9/11 - Not proud, but I'm becoming convinced

banquo

Ok. Let me say this: I hate conspiracy theorists. The whole 'New world order' scene, etc, drives me mad. And I tended to paint all 'conspiracies' with the same brush. Also, I have no doubt that this topic has been done to death on this forum.

However.

Architects and Engineers for 911 truth - An experienced architect's analysis. Also, he wears a suit, and is not concerned with political motive, just facts and equations in dealing with the collapse of the WTCs.

www.loosechange911.com - Helped convince me on the demolition aspect of the theory.

www.911weknow.com/ - An experienced, qualified engineer explains why he believes the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

There are loads more like this. It seems to me to be blatantly obvious, but don't know the first thing about architecture, engineering or demolition. I don't know what to think. What's the general consensus regarding 9/11 being an inside job?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm

loose change is such bull****

such unbelievable bull****.
ungodly amounts.

humanji

Have a glance through the past threads on this and you'll get loads of evidence for and against it including a rebuttal of loose change. But do it in your spare time. There's a lot of it

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561

some dude took loose change and added subtitles and extra scenes to explain just why it's all bull****.

it's long, but if you actually believe that crap.. you probably should watch it

--edit

HOLY ****
jump to 42m49seconds or so

you see a plane disintegrating

****ing AWESOME

godtabh

banquo wrote:

Architects and Engineers for 911 truth - An experienced architect's analysis. Also, he wears a suit, and is not concerned with political motive, just facts and equations in dealing with the collapse of the WTCs.

Can you post up the facts and equations in dealing with the collapse as I couldnt find any


There is nothing suspect from the engineering point of view. It failed like it was meant to. If the planes had of hit the lower ground floors it could have stayed up.

delop

Mordeth wrote:

loose change is such bull****

such unbelievable bull****.
ungodly amounts.

Sure sure, maybe it is, like those nuts who tried to tell us that the british and american govs were Making up Stuff about Sadam having WMD's, we all know he had them, didnt he?

911, there would have to have been loads of ppl involved, someone would have to have talked..

anyway here is another one http://911scholars.org/

I think it was once said, to solve a crime like this, follow the money, I reckon thats a good way to start...

How gained most, Silversteen, claimed twice on insurance, the cheeky bugger, 15m he paid for the lease, in 2001 and he collected 7bn out of insurance claiming it was 2 attacks, very interesting....

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

... we all knew saddam didn't have WMD. it was all of us that was telling the us and british goverments, not a few crazy conspiracy nuts.

why would there have to be loads of people involved? people did talk, there were warnings.. but they were ignored, for whatever reason. I'm sure we know what you think.

delop

Mordeth wrote:

I'm sure we know what you think.

Na, not going there, just think its interesting, Dont believe one way or another, No harm in reading it, im not shouting anything from the rooftops..

Id be more concerned with the cloud of cosmic gas our solar system is starting to pass through, you dont hear much about that in the press.. :-)

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

yeah, but that's 50'000 years away if it's a day.. it's not something we have to worry about

sentient koala bears.. now there is a real danger.

delop

Ok,ok , rising interest rates, of a finance minister who didnt have a bank account or couldnt manage his money , Ill worry about that for the rest of the yr ;-)

Quitting thread....

bonkey

delop wrote:

like those nuts who tried to tell us that the british and american govs were Making up Stuff about Sadam having WMD's, we all know he had them, didnt he?

I think you have that the wrong way round.

The US Administration tried to present the flimsiest evidence possible, insisting that "of course he has them" in the same manner that conspiracy theorists do the same. The populace at large treated each with about the same level of credulity

I think it was once said, to solve a crime like this, follow the money, I reckon thats a good way to start...

Excellent idea. Lets do that.

How gained most, Silversteen, claimed twice on insurance, the cheeky bugger, 15m he paid for the lease, in 2001 and he collected 7bn out of insurance claiming it was 2 attacks, very interesting....

Ohhhh...fell at the first post.

Silverstein insured at a value lower than was recommended to him by the insurers. After the events of 2001, he claimed 7bn, but didn't collect anywhere near that, with the final payout falling just shy of 5bn.
And what has he done with this windfall, one might ask? Why, he's continued to pay his rent on the site, at a whopping 10 million a month, so that he has the right to throw all of his money and more back into rebuilding at ground-zero!!!

What a cunning plan....knocking the towers to make a fortune to build office blocks where the towers used to stand. Genius.

banquo

Yeah I have to say that loose change seems a bit suspect, but I haven't double checked any of their facts.

kearnsr wrote:

Can you post up the facts and equations in dealing with the collapse as I couldnt find any

1."Applying the Scientific Method"
2."Proof That The Thermal and Gravitational Energy Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01"
3.Bad Science: A Forthcoming Paper that disagrees with the CT - at least they're balanced, hosting this.

There's also a video of a presentation that the guy gave at [URL="http://www.911blogger.com/node/10025]"]Here[/URL]

He talks about all the usual things, i.e.

-The direction of the fall, into the path of most resistance
-The speed of the fall in this direction, measured at 'freefall'
-The nature of the collapse, symmetrical all the way down
-The lack of evidence of temperatures hot enough to melt steel, and that the temperatures that did occur did not occur for the length of time that it takes for steel to weaken
-Squibs, visual evidence of charges placed
-Seismic evidence of explosions
-Audio evidence of explosions
-Eyewitness accounts of explosions
-That the chemical signature of thermite was found in the dust
-the pyroclastic dust clouds
-FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
-Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

...but he talks about them with a lot more credence than most.

EDIT: Wow. Oh god. I should have realised. This has 500-page-long-thread, with a notable circular pattern to the points made, written all over it. Maybe I'll just let it drop.

...

But I'm joining http://911scholars.org. I'm not saying I agree with either theory, I'm just not sure.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

there were an awful lot of desks, chairs, carpets, computers, monitors, papers, clothes, and people to burn as well as jet fuel.

Ciaran500

banquo wrote:

-That the chemical signature of thermite was found in the dust

You mean Copper(II) Oxide or Iron(II, III) Oxide? Sometimes known as rust. Wonder how that got there.

What are people trying to prove by saying that there was molten metal in the twin towers? Thermite isn't used in deconstruction and pretty unreliable and awkward substance to use to cut through metal.

Bartronilic

If it was an inside job, theres bound to be at least ONE demolition person, person on board the """missing""" flight to the pentagon, ONE soldier etc. in otherwords ONE person who would completely object to taking part or feel guilt and have told the world by now.

9/11 was not an inside job, bull****

banquo

The manhatten project was a secret for 5 years, when they detonated the thing.

bonkey

banquo wrote:

The manhatten project was a secret for 5 years, when they detonated the thing.

Do a google on the words "Manhattan project security leak" and see how long it takes to disprove this claim.

Yeah I have to say that loose change seems a bit suspect, but I haven't double checked any of their facts.

The science stuff that you're impressed with....have you double-checked that?

Have you double-checked any facts or claims?

I ask because you present a list of the "usual" claims and to be honest some of them are embarrassingly wrong, while the rest merely survive only a cursory examination before failing.

I am also worried by the inclusion in your posts of comments like the following:

he wears a suit

he talks about them with a lot more credence than most.

Its almost as though you're subconsciously describing a snake-oil salesman...

humanji

Mordeth wrote:

... we all knew saddam didn't have WMD. it was all of us that was telling the us and british goverments, not a few crazy conspiracy nuts.

I say the US sold Saddam WMD's and that's why they were so certain they were there. Kind of makes the fact that they didn;t find any, even funnier.

delop wrote:

Id be more concerned with the cloud of cosmic gas our solar system is starting to pass through, you dont hear much about that in the press.. :-)

Don't worry, that just gives us super powers (or makes all machines come alive and kill us, depending on which film you believe!).

Nick_oliveri

The only thing that keeps my mind open about the whole affair is the whole WTC7 thing. Like, theres something strange there (for me anyways). Its got to do with your level of smarts...

But i digest....


Ah no seriously, something that you will find that will most certainly put you off, is the total idiots and their no-plane theories, directed energy weapons (DEW's) and the hologram theory/tv fakery. These guys really take the nuttiest biscuit and seem to have a no gag reflex.You are better off going on with whatever it is you are doing not dwelling over the owld past events.

Ashla

banquo wrote:

Ok. Let me say this: I hate conspiracy theorists. The whole 'New world order' scene, etc, drives me mad. And I tended to paint all 'conspiracies' with the same brush. Also, I have no doubt that this topic has been done to death on this forum.

However.

Architects and Engineers for 911 truth - An experienced architect's analysis. Also, he wears a suit, and is not concerned with political motive, just facts and equations in dealing with the collapse of the WTCs.

www.loosechange911.com - Helped convince me on the demolition aspect of the theory.

www.911weknow.com/ - An experienced, qualified engineer explains why he believes the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

There are loads more like this. It seems to me to be blatantly obvious, but don't know the first thing about architecture, engineering or demolition. I don't know what to think. What's the general consensus regarding 9/11 being an inside job?

Well it's like this, my guy worked for controlled demolition, drilled and set their detonators for buildings all over the world, I even pressed the button for the demolition of army quarters in Cypress, we've watched the videos of the towers, and every floor was layered with explosives, which went off alternately in motion. The building collapsed in on it's self, which can only happen by controlled carefully placed explosives;

oscarBravo

Ashla wrote:

Well it's like this, my guy worked for controlled demolition, drilled and set their detonators for buildings all over the world, I even pressed the button for the demolition of army quarters in Cypress, we've watched the videos of the towers, and every floor was layered with explosives, which went off alternately in motion.

Which nobody noticed being put in place. How long did it take to rig the explosives in Cyprus, and how many people were working away normally in the building at the time? Did anyone feel the need to fly a plane into it, just in case?

Ashla wrote:

The building collapsed in on it's self, which can only happen by controlled carefully placed explosives;

That's simply not true.

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

Which nobody noticed being put in place. How long did it take to rig the explosives in Cyprus, and how many people were working away normally in the building at the time? Did anyone feel the need to fly a plane into it, just in case? That's simply not true.

You obviously haven't really read the full reports! and you really have no idea about controlled demolition! But that's OK! Just lead the blind into oblivion....

oscarBravo

Any special reason you didn't answer the questions?

Captain Chaos

Ashla wrote:

You obviously haven't really read the full reports! and you really have no idea about controlled demolition! But that's OK! Just lead the blind into oblivion....

I believe the controlled demolition theory myself, but someone on boards challanged the fact that buildings are blown from the bottom first and not top down. But it would have to be blown from top down to back the cover story that the airline impacts caused it to fail.

oscarBravo

Captain Chaos wrote:

I believe the controlled demolition theory myself, but someone on boards challanged the fact that buildings are blown from the bottom first and not top down. But it would have to be blown from top down to back the cover story that the airline impacts caused it to fail.

OK then: can you explain how two buildings that size were rigged for an unconventional demolition job without anyone noticing?

While you're at it, can you explain why planes needed to be involved at all? Why not just rig a conventional demolition job, and claim there was a truck bomb in the basement?

Captain Chaos

oscarBravo wrote:

OK then: can you explain how two buildings that size were rigged for an unconventional demolition job without anyone noticing?

While you're at it, can you explain why planes needed to be involved at all? Why not just rig a conventional demolition job, and claim there was a truck bomb in the basement?

I'm just stating that I believe the demolition theory and nothing more.

I don't know what all the ins and outs are and the tiny details that happened that day or leading to it. I don't have any set pieces of events or ''facts'' in my mind they I 100% believe. I'm not cliaming to have all the answers or reasons, just that I believe the first line that I typed. I don't know how it was set up or pulled off, only that thats what it looks like to me what happened.

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

Any special reason you didn't answer the questions?

Time! if there is any........

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it also looks like the sun rises in the morning and sets in the evening....

Ashla

Mordeth wrote:

it also looks like the sun rises in the morning and sets in the evening....

But a little bit faster these days! Have you noticed?

oscarBravo

Captain Chaos wrote:

I'm just stating that I believe the demolition theory and nothing more.

So it's just blind faith? You don't need any evidence beyond "it sorta looks like it"? You're not interested in questioning why there would have been a controlled explosion? The sheer scale of the conspiracy that would be required doesn't prompt any curiosity in you?

Captain Chaos wrote:

I don't know what all the ins and outs are and the tiny details that happened that day or leading to it. I don't have any set pieces of events or ''facts'' in my mind they I 100% believe. I'm not cliaming to have all the answers or reasons, just that I believe the first line that I typed. I don't know how it was set up or pulled off, only that thats what it looks like to me what happened.

Maybe it kinda sorta looks like it, but surely it takes more than a vague outer appearance to make you believe something? Do you believe in magic when you see Paul Daniels on TV?

oscarBravo

Ashla wrote:

Time! if there is any........

How convenient.