9/11: Inside Job or Terror Attack?

tolosenc

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Ten stories of a building may not have kinetic energy but it has a whole lot of gravitational potential energy, which can be converted to kinetic energy.

Imagine I put a bowling ball (or something much heavier) on top of a tripod with thin legs made of plastic and then held a lighter to one of the legs. Do you think that the bowling ball would not have any effect on how long it takes the leg to buckle, since it only has potential energy and no kinetic?

I'd say 10+ stories of a building that's falling would have a fair bit of kinetic energy, actually!

Just leave it man, some people are so invested in "the truth, man" that they are afraid to admit that they know it's all bull. You'll only shorten your own lifespan.

BlackBlade

tolosenc wrote: »

I'd say 10+ stories of a building that's falling would have a fair bit of kinetic energy, actually!

Just leave it man, some people are so invested in "the truth, man" that they are afraid to admit that they know it's all bull. You'll only shorten your own lifespan.

Ye cause ignorance is bliss isnt it :rolleyes:

Sam Vimes

BlackBlade wrote: »

well as I answered ye mate!
imagine it was suppose to hold the weight even while hot!

If the tripod was designed to withstand heat while bearing the load then no it wont collapse!

the point your completely missing is that the buildings that collapsed after a little fire (and it is a little fire on the scale of the structure) infact were designed to stay up after any scale of fire!

so unless somebody had something in the building that would burn hot enough to damage the HUGE steel the thing was made from it should never have come down!
comprende?

My initial point was that ten stories of a building would count as "one hell of a bloody hammer", which you demanded when someone pointed out that fire can soften steel. I then showed that possessing only potential energy would be no hindrance to this.

Given that there have been two videos posted in this thread of fire softening steel, one of a steel girder collapsing and one of a steel bridge collapsing, and that it has been pointed out that fire has been used to soften steel for hundreds of years, need I point out that no amount of design can change the simple facts that fire can soften steel and that a ten storey building weighing down on this steel can make it buckle more easily than it otherwise would?

BBDBB

I would have loved to have been at that meeting all those years ago


The Boss - Ok Guys, thanks for coming, we need a false flag attack to fool the world into thinking that those peace loving bedouins sitting on all that oil hate us enough to justify us attacking them to secure the oil contracts...........

Suit 1 - what about an assassination?

The Boss - hmmm, we did that in 63, it made the guy a martyr, but it didnt give us enough justification to invade anywhere cos it was a "lone gunman" nudge nudge wink wink

Good natured LOLZ all round the room


Suit 2 - what if we kidnap some dude?

Suit 3 - Ahh c'mon, we do that all the time and no one gives a hoot after a fortnight, whoever it was will be in the trash on a milk carton inside a week for crissakes

silence.......

New Guy - We could hijack a plane

LOLZ all round

Suit 2 -hahahaha, why not 4 planes??

Suit 3 -or hijack a school bus Keanu! *high fives exchanged between Suits 2 & 3

Suit 4 - and ram it into Old Peoples Home

riotous laughter now, and "good one dude"...........as it dies down

The Boss - thanks new guy, but we want a justification not a package holiday

New guy -no, no, what Im getting at is we hijack a plane and fly it into some really big iconic building

Silence and some nervous laughter

Holy Ferk I think he's serious! Laughter now is uncertain

The Boss - hmmmmmm, go on New Guy, you could be onto something

New Guy - Well what if we hijack a plane and fly it into an important building, something dear to the hearts of Joe Public in the USA like say Yankee Stadium, The Empire State, The Statue of Liberty

Suit 2 - Whoa New Dude, you are totally hardcore, respect an all, but Chuck Heston did the Statue already and we cant go pissing off the Gun Club

Suit 4 - This is good, we could make sure we hide a load of secret documents inside so they all get destroyed in the flames

The Boss - I like it, this is good work guys, keep going

...........an hour later..........

Jackets off, sleeves rolled up, the white board is being used with diagrams of planes buildings and calculations

snatches of the conversation include

"I still say that no one will give a ferk if you fly a Space Shuttle into Oprah Winfreys house, grow a freakin pair wilya?"
"So how much kerosene does a 747 hold??"
"no, there IS no snakes on the plane mutha f*cker"
"get on the net and find out what temperature steel melts at!"
"Do you think we should update the weather balloon story with some flying silver balls?"

...........3 hours later..........

The meeting is closing up, jackets being put back on, empty cups, cold coffee, pizza boxes strewn, some jocular but weary back slapping goes on as they pack up

The Boss - "Well done men, great job, the additional explosives was inspirational, really outside the box thinking, remind me to give you all raise, now if you will excuse me, I have to get to a meeting about the freakin Micks, we need a way of keeping them distracted from the economic screw over we're about to serve em, haha, maybe we'll tell em that they are really from Atlantis or sumthin

Laughter to fade

My name is URL

According to the documentary on RTE 1 right now; Nicholas Cage was working as a policeman on the day.

alastair

BlackBlade wrote: »

Ye cause ignorance is bliss isnt it :rolleyes:

The only ignorance at play here is to commit to an article of faith in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Conspiracy theories obviously fill some vaccuum left by religious belief, but that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

The mechanisms that undermined the two towers (and wtc 7) and led to their collapse is explained quite clearly in the NIST report - link above. No need for indulging in fantastic theories and their logical accusations.

BlackBlade

Sam Vimes wrote: »

My initial point was that ten stories of a building would count as "one hell of a bloody hammer", which you demanded when someone pointed out that fire can soften steel. I then showed that possessing only potential energy would be no hindrance to this.

Given that there have been two videos posted in this thread of fire softening steel, one of a steel girder collapsing and one of a steel bridge collapsing, and that it has been pointed out that fire has been used to soften steel for hundreds of years, need I point out that no amount of design can change the simple facts that fire can soften steel and that a ten storey building weighing down on this steel can make it buckle more easily than it otherwise would?

no your wrong!
what part of THE BUILDING WAS BUILT TO WITHSTAND ANY FIRE did you not get!
fire does yes soften stell I know that Im a mechanical technician by trade I work with metal and its stresses caused by heat every day!

lets put it this way for you ye!
the metal in the towers was built to stand up to the hot temperatures caused by fire yes! so fire shouldnt have bothered it and it should be still standing!

JUST LIKE!
ok ok now get this amazing feet of engineering!

your car or bike engine has a fire inside it and doesnt melt and I can assure you there is no 4" steel in those!

also have you ever heard of a Train???
well they burn coal to get the boiler up to huge temperatures and the only use steel with 25% the thickness the steel in the towers was!
and with nothing supposedly in the building (ie. coal thermite or TNT) to reach the temratures needed to buckle it then why did it?

seriously use your head here like!

BlackBlade

alastair wrote: »

The only ignorance at play here is to commit to an article of faith in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Conspiracy theories obviously fill some vaccuum left by religious belief, but that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

The mechanisms that undermined the two towers (and wtc 7) and led to their collapse is explained quite clearly in the NIST report - link above. No need for indulging in fantastic theories and their logical accusations.

its a report made by the people that done it why would it tell the truth ffs!

whatstherush

BlackBlade wrote: »

your car or bike engine has a fire inside it and doesnt melt and I can assure you there is no 4" steel in those!

Ya, try drive a car without a radiator and see how for ya get.

BlackBlade wrote: »

also have you ever heard of a Train???

Again run a train boiler without any water to take away excess heat and see what happens.

You are so full of shíte, I wouldn't believe the radio in your car.

Sam Vimes

BlackBlade wrote: »

no your wrong!
what part of THE BUILDING WAS BUILT TO WITHSTAND ANY FIRE did you not get!
fire does yes soften stell I know that Im a mechanical technician by trade I work with metal and its stresses caused by heat every day!

lets put it this way for you ye!
the metal in the towers was built to stand up to the hot temperatures caused by fire yes! so fire shouldnt have bothered it and it should be still standing!

JUST LIKE!
ok ok now get this amazing feet of engineering!

your car or bike engine has a fire inside it and doesnt melt and I can assure you there is no 4" steel in those!

also have you ever heard of a Train???
well they burn coal to get the boiler up to huge temperatures and the only use steel with 25% the thickness the steel in the towers was!
and with nothing supposedly in the building (ie. coal thermite or TNT) to reach the temratures needed to buckle it then why did it?

seriously use your head here like!

And if the weight of a ten storey building weighed down on a steam engine's furnace it may well buckle. We're getting side tracked here. I responded to you to correct you on one (and then two) points. You spoke of "one hell of a bloody hammer" as if this was a ridiculous notion, but the weight of a building would act as "one hell of a bloody hammer"

You then attempted to discount the weight of the building as it did not have kinetic energy and I explained that it had potential energy which would have exactly the same effect

How the building was designed has no bearing on the fact that you were wrong on both of these points. They're a matter of physics. Heat softens steel which you accepted and a heavy compressive weight would make it buckle at a lower temperature than it otherwise would, even if the weight didn't contain much kinetic energy. Thems the facts and they are the only facts that I posted to address. The buildings of the wtc and their design are not even relevant

gargleblaster

In case it hasn't already been said: PNAC, catalyzing event needed to implement plans, etc.

alastair

BlackBlade wrote: »

its a report made by the people that done it why would it tell the truth ffs!

Here they are ladies and gentlemen - the real perpetrators of the WTC collapse:

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/team_members.cfm

Keep drinking the koolaid.

alastair

gargleblaster wrote: »

In case it hasn't already been said: PNAC, catalyzing event needed to implement plans, etc.

Oooh - how ominous!

But can I make a suggestion?

...needs more 'Zeitgeist' scary music.

BlackBlade

whatstherush wrote: »

Ya, try drive a car without a radiator and see how for ya get.

yes it will leak gasses and loose compression but wont fall out from under the car!

Again run a train boiler without any water to take away excess heat and see what happens.
it will blow from the pressure built up inside it WONT melt
You are so full of shíte, I wouldn't believe the radio in your car.

you are so full of **** you have no idea what you are talking about!
why would you believe the radio in my car there is probably some ****in gob****e like you been broadcast on it ffs!

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And if the weight of a ten storey building weighed down on a steam engine's furnace it may well buckle.

lets stop ye right there shall we!
Do you honestly thing a single train would hold up a building of any size never mnd one on fire?

We're getting side tracked here. I responded to you to correct you on one (and then two) points. You spoke of "one hell of a bloody hammer" as if this was a ridiculous notion, but the weight of a building would act as "one hell of a bloody hammer"

Ive already answered you on that!
but I will explain one more angle of it!
a hammer is built to withstand its own weight isnt it! and so was the building!


You then attempted to discount the weight of the building as it did not have kinetic energy and I explained that it had potential energy which would have exactly the same effect

How the building was designed has no bearing on the fact that you were wrong on both of these points. They're a matter of physics. Heat softens steel which you accepted and a heavy compressive weight would make it buckle at a lower temperature than it otherwise would, even if the weight didn't contain much kinetic energy. Thems the facts and they are the only facts that I posted to address. The buildings of the wtc and their design are not even relevant

so basically what you are trying to say is all the sky scrapers all over the world can be brought down by fires but yet they are built in places that are more populated than anywhere else on the planet, and yet these people are aloud to build such death traps in urban areas!
honestly is that what your ****in tellin me?

cyrusdvirus

BlackBlade, you've convinced me.

People SHOULD need an IQ test to use a computer. AND a licence to have children.

Maybe that way your drivel would stop. Because it has stopped being amusing, and is actually beginning to hurt my head. And the fact that someone as deluded as you actually MIGHT have kids, and be regarded as someone to look up to and be responsible for raising a little person, frightens me in a way that you cannot understand.

Sam Vimes

BlackBlade wrote: »

so basically what you are trying to say is all the sky scrapers all over the world can be brought down by fires but yet they are built in places that are more populated than anywhere else on the planet, and yet these people are aloud to build such death traps in urban areas!
honestly is that what your ****in tellin me?

When most buildings go on fire it's not because they've just been hit by large burning chunks of two other buildings which also broke the water main feeding the building's sprinkler system. And the fire brigade usually make some attempt to put the fire out. So a building collapsing due to fire would be exceptional but these were exceptional circumstances

BlackBlade

gatecrash wrote: »

BlackBlade, you've convinced me.

People SHOULD need an IQ test to use a computer. AND a licence to have children.

Maybe that way your drivel would stop. Because it has stopped being amusing, and is actually beginning to hurt my head. And the fact that someone as deluded as you actually MIGHT have kids, and be regarded as someone to look up to and be responsible for raising a little person, frightens me in a way that you cannot understand.

and thats suppose to be some kind of smart answer is it?
your the one with the pain in your head from reading so maybe its you that needs an IQ test!
you lot in Kildare probably dont need to be assest to have kids since you's are only ridin things that graze in fields!

tigger123

The thing that always bugs the sh*t outta me is the pure scale of something like 9/11 if it had of been an inside job. You'd literally need 100's if not 1,000's of people completely committed to murdering 1000's of their own citizens (and they would have known how many it was going to be) and then keep schtum about the whole thing for the rest of their lives.

Now, leaving aside the moral and ethical misgivings of these 'murderers' you would then have to depend upon them not telling anyone, even on their deathbeds, for risk the whole plan was discovered. And then, what would be the consequences if it was uncovered? Literally, the US Government would have an armed revolution on their hands (and let's not forget the US constitutional right to bear arms to cover just such an eventuality).

Or, it was Al Qaeda. I think on the balance of probability I know which one I would go for. Those who think it was Bush et al have a screw loose.

cyrusdvirus

BlackBlade wrote: »

and thats suppose to be some kind of smart answer is it?
your the one with the pain in your head from reading so maybe its you that needs an IQ test!
you lot in Kildare probably dont need to be assest to have kids since you's are only ridin things that graze in fields!

Ahhhhh........

And back to amusing.

BlackBlade

Sam Vimes wrote: »

When most buildings go on fire it's not because they've just been hit by large burning chunks of two other buildings which also broke the water main feeding the building's sprinkler system. And the fire brigade usually make some attempt to put the fire out. So a building collapsing due to fire would be exceptional but these were exceptional circumstances

it was still made to withstand that amount of fire:rolleyes:

amazing how the buildings feeding the water to the towers collapsed isnt it!
considering they were supposedly brought down from the top down but yet 2 buildngs at the base that feed the water to it went first.
and still you think there is nothing sussy about the whole thing?

are you listening to yourself????

Micky Dolenz

chill out. Baiting always leads to bans.

13spanner

I used to think it was an inside job. ''Loose Change'' gets you thinking.

But now I think it was a terrorist attack, and nothing more. I could be wrong or right, but that's what I beleive to be true.

cyrusdvirus

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

chill out. Baiting always leads to bans.

Sorry Micky. I'll stop now.

marco_polo

BlackBlade wrote: »

it was still made to withstand that amount of fire:rolleyes:

amazing how the buildings feeding the water to the towers collapsed isnt it!
considering they were supposedly brought down from the top down but yet 2 buildngs at the base that feed the water to it went first.
and still you think there is nothing sussy about the whole thing?

are you listening to yourself????

What buildings were feeding water to the towers?

Water mains are underground, at most few feet under the pavement, in what way is it amazing that the falling debris of a 110 story building might damage them?

My name is URL

tigger123 wrote: »

The thing that always bugs the sh*t outta me is the pure scale of something like 9/11 if it had of been an inside job. You'd literally need 100's if not 1,000's of people completely committed to murdering 1000's of their own citizens (and they would have known how many it was going to be) and then keep schtum about the whole thing for the rest of their lives.

That's the thing with the more outlandish of theories. They rely on whole cabals working together and not disclosing the matter to anyone. It also means that any time someone suggests that there was perhaps an effort to cover up neglect; that the mere suggestion can be swept aside as one of those grand conspiracy theories, even though it may only concern and require a tiny amount of people's knowledge of and agreement on what bits to hide.

BlackBlade

marco_polo wrote: »

What buildings were feeding water to the towers?

Water mains are underground, at most few feet under the pavement, in what way is it amazing that the falling debris of a 110 story building might damage them?

Em no!
they dont run under the foot path like!
there was a whole train station etc under there so why would falling debris burst a pipe that could potentially be covered by multiple stories?
pardon the pun but that doesnt hold any water!:rolleyes:

My name is URL wrote: »

That's the thing with the more outlandish of theories. They rely on whole cabals working together and not disclosing the matter to anyone. It also means that any time someone suggests that there was perhaps an effort to cover up neglect; that the mere suggestion can be swept aside as one of those grand conspiracy theories, even though it may only concern and require a tiny amount of people's knowledge and agreement.

2 guys could have done that over a couple of weeks you wouldnt need hundreds, a couple of special forces guys could easy go along internal channels in such a vast building without ever being noticed!

alastair

BlackBlade wrote: »

2 guys could have done that over a couple of weeks you wouldnt need hundreds, a couple of special forces guys could easy go along internal channels in such a vast building without ever being noticed!

Just the two lads then. And the NIST experts of course. Oh and the fire department, and whoever co-ordinated the planes, etc etc. The two lads must have been busy bring those tonnes of thermite up though the air conditioning channels on all those floors.

Killinator

BlackBlade wrote: »

2 guys could have done that over a couple of weeks you wouldnt need hundreds, a couple of special forces guys could easy go along internal channels in such a vast building without ever being noticed!

I for one would love to see some sort of blueprint/diagram which show these internal channels,
Especially on the higher floors what with the office space, elevators and stairs,
Don't the US Special Forces generally sign up to protect America

gbee

alastair wrote: »

The only ignorance at play here is to commit to an article of faith in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary..

I'll field that one: disclosure: I'm an atheist. I think anybody who believes in a God is mentally ill.

Bush said he talks to God. Far too many wars are blamed on God, if God did not exist the Muslims would not either, we think the Jihad is a backward 2,000 year old religion, yet Bush calls for a 21st Century crusade and those that question that are, in your word "only ignorant" ?

I'd suggest a sleeping pill might make a medical excuse.

alastair

gbee wrote: »

I'll field that one: disclosure: I'm an atheist. I think anybody who believes in a God is mentally ill.

Bush said he talks to God. Far too many wars are blamed on God, if God did not exist the Muslims would not either, we think the Jihad is a backward 2,000 year old religion, yet Bush calls for a 21st Century crusade and those that question that are, in your word "only ignorant" ?

I'd suggest a sleeping pill might make a medical excuse.

You seem to miss the point entirely. There's no binary choice between Bush or conspiracy loons required of anyone. Calling the ignorance of these wtc theories for what ithey are is simply a case of weighing up the evidence and logic at play.