by your copy & paste skills. Try providing some actual explanations of your own for once that span more than two poorly written and grammatically incorrect sentences.

my explanation is extremely high temps were reached during the wtc destruction. these truther links have valuabe information and independent studies that show high temps were achieved. i havent seen anywhere that dr astaneh denied making the "vaporized" statment. the intel gained from his observation is that 15.9 mm of A36 steel disappeared due to "burning" and then the column buckled and fell. barnett saw "steel members" that were "evaporated". how many and how much steel was "evaporated" or from the new theory "corroded" would be interesting.

and i refer you back again to:
Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

and what could cause all this high temps. something that reacts hot enough to produce iron microspheres:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

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.

Are you fucking serious? We've been through this giant steaming pile of shit before. Don't you remember the 911 truther thread that was started? Don't you remember TLC and I ripping apart this POS article because your samples of "thermite" have no chain of custody?

steaming pile of "vaporized" and "evaporated" pile of wtc 7 steel, im guessing is what you meant. noone ripped me apart. chain of custody? is that all you have. at least you are aware that it is a thermitic material TLC, paint doesnt react at X temp to produce iron microspheres.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

That's ok, a lot of people suck at seeing what are called "red flags" in a given situation... especially technically-inclined men who have difficulty grasping subtleties which can't be neatly explained by numbers and computer simulations.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: munky
Nowhere did I claim that those witnesses are absolutely without doubt planted, so don't put words in my mouth. My claim is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated to have a pretext for entering a war (2 wars now), and to spread fear propaganda in order to push radical legislation that would never pass under normal conditions.

I am not concerned with technical minutia such as how fast was the plane was going and at what angle it hit the building, because those still don't explain the red flags and loose ends in the official story, such as who sponsored the hijackers, who profited from the put options on the airlines, and who had early information but failed to warn the people beforehand.

At least you're more honest than the OP. No less stupid, but more honest.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: jonks

And there we have it. Your position is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the dozens and dozens and dozens of unrelated public and private citizen, domestics and foreigners with eyewitness accounts are Government plants and/or lying. Not to mention the hundreds or thousands who saw the plane and told friends and family but weren't quoted in the media.

Kyle, this guy is on your team, straighten him out would ya? Remaining silent only hurts your own claims that you care about "facts." Or, if you agree with him, let us know that too so these fine folks on here humoring you can stop arguing with a crazy person.

Nowhere did I claim that those witnesses are absolutely without doubt planted, so don't put words in my mouth. My claim is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated to have a pretext for entering a war (2 wars now), and to spread fear propaganda in order to push radical legislation that would never pass under normal conditions.

I am not concerned with technical minutia such as how fast was the plane was going and at what angle it hit the building, because those still don't explain the red flags and loose ends in the official story, such as who sponsored the hijackers, who profited from the put options on the airlines, and who had early information but failed to warn the people beforehand.

My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

Why because he has a different view then your fascist ideology! This country is going in the toilet all thanks to the feds, but it's ok keep it up Jimmy boy if things turns really bad you can always use your IDF passport and move to your Avalon!! :roll:

fascxist how so?? You on the other hand have an idiots ideology so go away!
he is entitled to mhis opinions.
I am entitled to laugh at his opinions!
I have a home in Israel. I go to the promised land several times a year!

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks


Why because he has a different view then your fascist ideology! This country is going in the toilet all thanks to the feds, but it's ok keep it up Jimmy boy if things turns really bad you can always use your IDF passport and move to your Avalon!! :roll:

Spoken like a true twuther.

The country is going in the toilet because sane people like JEDIYoda and myself refuse to believe your incredible fairy tales about your own government murdering thousand of people in order to justify 2 wars? LOL you're a joke .

Go back to the loony bin where you belong.

 

[Number1]

I am watching Space Buddies with my grand son right now. The movie is about as realistic as the conspiracies people talk about in here.

Well at least the movie doesn't pretend to be anything else then fiction for children.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
what temp does gypsum become sulfur dioxide?

im bright enough to know that extremly high temps were reached during the wtc destruction and that could explain the "evaporated" and "vaporized" steel members (thats pleural).

It's spelled "plural," not pleural. I already told you previously that Astaneh-Asl never used the word "vaporized" either. It was an invention of a journalist but you continue to sling it around. Barnett also states that his used of "evaporated" was early on in the process before any actual tests had been done.

learn something:

Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction

http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Here, it most likely reached about 1,000 to 1,500 degrees. And that is enough to collapse them, so they collapsed. So the word "melting" should not be used for girders, because there was no melting of girders. I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb...07/overpass_05-10.html

And? This means what? You post a lot of shit links from twoofer websites without providing the first bit of explanation of what it means and assume everyone should be blown away by your copy & paste skills. Try providing some actual explanations of your own for once that span more than two poorly written and grammatically incorrect sentences.

my explanation is extremely high temps were reached during the wtc destruction. these truther links have valuabe information and independent studies that show high temps were achieved. i havent seen anywhere that dr astaneh denied making the "vaporized" statment. the intel gained from his observation is that 15.9 mm of A36 steel disappeared due to "burning" and then the column buckled and fell. barnett saw "steel members" that were "evaporated". how many and how much steel was "evaporated" or from the new theory "corroded" would be interesting.

and i refer you back again to:
Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
http://www.journalof911studies...icles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

and what could cause all this high temps. something that reacts hot enough to produce iron microspheres:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

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.

Are you fucking serious? We've been through this giant steaming pile of shit before. Don't you remember the 911 truther thread that was started? Don't you remember TLC and I ripping apart this POS article because your samples of "thermite" have no chain of custody?

steaming pile of "vaporized" and "evaporated" pile of wtc 7 steel, im guessing is what you meant. noone ripped me apart. chain of custody? is that all you have. at least you are aware that it is a thermitic material TLC, paint doesnt react at X temp to produce iron microspheres.

Guess what? I found "thermatic material" from the WTC in my buddy's apartment the last time I was in Manhattan. It doesn't matter what analysis they've done to it because we'll never know where it came from.

TLC has addressed both of your points about the words "vaporized" and "evaporated." You've failed to comprehend what he said. Read it again.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

That's ok, a lot of people suck at seeing what are called "red flags" in a given situation... especially technically-inclined men who have difficulty grasping subtleties which can't be neatly explained by numbers and computer simulations.

subtleties like the fact that what you've tried to argue makes essentially no sense whatsoever?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
My God...Thank You Lord!!! As I sit down for my daily tea and crumpets it`s nice to have some entertainment on these forums!

Munky people like you are more dangerous that people like Kylebisme. We know that Kylebisme swears he is right and even claims to listen to dissenting facts!

You on the other had have no interest in any part of what the real facts are, other than youre mis-guided opinion!

That's ok, a lot of people suck at seeing what are called "red flags" in a given situation... especially technically-inclined men who have difficulty grasping subtleties which can't be neatly explained by numbers and computer simulations.

subtleties like the fact that what you've tried to argue makes essentially no sense whatsoever?

Not surprising, seeing as most responses suggest "Well, but NIST says so, so it must be true." You people should learn to read the messenger behind the message, maybe then it'll start to make sense.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

fascxist how so?? You on the other hand have an idiots ideology so go away!
he is entitled to mhis opinions.
I am entitled to laugh at his opinions!
I have a home in Israel. I go to the promised land several times a year!

Oh... Heck, I've a home in the promised land too... But we call the place Ireland!... Ain't no Esses in Ireland and we have an 'nd' to boot... So there... told you, huh!

 

[Number1]

THE JEW DID IT (at least that's what event8horizon thinks)

Originally posted by: event8horizon


9/11 Planes Flew Directly into
Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

The article ( I am being generous here) you quoted was written by Christopher Bollyn

Here is another article by Christopher Bollyn:

Ehud Barak - Architect of 9-11

Quote
"The terror attacks of 9-11 were planned and carried out by Zionist extremists with the intention that the blame would be assigned to Islamic terrorists based in Afghanistan. Israeli military leaders and the Zionist-controlled media were well prepared to interpret the attacks so that public opinion would blame Muslims and Arabs for the atrocity. Changing public opinion is the primary mission of the architects of false-flag terrorism."

That you would quote this nut case to support your theories is telling.

You're just as much a nut case as he is.

Read more of what Christofer Bolyn wrote at

http://www.bollyn.com/index.php