-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why are people so insistant on 9/11 conspiracies?
Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
noto12ious
Golden Member
ROFL now Acanthus is changing his story. Acanthus tried to deny the very existance of pre collapse explosions for days. William Rodriguez wasn't lying, and neither are all the other fire fighters + news reporters, etc. Rodriguez even helped evacuate a few of the WTC workers who were injured by the pre collapse explosions (in one case... explosions occured before the planes struck). STOP LYING ACANTHUS.
noto12ious
Golden Member
Save yourself the trouble. With each one you post, there will be many other videos to counter =)
Acanthus, when are you going to stop lying? :thumbsdown:
It is a possibility JFK and this are linked if they are true. Who really knows at this point. The trick is to get the government to disclose the information instead of making it confidential. Some of that information cannot be a threat to national security, but it still isn't released.
No squibs, falls straight down.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4527441573129587309&q=implosion
Notice how its a rapid fire sequence of very fast small explosions, not explosions very far apart. Notice how you can hear the explosions as percussion and not just a rumble. Theres a very distinct difference.
Not one flash or squib in this one, straight down
No flashes, no squibs
Yet another one, very distinct percussion rumbles, no flashes, no squibs
Here is a different angle of the same thing, you can see they blew out the entire base of the skyscraper to help take it down.
Another one, no squibs, distinct percussion of rapid fire explosives, no flashes, straight down.
Done slowly in sections Still no squibs.
So as you can see, squibs are not always present, way to make youself look like a douchebag.
Hell heres a completely empty and open faced building that goes straight down with no squibs. Text
Edit: actually, after viewing all the results for "implosion" on google video, i think 3 out of all of them had squibs.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4527441573129587309&q=implosion
Notice how its a rapid fire sequence of very fast small explosions, not explosions very far apart. Notice how you can hear the explosions as percussion and not just a rumble. Theres a very distinct difference.
Not one flash or squib in this one, straight down
No flashes, no squibs
Yet another one, very distinct percussion rumbles, no flashes, no squibs
Here is a different angle of the same thing, you can see they blew out the entire base of the skyscraper to help take it down.
Another one, no squibs, distinct percussion of rapid fire explosives, no flashes, straight down.
Done slowly in sections Still no squibs.
So as you can see, squibs are not always present, way to make youself look like a douchebag.
Hell heres a completely empty and open faced building that goes straight down with no squibs. Text
Edit: actually, after viewing all the results for "implosion" on google video, i think 3 out of all of them had squibs.
I just read thru this entire post (quite long but amusing in a strange way). Here's my thoughts:
Notorious: Why don't you ever respond to anything that is presented to you? You keep posting the same things, and calling people names, and making smiley faces, and using lots of bold text. You accuse people of not being able to answer your (sometimes relevant sometimes not) "evidence" that "destroys" this and that. Yet when people do address some of the things you ask about, you completely ignore it. You have a link in your sig with "200+" things, most of which have been thoroughly disproven. But you never address any of that... you just keep posting the same thing. It's almost like you are not an actual person but just a BOT like you might find in an online game. And using your logic, unless you can come up with a GOVERNMENT REPORT to PROVE that you are not a BOT, I won't believe it. What's that, you can't? But what about the "scientific method?" See how that works?
In all seriousness, this is a very interested topic, as are most conspiracy subjects... not because they are likely to be true or anything, but more to see how and why people engage in them. I do appreciate the few (maybe just one?) people who are approaching this rationally and giving their theories without being rediculous.
Notorious: Why don't you ever respond to anything that is presented to you? You keep posting the same things, and calling people names, and making smiley faces, and using lots of bold text. You accuse people of not being able to answer your (sometimes relevant sometimes not) "evidence" that "destroys" this and that. Yet when people do address some of the things you ask about, you completely ignore it. You have a link in your sig with "200+" things, most of which have been thoroughly disproven. But you never address any of that... you just keep posting the same thing. It's almost like you are not an actual person but just a BOT like you might find in an online game. And using your logic, unless you can come up with a GOVERNMENT REPORT to PROVE that you are not a BOT, I won't believe it. What's that, you can't? But what about the "scientific method?" See how that works?
In all seriousness, this is a very interested topic, as are most conspiracy subjects... not because they are likely to be true or anything, but more to see how and why people engage in them. I do appreciate the few (maybe just one?) people who are approaching this rationally and giving their theories without being rediculous.
noto12ious
Golden Member
Such as what? Be specific and point it out. These are the same people that haven't been able to refute the evidence presented in numerous threads...evidence that automatically destroys the official government story 🙂 You don't like my "faces"? Tough. I enjoy using them to express my enjoyment while exposing these government apologists. According to them, the government can do no wrong, even though a mountain of evidence shows otherwise :laugh:
"Yet when people do address some of the things you ask about, you completely ignore it."
Ignore what exactly? I've answered most of the posts directed at me ... some just aren't worth my time, or have already been debated elsewhere on other 9/11 threads. If anyone is doing the "ignoring", it's the blind government apologists who refuse to answer the main points I made earlier in this thread. Acanthus is one of the few who has tried to come up with a plausible explanation (although his answer automatically means the government collapse model is blatantly wrong). Funny eh?
"You have a link in your sig with "200+" things, most of which have been thoroughly disproven"
I never said they were all 100% correct. However, most of them are factual, as presented in the mainstream media. Since you claim "most have been thoroughly disproven", go ahead and refute each one or provide links that "thoroughly" disprove "most" of them. That's your claim. Back it up.
"And using your logic, unless you can come up with a GOVERNMENT REPORT to PROVE that you are not a BOT, I won't believe it. What's that, you can't? But what about the "scientific method?" See how that works?"
I'll continue bringing up the same critical points these puppets refuse to address 🙂 They can't answer it, and that means there is a blatant coverup (at the very least). Other users on the forum will take continue to take notice :thumbsup:
You should be directing your "government report" rant to Acanthus. He still hasn't provided one to back up his molten steel claim. The problem is, the government refuses to address it... same exact deal with not acknowleding HUGE pre collapse explosions :thumbsdown:
noto12ious
Golden Member
Absolutely.
Watch this video when you have some free time. It absolutely destroys the government's JFK coverup.
JFK 2 - The Bush Connection
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2928756561478705121&q=jfk
noto12ious
Golden Member
Haha. Here's Acanthus trying to deny pre collapse explosions by explaining them away as "structural failure". Yeah, structural failure injured many people in the towers, right? :laugh: Why didn't those eyewitnesses say "structural failure" instead of explosions? If they were really just structural failures, why hasn't the government included the "explosions", I mean "structural failures" in their collapse models?
Some Acanthus quotes:
"Im saying firefighters and reporters in your videos are morons. Because they cherry picked the ones for your little videos."
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...&STARTPAGE=9&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
(So according to Acanthus, our hero fire fighters and reporters are morons. Shame on him. Tsk tsk.) :thumbsdown:
"Again, for the 5th time in this thread, the internal supporting structure of the building likely failed before the outer superstructure, the "explosions" were the floors collapsing."
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...STARTPAGE=16&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
"The "explosions" ahead of the buildings collapse as it fell...
The internal structure couldve failed before the outer structure"
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...&STARTPAGE=9&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
noto12ious
Golden Member
Do you actually watch the videos before you post them?
Smoke can be seen coming out the sides of the building before and during the collapse.
Blank.
Memphis Baptist Hospital Building Implosion has smoke and debris clearly visible before and during collapse (middle sections). :laugh:
Like I said before, for each one you post, there will be many other counters:
I don't even to find videos to prove my point.
http://implosionworld.com/office.html
http://implosionworld.com/hotel.html
http://implosionworld.com/boelnrbftp.htm
http://implosionworld.com/mattatuck2.htm
http://implosionworld.com/past.htm
I'm pretty sure this has already been posted for you, but here you go:
Molten Metal
Now where are you getting the info about the molten metal?
Freefalling tower theory
Explosions and eyewitnesses
I work in law enforcement actually, so I have a lot of experience with people's "1st hand reports" and how wildly they can differ both from each other and the actual event. I have had people tell me they heard and saw gunfire when it was actually fireworks. I have had multiple witnesses see the same car but all report it as different colors and styles. People reporting fights will often swear that there are 10 or 20 people involved when there are really less than 5. I don't take this as a negative against them, it is just that people react differently to stressful situations. Also, sometimes (many times!) the worst reporting party is an off duty cop or a firefighter. They are not used to seeing and describing things from that different point of view. Again, this is nothing against the cops or firefighters or Joe 12-pack making the report, it is just human nature.
Seismic issues
Many of the conspiracy people deliberately take Arthur Lerner-Lam's statements out of context to imply that he is on board with their theory. That is clearly not the case.
Pancake collapse
Fire damage
Somebody mentioned this earlier, it may not have been you... the thread is getting long!
Squibs
More squibs
Now I know that this will not in any way convince you, but please read it and think about it. Doesn't it seem reasonable?
Lots of good info here although more rude than it probably should be
I could go on and on. I think it would be reasonable to remove that link from your sig, since it seems like a lot if it is very questionable.
When I made that comment about you being a BOT, it was a comparison... similar to your demands that we produce a GOVERNMENT REPORT on something that they really wouldn't have a reason to study. So for now I will continue in my assumption that you are actually a BOT and you are programmed to point to links from random conspiracy sites. You can offer no proof, FROM the GOVERNMENT, that this is not so. Therefore, BOT.
I dont get it, do you know what a squib is? You're not pointing out the same thing. Dust during collapses isnt what a squib is. The squib is the rapid expelling of a tuft of dust from destroying structural columns and pulverizing concrete.
Of course theres going to be a cloud when it collapses, thats not a squib.
Yup read the links and what we were discussing, you were talking about the "explosions" which are actually just rumbles. seconds before collapse. I stand by all of those statements.
1. Firefighters and reporters were under just a slight bit of duress on that day.
2. Firefighters and reporters are not engineers or physicists.
3. They can testify what they THINK they saw and heard, but it was such a unique experience that youre going to get innacuracies, innacuracies that the people that make consipiracy movies capitalize on.
noto12ious
Golden Member
Uh..
Molten steel:
"These candidly shaken macho guys recall scenes still haunting their nightmares two years after 9/11 - a 4-foot-high pile of bodies hurled from the towers, finding faces that were ripped from heads by the violence of the collapse, and heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel"
http://www.nypost.com/movies/19574.htm
Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel
http://www.jhsph.edu/Publications/Special/Welch.htm
As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running
http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf
Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint, Inc.-added that "sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel" (Walsh, 2002)
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/evidence/gcn_handheldapp.html
Smoke constantly poured from the peaks. One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_200112/ai_n9015802#continue ">http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/...31/is_200112/ai_n9015802#contin
e </a>
A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. ?Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen?s and the thousands who fled that disaster,? he said
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
I haven't done enough research on both sides of the argument to comment... yet.
There's a problem with your argument. Corroboration. All of their testimonies of proven pre collapse explosions (as evidenced by engineers and maintenance workers in the basement levels being injured / witnessing the aftermaths of said explosions, which even destroyed garages... national hero Rodriguez also reported basement explosions before the planes struck which injured many of his co-workers) have been intentionally ignored by all government agencies and are still not being acknowledged by the government despite fire fighters + other WTC workers testifying before the 9/11 Commission and NIST. Coverup.
A few of the testimonials are a few pages back, along with a few videos. If you want to shrug off the HUGE pre collapse explosions as "structural failure", then it means NIST's official collapse model is blatantly wrong for not including them. Hurry, go tell NIST of the failures! Also show them this clip destroying the official story. Hey, they forgot to factor in these explosions, I mean "structural failures" into their model :laugh::
http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/911eyewitness_wtc1.wmv
You obviously haven't been following the 9/11 threads here. "Many of the conspiracy people" that reference the above does not include me. This topic has already been settled on other threads. To summarize, the 1993 truck bombing at WTC did not register on seismographs either (assuming that page you linked was trying to deny pre collapse explosions because none registerd on seismographs).
What about it? Also, where's a demolition model for the Twin Towers and WTC7? Nevermind, it doesn'tt exist. Scientific method be damned. :thumbsdown:
I didn't mention it. I took a quick glance at the link... why is there only 1 example, the Windsor?
This quick flash cites several more examples of high-rise steel frame structures that didn't collapse, and burned for much longer periods of time than WTC:
http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/WTCFlash.htm
What happend to WTC7 again? :laugh:
Squibs or no squibs, it's still highly visible:
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/video%20archive/wtc-7_collapse.mpa
Also, If you view the WTC7 clip in full screen mode, you?ll see a couple of bright flashes during collapse, on floors 20-30, center-right part of the building. Not to mention the huge pre collapse explosions heard before WTC7's collapse in 911 Eyewitness, and the symmetrical collapse + inwards kinks of the building (core columns destroyed) + subsequent pyroclastic dust clouds, all characteristics of demolition.
Am I missing something? I don't see a section dedicated to the obvious demolition squibs for the twin towers. :thumbsdown: I was looking forward to destroying any argument they had (ie, the Popular Mechanics hitpiece). Ah well. Here it is again just for kicks.
From this image here:
http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem12/demolition.wave.170.jpg
Why is the the lower squib shown to be appearing first? The upper squib is then shown appearing a few seconds later. So much for the "pancaking floor" theory causing those squibs.
Video here: (Specific time frame 52:13 - 52:25)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&pl=true
Took a quick glance, it looks like some good info... I haven't researched enough on both sides of their arguments (Ruppert, etc) to comment.
I don't think so. 🙂 The link provides a great place to start... especially since the 911 Commission intentionally failed to investigate or mention most of the links provided. I've made it clear in other threads that not all of the links contained on that page are 100% accurate. Also intriguing is its motives section :thumbsup: It's staying unless I find a better link to replace it with, since Mineta and 911 Eyewitness destroy the 911 Commission Report, and are my personal favorites 🙂
Why not? It's been well documented, and is part of the criminal investigation for the largest attack in America's history + largest skyrise collapses in the world. The fact that the government refuses to address or acknowledge the issue (molten steel) raises another red flag, just like their denials of all HUGE pre collapse explosions. The only thing I'm "programmed" to do is to remain a patriot. You can thank those g.i. joe cartoons and combat with vic morrow episodes :thumbsup:
Funny how you still won't address 911 Eyewitness, or Norman Mineta, as I've challenged many other government apologists to do. :laugh: You have no answer, and these two aspects ALONE blow the entire 9/11 Commission Report wide open... not even factoring in everything else. At least Acanthus had the balls to give it a shot...although his explanation destroyed NIST's own findings :laugh:
noto12ious
Golden Member
Ladies and Gents, Acanthus... his own words:
"Im saying firefighters and reporters in your videos are morons. Because they cherry picked the ones for your little videos."
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...&STARTPAGE=9&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
Enough said. :thumbsdown: Acanthus is clearly just a government apologist, and will badmouth anyone to uphold the official story, no matter how heroic the fire fighters were, or how blatant the coverup is. Very sad "human being" :laugh:
According to Acanthus, "rumbles" injured many American citizens in the basements of the towers. :roll:
noto12ious
Golden Member
Comments regarding Prof. Jones? ?Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse??
http://www.911blogger.com/files/Com5May.html
:thumbsup:
http://www.911blogger.com/files/Com5May.html
:thumbsup:
Patrick Wolf
Platinum Member
I don't know any of these conspiracies, but do any of them include our government purposedly killing nearly 3,000 Americans by crashing into the WTC, making it look like terrorists did it, just so they have a good reason to invade Iraq?
I sure hope not... cause that would be incredibly dumb.
I sure hope not... cause that would be incredibly dumb.
noto12ious
Golden Member
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001
In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1
Actual Operation Northwoods documents: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
You should also view this video that absolutely destroys the government's JFK cover-up.
JFK 2 - The Bush Connection:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2928756561478705121&q=jfk
Rumbles are distintcly different from demolition percussion.
And being heroic is obviously a prerequisite for a structural/civil engineering degree nowadays?
That quote is in reference to the cherrypicked people in the conpiracy theory thread that didn't know what they were looking at.
noto12ious
Golden Member
"Rumbles" don't injure many American citizens in the substructures of the towers. Stop lying, Acanthus :thumbsdown:
Shame on you for calling America's hero fighters and reporters a bunch of "morons". Shame. On. You. :thumbsdown:
noto12ious
Golden Member
Actually, it proves that elements within the United States Government are 100% capable of conspiring against the America public to further specific agendas.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
