4 of 7
4
9/11 Conspiracy Theories are bullshit.
Posted: 11 August 2007 04:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  142
Joined  2007-06-17

Why did the buildings collapse in less than 12 seconds?

They didn’t.

Video #1: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6907229410188116774&q=wtc+collapse&total=1684&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=15

I’m won’t talk about mass, velocity, energy, and temperatures.  I’ll just note that the collapse starts 16 seconds into the video, is still going at 26 seconds in (when something dropped from the roof would hit the ground), and at 28 seconds (when you say the collapse was complete), and keeps going until well into the 40’s.  You don’t need physics, just a little arithmetic.  46 seconds, when it is basically fallen down, minus 16 seconds, when it starts to collapse, is not 12 seconds, it is 30 seconds.

Video #2: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2278132021632746245&q=wtc+1+collapse&total=345&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=41

The tower is already collapsing as the video begins.  The first debris is hitting the ground the ground just after 12 seconds, and the buildings are quite obviously not done collapsing at that point.

Video #3: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8564772103237441151&q=wtc+1+collapse&total=345&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Starts to collapse at 2 seconds, last parts still falling when the video cuts off at 40 seconds.  40 seconds minus 2 seconds is not 12 seconds.  The last part of the core falls at 31 seconds into the collapse.

Video #4: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1235824755904060590&q=wtc+1+collapse&total=345&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

Collapse begins at 16 seconds, continues until after 50 seconds, with the core seen falling at 48 seconds, corresponding exactly with #2.

Video #5: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2884238069634280606&q=wtc+1+collapse&total=345&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=70

This video shows the central core still standing most clearly.  The tallest part of it is about 60 stories up.

Not even the external walls collapsed in 12 seconds in any video.

Why did WTC7 collapse if it wasn’t hit by a plane?

Look at video #3 in particular.  You will notice WTC 7 on the left.  You will also notice multi-ton pieces of steel raining on it.  That tends to interfere with the structural integrity of a building.

Video #6: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7097962197208194239&q=wtc+1+collapse&total=345&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=55

At about 14 seconds in you will see a very large piece of the north tower fall into the front of WTC 7.

Video #7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51FIPMlrFf4

You will see a large amount of smoke coming from most of the south side of the building, which is also extensively damaged.

In short: WTC7 fell down because a 110 story building fell on it, and it caught fire, lost structural integrity, and failed.

A succinct video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwdD6ERutEI&eurl=http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

All the common claims about this building prove to be nonsense.  It was not the only other building to collapse.  It did not suffer only minor damage.  It did not collapse in 6 seconds, or fall straight down “into its own footprint”.  “Pull it” is not a synonym for imploding a building anywhere on the planet.  So on and so forth.  It fell down because of a combination of structural damage, and further weakening due to fire.

(Why is it that nobody seems to wonder why the Mariott hotel, which had been 22 stories tall, all but disappeared when the tower fell on it?)

So why can’t we be told the tons of steel and concrete on every floor and basement level?

Just go get the building specs from somewhere.  As I recall the towers had about 96,000,000 kg of structural steel each.  Divide by the number of floors, including the basement levels, and you get something like 400 tons per floor, but heavier at the bottom than at the top, and heavier on the floors with beams instead of trusses.

There were also hundreds of tons of concrete per floor.

What this has to do with anything I don’t know.

The fact that the structural engineers won’t specify the tons of steel on the floors where the planes hit is pretty damn peculiar.

Who asked them to do this, and what was their answer?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2007 05:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2374
Joined  2007-07-05

What this has to do with anything I don’t know.

I guess there isn’t much to say to someone that doesn’t really get the basic physics.

Here is a place to start:

http://www.myphysicslab.com/collision.html

Now the WTC wasn’t really a rigid body.  It bent in the wind.  The NIST report said the south tower oscillated for four minutes after being hit by the plane.  The distribution of mass and type of mass would affect that oscillation.  The steel provides the springiness while the concrete would just be inertial mass.  Of course, doesn’t the quantity of steel have something to do with how long the supposed raging inferno would take to weaken the structure to start the collapse?  Doesn’t it take longer to cook a 20 lb turkey than to cook a 10 lb turkey?  The south tower collapsed 56 minutes after being hit.  Why should we need to ask the experts how much steel was on the floors where the planes hit?

But if people can believe the ridiculous one shouldn’t expect them to know what questions to ask.

NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chap_1-8.pdf on page 328 says”

“At 9:58:59 a.m. WTC 2 began to collapse, and roughly ten seconds later debris reached the ground.”

I have the NIST reports burned to DVD.  I am not searching for any more examples.

psik

[ Edited: 11 August 2007 05:45 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2007 06:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  142
Joined  2007-06-17

I guess there isn’t much to say to someone that doesn’t really get the basic physics.

Don’t I know it.

What is your point?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 August 2007 06:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2007-08-14

Perhaps the Moslems had thermate smuggled on the planes with themselves inside their flip-flops?

And Bin Laden had the JiF Peanut Butter trucks in the basement loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads?

This is the only logical conclusion I can come up with after listening to that one guy . . . What’s his name? He wrote The Resistance Manifesto . . . A book on how to marry an ugly Moslem woman and be happy for the rest of your life . . .

Anyway . . . Back to the point.

I have clearly demonstrated that such conspiracies aren’t bullshit. After all . . . This does tie into the end result thing of why 9/11 happened: it was orchestrated by Al Sharpton to lead to a rapid succession of events that would lead to the firing of Don Imus.

Your Welcome,

Delwyn (the “Pretty and White”)

 Signature 

“I’ll just start a terrible, malicious rumor about myself that may or may not be true. That way I said it before you did, you being I, of course . . .” - Exceprt from Me to Me, Conversations With Myself (by me)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 August 2007 03:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2007-08-17

On this September 11th, 2007, there is more awareness of the corruption and conspiracy of the US Gov than ever before.

The US Gov knows we know. The US Gov is scared. They should be.

How long will we remain silent?

On midnight, this September 11th, 2007, I urge every defender of American rights to stand in your doorway, on your balcony, at your window, on your car, in the street, and be heard!

I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

Me and my family will be walking around our neighborhood, peacefully but loudly protesting the US Gov lies.

I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

We have already called the local public access station and are promoting this event.

I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

It is time for the American people to make a conscious, concerted, daily effort to tell the government loud and clear,

I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

Midnight, September 11th, 2007. STAND AND BE HEARD. MAKE SOME NOISE. LET OUR DECISION TO NOT FALL VICTIM TO LIES BE KNOWN!

I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!
I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!
I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

MIDNIGHT - SEPTEMBER 11TH - 2007.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 September 2007 08:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2007-09-11

I think Atheists deny the truth - the government was directly involved in 9/11 because it benefits their position if they can blame it on religion.  People like Mike S & Richard Dawkins along with many others have publicly stated within the first year 9/11 was a direct result of religion.  If this is true it is a great blow to religion, a very powerful statement against the horror and evils of religion.  However, it can be established religion offers the modern world little benefit without linking 9/11 to religion to a “Jihad”(terrorist actions motivated by religion). Truthfully, I do wish religion instead of the government was the cause.  Truthfully I do not want to accept the fact that my government is able to commit such vile and evil acts against myself, family and friends.  Truthfully I want to think I live in one of the best countries in the world.  However, what I want to believe does not impact, in any way, the truth.  A lie repeated does not mean it will ever be true.  Because believing something makes me feel safe does not make it any more logical. I fully understand the position of confused atheists who are comforted by the idea their government protects them, loves them and has their best interest in mind(like a god).  I do not accept their position that 9/11 was some sort of a jihad.  I realize many are publicly committed to this idea and backing down might somehow discredit their other writings or position of authority.

Even if 96% of Loose Change or general conspiracy theories are bullshit this means 4%  is true which is entirely too much.  Our government for far too long has been too dishonest and murdered too many innocent people.  The time for change it today.

[ Edited: 11 September 2007 08:58 PM by Chaos9/11 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 September 2007 09:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  895
Joined  2007-05-09

Even if 96% of Loose Change or general conspiracy theories are bullshit this means 4% is true which is entirely too much.

Depends on what 4% they have correct.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2007 11:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  53
Joined  2007-05-20

I think Atheists deny the truth - the government was directly involved in 9/11 because it benefits their position if they can blame it on religion.


Atheists deny lies.  You are more likely to see an atheist denying 9/11 conspiracies because they actually use their critical thinking skills to see through unproven “facts” and circumstantial “evidence”, and they use science instead of web videos produced by teenagers who have NO credibility or expertise on the subject matter.

People like Mike S & Richard Dawkins along with many others have publicly stated within the first year 9/11 was a direct result of religion.

 
Muslims terrorists themselves have admitted several times to the crimes of 9/11.  You do realize that they have actual terrorist camps, where they train young muslims in jihad against the west, don’t you???  To prove my point, they attacked WTC BEFORE 9/11, and they have attacked our allies with terrorist activities AFTER 9/11.  Nobody invented muslim extremism.  Somebody invented this conspiracy theory, and you should feel ashamed to have fallen for it.

If this is true it is a great blow to religion, a very powerful statement against the horror and evils of religion.  However, it can be established religion offers the modern world little benefit without linking 9/11 to religion to a “Jihad”(terrorist actions motivated by religion).

Little benefit?  I happen to know that the Lutherans offer a variety of charities, and that they were one of many religious organizations that helped Katrina victims.  I don’t remember any atheist organizations helping when help was needed.  And yes, I’m an atheist.

Truthfully, I do wish religion instead of the government was the cause.  Truthfully I do not want to accept the fact that my government is able to commit such vile and evil acts against myself, family and friends.  Truthfully I want to think I live in one of the best countries in the world.  However, what I want to believe does not impact, in any way, the truth.  A lie repeated does not mean it will ever be true.

 
Truthfully, religion WAS the cause of 9/11.  Truthfully, your government isn’t able to commit such vile acts against THEIR OWN DEFENSE HEADQUARTERS and three skyscrapers filled with innocent victims.  Truthfully, you should move to North Korea, Sudan, or Afghanistan, and then come home and apologize.  A lie repeated on web documentaries and conspiracy sites DOES NOT MEAN IT WILL EVER BE TRUE.  I agree.

Because believing something makes me feel safe does not make it any more logical.

Try believing in science and reasoning, and accepting the explanations from people that are experts on the subject.  If NIST, the bi-partisan 9/11 commission, and the experts at Popular Mechanics are part of the conspiracy, then you have a pretty unwieldy conspiracy.  Now add on all those other organizations- CIA, NORAD, executive branch, airline industry, etc… and you have are beginning to cut yourself with ockham’s razor.

I fully understand the position of confused atheists who are comforted by the idea their government protects them, loves them and has their best interest in mind(like a god). 

False dichotomy.  We can be unhappy with our government, and still prove that your conspiracy against the government is fallacious and based on conjecture and a lack of evidence.

I do not accept their position that 9/11 was some sort of a jihad.  I realize many are publicly committed to this idea and backing down might somehow discredit their other writings or position of authority.

You have three planes with muslim extremists, a leader of jihad who has admitted to it, and an ever-expanding organization of angry muslims declaring jihad on the western nations.  What more do you want?  A bomb up your ass?  To experience the thrill of a suicide bomber exploding himself on your bus???

Even if 96% of Loose Change or general conspiracy theories are bullshit this means 4% is true which is entirely too much.  Our government for far too long has been too dishonest and murdered too many innocent people. 

100% of that “documentary” is untrue. 
Dylan Avery — “We made that film essentially as a bunch of kids. That’s the reality of the situation; we were a bunch of kids tackling a subject far beyond the scope of any one documentary. I would be the first to admit that our film definitely contained errors, it still does contain some dubious claims, and it does come to some conclusions that are not 100% backed up by the facts….

The time for change it today.

The time to watch the “Screw Loose Change” rebuttal is today.  http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2007 04:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2374
Joined  2007-07-05

That’s it!

The atheists did it to create religious turmoil and generate revulsion for religion.

Now it makes sense.

ROFL

http://www.fknnewz.com/911facts.html

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2007 08:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  245
Joined  2007-07-27

I believe there was a conspiracy alright but by the extremist Muslim who crashed planes into the buildings and I do not believe that our own government would do such a thing because had they,they would have eventually been found out as there are government watch groups within the government its self and no one knows who the watch groups are but know they exist.

The buildings fell because of religion because the US defends Israel, that is why and until we no longer support Israel will these kind of things stop, but neither will happen so it is something we are going to have to accept like it or not.

 Signature 

In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holely Goat I bring the truth

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 September 2007 11:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 56 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2374
Joined  2007-07-05

9/11 is kind of sickening because it has dragged on for so long.

http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Bill_Maher_Thinks_911_Truthers_should_0915.html

but:

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=85858&postcount=10

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 September 2007 06:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 57 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  245
Joined  2007-07-27

So what is this guy trying to say (ask) as I don’t get it? I have heard people say the moon landing never happened, that 6,000,000 Jews were never slaughtered by the Nazi, that the earth is hollow, that there is a cover up of the UFO’s and that the US government imploded the towers.

I came from a federal family whereas most of my family and many of my relatives worked for the federal government and although there are lots of corruption in the federal government all of the conspiracies they are credited to have done I just have one question to ask the accusers? Where is your proof?

Bring me some proof, some hard evidence and maybe I’ll start to believe you, but until then it is just hearsay.

Anyone can accuse the government of anything but unless you sat in on a “secret” meeting or held a top secret document or viewed a written command your bases are not very creditable if you expect some one to believe you on your word you will have to do a lot more than come up with theories of your own.

 Signature 

In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holely Goat I bring the truth

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 September 2007 11:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 58 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2374
Joined  2007-07-05
Holely Goat - 16 September 2007 06:28 PM

So what is this guy trying to say (ask) as I don’t get it?

Anyone can accuse the government of anything but unless you sat in on a “secret” meeting ... your bases are not very creditable if you expect some one to believe you on your word you will have to do a lot more than come up with theories of your own.

Who, Bill Maher?  He is saying the planes brought the buildings down and the people he is calling conspiracy theorists need psychiatric help.

But neither the government nor Arabs can change the laws of physics.  So I think it is obvious that you need to know the quantity of steel and concrete on each level to analyze the impact.  I have built a model and am editing the video now.  But it should have been easy for “experts” to get that information from the original documentation from the 60’s.  When I started reading the NIST reports I didn’t know what dead loads and live loads were.

http://911research.wtc7.net/materials/contrib/911_physics_v9a.htm

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 September 2007 12:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 59 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  53
Joined  2007-05-20

http://www.fknnewz.com/911facts.html

This link is the best example I can find anywhere of what an ad hominem argument sounds like.  All vitriol- no substance.  It is an insult to the people who actually died on the real planes that actually hit their actual targets to turn their tragedy into a Max Headroom Parade of Insults.

The argument regarding tons of concrete is an argument from incredulity.  Just because you can’t comprehend how a building with concrete could collapse, doesn’t mean that it can’t collapse.  Just because you can’t find the answer to how many tons of concrete were in the building, doesn’t mean that the answer isn’t available or that it matters.

Clearly, the building fell, whether there was x amount of concrete or not.  If you want to try to prove that thermite was responsible, you should prove it.  Show us that the sulfur “found” in the rubble is uncommon and unexpected.  You should also explain how much thermite would have to have been placed, and why the conspiracy demolishers would choose such a burdensome bomb.  You would also have to show how it could possibly create the “molten steel” that was “found” at ground zero.  If jet fuel didn’t cause the “molten steel”, then are you suggesting thermite did?  What ARE you suggesting?

This doesn’t sound so much like a conspiracy theory.  It’s starting to sound like a conspiracy bad guess.  And if I argued a straw man, you’ll have to forgive me.  The truthers are starting to blur into a sea of thermite, concrete, and cruise missiles.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 September 2007 08:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 60 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2374
Joined  2007-07-05
ticktock - 17 September 2007 12:29 AM

http://www.fknnewz.com/911facts.html

This link is the best example I can find anywhere of what an ad hominem argument sounds like.  All vitriol- no substance.  It is an insult to the people who actually died on the real planes that actually hit their actual targets to turn their tragedy into a Max Headroom Parade of Insults..

Is the NIST report what you call substance?

It’s 11,305 pages.  It takes up 1.03 gigabytes on a CD.

It does not specify the quantity of concrete in the World Trade Center.  How could it fail to do that for a building designed in the 1960’s?  Why don’t we have a table specifying the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every floor of the WTC after all of these years? 

How could a plane this HUGE

nt_frame3.jpg

LEVEL that TINY building in less than 2 hours

and yet

The Hiroshima Memorial

tour_38.jpg

was not leveled by an Atomic Bomb detonation.

http://www.galenfrysinger.com/abomb_dome_hiroshima.htm

The laws of physics don’t give a damn about vitriol or any other emotional bullsh!t.  Too many people can’t look at the videos from 9/11 and figure out that the plane couldn’t possibly have released that much energy that fast. 

This has less vitriol but if people can’t figure out the obvious then that should be more insulting to the dead than any vitriol promoting what actually happened.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8129564295534231536

You need to separate content from delivery and analyze them separately.  Different delivery is effective with different audiences but all that really matters is content.  The people in the media assume the audience is stupid.  Unfortunately that is often the case.  So we live in a world of who can do the best job of manipulating the stupid.

If there were 900 tons of steel on the 79th, 80th and 81st floors of the south tower how could it weaken in 56 minutes?  Of course we can’t address that question because no one ever tells us how much steel was there.  If you respect the dead so much why don’t you demand that information?

psik

PS - Of course since the building that became the Hiroshima Memorial was completed in 1915 it could not have been designed to withstand an A-bomb.  Who knew about A-bombs in 1915?

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 7
4