What brought down WTC7

[jonks]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: jonks
I too want a proper investigation into the moon landing that wasn't, flouride that brainwashes, obama's birth in kenya, and how Bush got into an ivy league school. These mysteries deserve serious treatment. Anyone who says otherwise is a sheep.

If you can provide me with any evidence to substantiate you call for an investigation into such matters, then I'd be happy to back you. Absent that, you sound like every other nutcase I've heard ratting about such nonsense before you.

Well Obama produced a birth certificate after calls for it became vocal enough. His campaign posted it online. But it was a fake! Everyone could see there was no raised seal and the official state number was wrong! So they had reporters in person verify the seal was raised and the number was accurate. Doubters said they wouldn't believe until the Hawaiian govt issued a statement that it was real. So the Hawaiian govt issued a statement that the cert was real. Did that stop the doubt? Nope, it merely confirmed the conspiracy had penetrated into the Hawaiian state department!

Please, if a report or investigation were re-done by NIST alongside 5 other groups and they came out and issued identical findings, you'd still call bullshit. Because you can't square what they are telling you with what you've already decided must be true since you, a newtonian physics buff, have seen video of the collapse and you know what the truth is.

Every single aspect of the 9/11 whackadoos has been refuted over and over and they just keep hangin on and shifting arguments and still, to this day, can't piece together a story that makes sense other than what everyone else saw with their own eyes.

 

[Moonbeam]

Oops, this post got lost like the folk who pulled 7

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
So end of the day, it is possible that there was a conspiracy however remote that seems to be.

If you persist with this mindset then every event that ever occurs is possibly a conspiracy. From last night's high school football game (were there bribes? I don't have any evidence but who could have dropped such an easy pass?? and his mom dated the coach of the other team 15 years ago, maybe there's a connection??!) to every state, local, and presidential election in every country because how can anyone keep track of all those ballots?

There comes a point where you have to stop dealing with what's "possible" and start dealing in what's "likely". People can't keep secrets for shit. If you have a conspiracy that large, someone talks. It's been 8 yeras, no one has talked. No new evidence has arisen. Time to put this one to bed, or mumble yourself to sleep about faked moon landings.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Sclamoz, that makes all the sense in the world and is totally consistent with how I picture what happened intuitively, but sadly we now know it is all completely wrong. There is a steel building in China that caught fire, really caught fire, but it didn't fall.

My only hope now is that somehow, in some magical way, the mighty, TastesLikePullet, will be able to explain why no occult command was issued in that case, to pull it and bring it down.

I hear, however, that there are millions of Chinese who claim it was a government conspiracy that left it standing, some secret effort to shame American building technology with ceramic insulation. Traces of feldspar and silica were found on the girders, apparently.

Well, It could be a Chinese coup. Too bad our pseudo investigation did not or could not test like the Chinese did, if they did. We sent most all the steel from 9/11 to them so maybe we'll get a report back someday.

I gots an affirmative question for you Moonerator

Take a typical beam section from WTC 1,2 that is about 35' in length. But after the event was bent like a horse shoe. Given the carbon content of that kind of steel etc... should it have bent like that or cracked or split or what? Seems to me very intense heat AND lots of pressure had to be applied. I've read that the steel becomes brittle and breaks before it would deform into a horse shoe configuration.

I do not know. That us a question that would require technical knowledge I do not have and of a specific and narrow materials kind. There is no way I can use a general understanding of physics to answer it. I do think, however, the horseshoes are made of steel. I also believe that if they found a steel beam bent in the way you describe in the ruins that it is possible for it to happen. Occam's razor again.

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Cogman
So, you're saying that 1000 structural engineers who's sole task it was to determine that cause of the fall, were incapable of considering an explosion inside the building? Or that they were all so incompetent as to not see such glaring contradictions?

I've said:

Originally posted by: kylebisme
... the investigations seem to have been compartmentalised and directed from the top down, so most of the people working on it, scientists and otherwise, were given tasks that separated the evidence into parts which would confirm the official story rather than expose them to anything that would lead them to question it. And of course anyone who does come forward against the official story gets shouted down or worse, so I'm sure many are dissuaded from ever really looking into the matter simply by that.

Who has been bought into covering things up, blackmailed into covering things up, or just simply confused into covering things up, is something I doubt more than some few people know, and certainly not anything I am in any position to speculate on. However, if we ever get a real investigation set up, I'd wager we find it is some mix of all of the above.

And I take issue with your "1000" claim, as it seems to be dervied from your imagination.

Originally posted by: kylebisme
Why, pre-tell isn't there a small army of structural engineers that are troothers?

They are 912 architectural and engineering professionals at the moment, but it's hard to expect others to even try to look into the matter, let alone come forward on it, with all you falsers standing poised to shout them down with inane arguments while refusing to address the facts.

Check your list out, A fair portion of the people listed as engineers in that 912 count are electrical, computer, and mechanical engineers. Guess what? They know nothing about structural engineering. I counted a total of about 10 structural engineers on the list. (using a quick search)

Heck, they even list Marine Engineers... Yeah, a guy that works as a coast guard agent knows a lot about building integrity.

 

[First]

Man, I've never seen a guy so thoroughly debunked yet still so staunchly deluded in his beliefs. Anti-evolutionists could learn a thing or two from this guy.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: LunarRay
So end of the day, it is possible that there was a conspiracy however remote that seems to be.

If you persist with this mindset then every event that ever occurs is possibly a conspiracy. From last night's high school football game (were there bribes? I don't have any evidence but who could have dropped such an easy pass?? and his mom dated the coach of the other team 15 years ago, maybe there's a connection??!) to every state, local, and presidential election in every country because how can anyone keep track of all those ballots?

There comes a point where you have to stop dealing with what's "possible" and start dealing in what's "likely". People can't keep secrets for shit. If you have a conspiracy that large, someone talks. It's been 8 yeras, no one has talked. No new evidence has arisen. Time to put this one to bed, or mumble yourself to sleep about faked moon landings.

Well, some things are accepted as being impossible. You'd agree, I presume. Then what is not impossible is possible and possible to degrees. Something remotely possible is just that. It is remote that your basketball game contained bribes but if there is some evidence even a little bit like your 70 pt per game player only hits 30 pts you may want to look at it if you lost a bundle betting on it.. if not then what does it matter to you? Fair play? maybe.. or maybe in your thinking a 40 pt change is no big deal... to me... maybe it is.. depends

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Could there have been any other explanation of your "outside forces" other than explosives?

There most certainly are, and I even provided video examples of another method in the Op. I hope you might take the opportunity to consider the information I presented there at some point.

so who snuck large hydraulic jacks into WTC7? and why didn't anyone see them?

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Sclamoz
OK well I'm watching the video and there really isn't anything about physics just the person takes issues with changes that NIST made to their report and left out how they came to some conclusions.

He takes issue with utter absurdity of the report, including the physics of free fall which is the basis for this thread at this time stamp.

Originally posted by: Sclamoz
I was looking for more detailed information that you brought up about how the NIST ignored the laws of physics in their model/report. I mean I don't want to go tell all the falsers I know that and then be like uhhhhh well I don't know exactly what laws of physics were broken....because then I would look like an idiot right?

Of course you should not want to go repeating things you don't understand, and I would never want anyone to do such a thing. That said, I have provided all the necessary details to understanding how the official explanation contradicts the laws of physics right in the OP, expounded on them throughout this thread since then, and will happily answer any questions on this which you might have; all you have to do is ask them. Beyond that, you can find a collection others demonstrations of the the physics involved in the collapse of WTC on this page, and plenty of other places around the net if you care to look.

Alternatively, you could ask the falsers to prove their claims though a simulation of a structure undergoing a period of free fall acceleration as a result of impact damage and office fires, but I assure you that you won't get anywhere with that.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: kylebisme
Why, pre-tell isn't there a small army of structural engineers that are troothers?

They are 912 architectural and engineering professionals at the moment, but it's hard to expect others to even try to look into the matter, let alone come forward on it, with all you falsers standing poised to shout them down with inane arguments while refusing to address the facts.

lol. Many of their members are lab techs, high school teachers, and/or have expertise in disciplines that hve nothing to do with architecture or structural engineering.

Than there's this:

http://www.ae911truth.info/tik...10+Boneheaded+Mistakes

I guess we now know where you get all your boneheaded claims from too.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I don't think the Government was complicit in the events of 9/11 mainly because they are with out the savvy to do it. Keystone cops as it were!

See here.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Take a typical beam section from WTC 1,2 that is about 35' in length. But after the event was bent like a horse shoe. Given the carbon content of that kind of steel etc... should it have bent like that or cracked or split or what? Seems to me very intense heat AND lots of pressure had to be applied. I've read that the steel becomes brittle and breaks before it would deform into a horse shoe configuration.

I do not know. That us a question that would require technical knowledge I do not have and of a specific and narrow materials kind. There is no way I can use a general understanding of physics to answer it. I do think, however, the horseshoes are made of steel. I also believe that if they found a steel beam bent in the way you describe in the ruins that it is possible for it to happen. Occam's razor again.[/quote]

I don't know either tis why I asked.
I saw that horseshoe and thought so what. Then I hear some engineer indicate that it is odd to have occurred cuz of the dimensions and the type of steel involved etc... Well he knows more than me and you know more than me so maybe you could explain it to me.
I know not and know I know not, I am a student, teach me

It is the folks who know not and know not that they know not who worry me...

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: kylebisme
Why, pre-tell isn't there a small army of structural engineers that are troothers?

They are 912 architectural and engineering professionals at the moment, but it's hard to expect others to even try to look into the matter, let alone come forward on it, with all you falsers standing poised to shout them down with inane arguments while refusing to address the facts.

Thanks for that link, I'll forward to HR for future applicant screening.

The American Institute of Architechts alone, has a membership of over 83,000. As for the broader employment base of engineers, there's roughly 1.5 million engineering jobs in the US as of 2006.

So it's nice you found 912 of em who agree with you. I'll go with the silent overwhelming freaking majority who don't.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I don't think the Government was complicit in the events of 9/11 mainly because they are with out the savvy to do it. Keystone cops as it were!

See here.

Is that a movie? What is the name of it if so? I think I'd like to see that... sorta like watching that Tom Clancy one... the drug one.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: jonks
Well Obama produced a birth certificate after calls for it became vocal enough. His campaign posted it online. But it was a fake! Everyone could see there was no raised seal and the official state number was wrong! So they had reporters in person verify the seal was raised and the number was accurate. Doubters said they wouldn't believe until the Hawaiian govt issued a statement that it was real. So the Hawaiian govt issued a statement that the cert was real. Did that stop the doubt? Nope, it merely confirmed the conspiracy had penetrated into the Hawaiian state department!

If you want to make absurd arguments against the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii, make your own thread to do that and keep such nonsense out of mine.

Originally posted by: jonks
Please, if a report or investigation were re-done by NIST alongside 5 other groups and they came out and issued identical findings, you'd still call bullshit.

Rather, I call bullshit when presented with bullshit, while you are obviously willing to eat bullshit up like candy just because NIST claims that is what it is.

 

[Munky]

It's much easier to call people nutjobs, lunatics and tin-foils than to go against popular belief. Ignorance is bliss, and apparently people are more willing to believe a polished lie than the ugly truth.

As in any criminal case, there needs to be a motive... in this case, the motive is war. War is profitable, and it allows the expansion of power. Without 9/11 there would have been no public support for war with Afghanistan or Iraq. Look at what caused the US to enter other wars:

WW1: The sinking of the Lusitania. Germany declared the waters off the coast of Britain a war zone, and the US damn well knew that the Lusitania was in danger of being torpedoed. The German embassy even issued a statement prior to that, warning about the risk. But did anyone listen? No, because that's exactly what the US wanted - an attack on a civilian ship to fuel public anger against Germany.

WW2: The attack on Pearl Harbor. The US put an embargo on trade of crucial resources with Japan, in collaboration with the British, and froze Japanese assets in the US. The US govt further agitated Japanese leadership with ridiculous "peace talk" demands they knew the Japanese would never accept. And even when the US intelligence had learned than the Japanese fleet wan en route to Hawaii, they issued no warning to commanders stationed there. After the attack, the public support for war was once again unified.

Vietnam War: Gulf of Tonkin incident. A naval clash happened as a result of covert attacks by the US on North Vietnam, resulting in the sinking of a Vietnamese torpedo boat. Then the US govt fabricated a story about another attack by North Vietnamese boats on a US warship 2 days later, when in fact no such attack took place. But the trigger-happy govt was just happy to demonize North Vietnam in the public eye with such news, and thus we enter yet another war.

Which brings us to 9/11/2001. If the attack on WTC had in fact been unprovoked and completely unexpected, it would be an exception, rather than par for the course. And, as if the attack wasn't enough, there were a series of anthrax mailings which the govt used to further bolster the nation against Iraq and Afghanistan, when in fact the military-grade anthrax originated from a military research base in the US, not any part of the Middle East. But with corporate media spreading the scare and shaping public opinion, it was easy to ram the tyrannical Patriot Act into law, and accuse Iraq on WMD charges without evidence. Next thing you know, we're involved in 2 messy wars once again, while the corporate elite laugh all the way to the bank as they continue to deceive the gullible sheep.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Could there have been any other explanation of your "outside forces" other than explosives?

There most certainly are, and I even provided video examples of another method in the Op. I hope you might take the opportunity to consider the information I presented there at some point.

so who snuck large hydraulic jacks into WTC7? and why didn't anyone see them?

Come on ElFenix. I ask you... IF you saw a herd of elephants marching through WTC 7 would you notice hydraulic jacks attached to their tails... really now?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Could there have been any other explanation of your "outside forces" other than explosives?

There most certainly are, and I even provided video examples of another method in the Op. I hope you might take the opportunity to consider the information I presented there at some point.

so who snuck large hydraulic jacks into WTC7? and why didn't anyone see them?

Come on ElFenix. I ask you... IF you saw a herd of elephants marching through WTC 7 would you notice hydraulic jacks attached to their tails... really now?

maybe it was all the termite(s)?

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: jonks
So it's nice you found 912 of em who agree with you. I'll go with the silent overwhelming freaking majority who don't.

Rather, you are going with the majority who likely never bothered to take a good look into the matter, all while dissuading them from ever doing so by belligerently shouting down anyone who does.

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: kylebisme
See here.

Is that a movie? What is the name of it if so?

It's the pilot episode for the X-Files spin-off, The Lone Gunmen, which originally aired on 4 March 2001.

 

[Moonbeam]

Why the hell didn't somebody tell me sooner that Bush brought down the towers. I'm going to go google secret government steel eating termites now, but I can see the free fall period thingi plain as day now too. The official view is clearly a fraud.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Could there have been any other explanation of your "outside forces" other than explosives?

There most certainly are, and I even provided video examples of another method in the Op. I hope you might take the opportunity to consider the information I presented there at some point.

so who snuck large hydraulic jacks into WTC7? and why didn't anyone see them?

Come on ElFenix. I ask you... IF you saw a herd of elephants marching through WTC 7 would you notice hydraulic jacks attached to their tails... really now?

maybe it was all the termite(s)?

But then folks would have gotten on their cell phones to call home "Martha you won't believe this but I just saw a million termites carrying something on their backs.. Termites them itty bitty things... I don't know what they were carrying I'm talking about termites"

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Why the hell didn't somebody tell me sooner that Bush brought down the towers. I'm going to go google secret government steel eating termites now, but I can see the free fall period thingi plain as day now too. The official view is clearly a fraud.

Not trying to comment on your spelling but it's not Termites... it is Thermite...

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Cogman

Check your list out, A fair portion of the people listed as engineers in that 912 count are electrical, computer, and mechanical engineers. Guess what? They know nothing about structural engineering. I counted a total of about 10 structural engineers on the list. (using a quick search)

Heck, they even list Marine Engineers... Yeah, a guy that works as a coast guard agent knows a lot about building integrity.

So you'd agree that the Structural Engineers would know a thing or two about Structural stuff and the Computer ones about Simulation and the Mechanical ones something about the mechanical aspects and the Electrical ones could comment on the Power station underneath WTC 7 and the Marine Engineers about what ever it is they know?

It seems to me that Structural Engineering folks like the ones at UCSD who developed the earth quake building stuff I see them swaying all about and talking about resonance factors and the kind of steel and all that junk are appropriate to opine on the Earthquake stuff related to buildings and that most any Structural Engineer would agree with the basic premise of the thesis provided? IF that is true, what is it about what the 10 structural engineers are saying that is not true or misleading?

 

[Sclamoz]

OK well I'm watching the video and there really isn't anything about physics just the person takes issues with changes that NIST made to their report and left out how they came to some conclusions.

He takes issue with utter absurdity of the report, including the physics of free fall is the basis for this thread at this time stamp.

The part where he says "the NIST was forced to admit the near freefall speed of the WTC collapse..."?

He never says anything about why it couldn't happen, he just brought that up and then goes on to talk about how the MAINSTREAM MEDIA where made aware of the plot ahead of time.

I want you to tell me, in detail the physics because you apparently understand this all better then the rest of us, and I feel like once I can explain to people what laws of physics the official version ignored and how there will be no stopping us!

Unless of course the people behind this secret conspiracy that killed thousands decide to stop us from talking about it.

I mean if the NIST can come up with an explanation and a computer simulation we need to do better than just yell IMPOSSIBLE! or no one will take us seriously, right?

Alternatively, you could ask the falsers to prove their claims though a simulation of a structure undergoing a period of free fall acceleration as a result of impact damage and office fires, but I assure you that you won't get anywhere with that.

Isn't that what the NIST did to prove their side of the story????


The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

* Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
* Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
* Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time?compared to the 3.9 second free fall time?was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below

I'm glad I don't buy into that nonsense anymore. But in order to open peoples eyes to the truth we need facts and evidence to backup what we say!

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: kylebisme
If you want to make absurd arguments against the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii, make your own thread to do that and keep such nonsense out of mine.

Well at least you admit your thread is for your own absurd arguments.