9/11 Conspiracy Thread

[Grand Vol]

Again, that is where you are wrong. I used to laugh at 9/11 Truthers as much as anyone else did until about 4 years ago.

Well, you joined the ranks of being laughed at.

Well done, sir. Bravo.

 

[rjd970]

But wait... you still miss my 2 major points regarding the nature of the failure.

1. It was symmetrical in nature. Instead of the building failing or favoring one side or the other, all 3 buildings failed in the normal direction. What are the odds that 3 buildings damaged asymetrically and in different manners (allegedly WTC 7 was damaged also) falling straight down in the normal direction?

2. The speed of the collapse. You get no argument from me that metal is weakened with heat, but I would think that after you mover further away from the source of heat, the structural integrity of the steel would gradually improve. With that being that case, lets assume that the steel near the source did weaken and fail... you should have had a series of inelastic collisions that may have very easily caused the weight of floor above to collapse on to the weakened floor below. But at a point, as you move further away from the source, these inelastic collisions of floors on top of floors would have run into gradually stronger floors on the lower levels.

What I am suggesting is that (worst case scenario) we should have seen 2 towers failing asymmetrically with probably everything within 15-20 floors of the impact points possibly falling to the ground on the side of the collision or one side or the other. Any floors that would have collapsed on each other would have eventually reached stronger/less weakened floors and eventually stopped at some point. Instead of a total collapse, we should have seen two 70-80 floor structures left standing with jagged/asymmetrical damage left behind from the other floors falling away to the street.

Of course even then, there are some other questions:

1. How much time does it really take to weaken steel to failure? Is 90 mins a reasonable amount of time when we have examples of other buildings burning for as long as 24 hours without heat fatigue/failure?

2. Still no reasonable explanation for WTC 7.

Keep repeating that....

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

That is more than "reasonable". It is actually FACT.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Peyton actually won the Hypeman.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

But you did mention it. No?

Well obviously I mentioned it because I showed you the quote, but again, I wasn't using melted steel as the foundation of my argument. Big difference between mentioning something and using it to prove or disprove something.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

One silly question about that video...

Why are the rolling it out onto the floor?

Because the head of the bar most likely missed the guide that would lead it to the next mill stand. That's what's referred to in the steel industry as a cobble.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Deflection.

You just gave an answer of "why don't you ask your cat in Oklahoma why the fox stole the chicken eggs in Georgia."

No, if I can use you sarcastic analogy, it is more tantamount to "why don't you ask the fox that stole the chicken eggs".

I am asking you to go directly to the ones directly responsible. How that can be called a deflection is beyond me, but anyways...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Well, you joined the ranks of being laughed at.

Well done, sir. Bravo.

Like I continue to tell you, get your laughs in right now.

As time goes on and the truth comes out, you know I haven't missed an opportunity to say "I told you so" on here.

 

[Grand Vol]

As time goes on and as we see more people coming out fighting for the information about 9/11 to not be released, I don't see how you can say it is a wild conspiracy theory at this point. At the very least, you should have doubts about the entire narrative.

Do you honestly think in those 26 pages there will be some information that indicated a controlled detonation in any of the WTC buildings?

Do you honestly think crap like that gets written down?

Let me put this another way...

Say the JFK assassination had multiple shooters (a far more plausible conspiracy theory than 9/11) and said shooters were on the grassy knoll and in another building. Said shooters killed our President and escaped. What kind of life expectancy do you think they'd have? Measured in hours perhaps? And do you think stuff like their identities, locations, escape and evasion plans, weapons used, etc would be written down?

Which hole in rural Texas do you think the bodies were dumped in and how far out into the Gulf do you think the rifles were dropped over the side of a boat?

Even giving your conspiracy theories credence for the sake of argument, do you honestly think stuff like that would be written down? Do you honestly believe the US Government to be that incompetent (or competent) to allow itself to be implicated in the long run by making sure they properly documented the largest terror attack in history?

You're chasing an invisible rabbit.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

But wait... you still miss my 2 major points regarding the nature of the failure.

1. It was symmetrical in nature. Instead of the building failing or favoring one side or the other, all 3 buildings failed in the normal direction. What are the odds that 3 buildings damaged asymetrically and in different manners (allegedly WTC 7 was damaged also) falling straight down in the normal direction?

2. The speed of the collapse. You get no argument from me that metal is weakened with heat, but I would think that after you mover further away from the source of heat, the structural integrity of the steel would gradually improve. With that being that case, lets assume that the steel near the source did weaken and fail... you should have had a series of inelastic collisions that may have very easily caused the weight of floor above to collapse on to the weakened floor below. But at a point, as you move further away from the source, these inelastic collisions of floors on top of floors would have run into gradually stronger floors on the lower levels.

What I am suggesting is that (worst case scenario) we should have seen 2 towers failing asymmetrically with probably everything within 15-20 floors of the impact points possibly falling to the ground on the side of the collision or one side or the other. Any floors that would have collapsed on each other would have eventually reached stronger/less weakened floors and eventually stopped at some point. Instead of a total collapse, we should have seen two 70-80 floor structures left standing with jagged/asymmetrical damage left behind from the other floors falling away to the street.

Of course even then, there are some other questions:

1. How much time does it really take to weaken steel to failure? Is 90 mins a reasonable amount of time when we have examples of other buildings burning for as long as 24 hours without heat fatigue/failure?

2. Still no reasonable explanation for WTC 7.

Look at how the WTC was built. The outer steel grid system was heavily relied upon for the overall strength of the structure. If one floor weakens, the rest most likely will collapse on top of it and you have a pancake effect.

 

[Grand Vol]

Because the head of the bar most likely missed the guide that would lead it to the next mill stand. That's what's referred to in the steel industry as a cobble.

Just funny they are standing there watching it roll out onto the floor.

I'd assume that process takes a minute or two to stop?

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

This is a picture of the WTC 7 damage.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

Just funny they are standing there watching it roll out onto the floor.

I'd assume that process takes a minute or two to stop?

Yeah, it's best to let it roll out. Easier to clean up.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Do you honestly think in those 26 pages there will be some information that indicated a controlled detonation in any of the WTC buildings?

Do you honestly think crap like that gets written down?

Let me put this another way...

Say the JFK assassination had multiple shooters (a far more plausible conspiracy theory than 9/11) and said shooters were on the grassy knoll and in another building. Said shooters killed our President and escaped. What kind of life expectancy do you think they'd have? Measured in hours perhaps? And do you think stuff like their identities, locations, escape and evasion plans, weapons used, etc would be written down?

Which hole in rural Texas do you think the bodies were dumped in and how far out into the Gulf do you think the rifles were dropped over the side of a boat?

Even giving your conspiracy theories credence for the sake of argument, do you honestly think stuff like that would be written down? Do you honestly believe the US Government to be that incompetent (or competent) to allow itself to be implicated in the long run by making sure they properly documented the largest terror attack in history?

You're chasing an invisible rabbit.

This is exactly the same logic that can apply to those that think a friendly fire missile shot down TWA 800. If there had been a submarine sinking with all hands lost soon after that incident, I would buy it. Anything short of killing all those involved.... naaaaah. Now when Cankles is in power, some of these things become more plausible, because there is no doubt in my mind that she will not hesitate to kill people that stand in her way. The list is too long for it to be 100% fabrication. She has been involved in somethingillicit at some point.

 

[Grand Vol]

No, if I can use you sarcastic analogy, it is more tantamount to "why don't you ask the fox that stole the chicken eggs".

I am asking you to go directly to the ones directly responsible. How that can be called a deflection is beyond me, but anyways...

Deflection. Meaning you won't answer the simple question of why they would bring them straight down instead of toppling them to cause more damage.

Which one causes more damage? Which one causes more hate? Which one ties up the loose ends of a possible controlled demolition?

You truly believe someone would leave such clues lying around to be followed up on? The government might be incompetent from time to time, but not that stupid.

 

[Grand Vol]

Yeah, it's best to let it roll out. Easier to clean up.

I'm getting a lesson in steel rolling this morning. Thanks.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

That is more than "reasonable". It is actually FACT.

1. If it suffered cracks and kinks for over 8-9 hours, then that suggests that it would have failed in that manner. Meaning that it would have failed along cracks or kinks... and not necessarily all at one time/simultaneously.
2. The building did not fall in the manner that they described in this report. Hove you seen the video of WTC 7's demolition?

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

Now, here is a picture showing all three buildings. Take note of how close to the north tower building 7 was.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Do you honestly think in those 26 pages there will be some information that indicated a controlled detonation in any of the WTC buildings?

Most likely not. It would probably give you information on who actually funded and orchestrated the attacks.

Once you know that, you will be able to direct your questions to them and get all the answers you want.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Now, here is a picture showing all three buildings. Take note of how close to the north tower building 7 was.

You know that those are the boxes the Empire State and Chrysler buildings came in.

 

[Grand Vol]

Most likely not. It would probably give you information on who actually funded and orchestrated the attacks.

Once you know that, you will be able to direct your questions to them and get all the answers you want.

So you are saying the Saudis planted explosives in those buildings?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Look at how the WTC was built. The outer steel grid system was heavily relied upon for the overall strength of the structure. If one floor weakens, the rest most likely will collapse on top of it and you have a pancake effect.

In time, this "pancake effect" will go down in history right along side the "magic bullet theory" in the Warren Commission.

Look, even with what you are suggesting about the construction of the building, I now find it hard to believe that it would have been a total failure of the entire structure and it should not have been symmetrical in nature.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

I'm getting a lesson in steel rolling this morning. Thanks.

A good mill pulpit operator will let it run out. A rookie or someone who panics will shut the entire mill down and the mill operators (guys on the floor) will have to most likely remove guides and reset the entire mill. Leading to much consternation on the part of the mill operators looking up at the jack wagon in the pulpit.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

This is a picture of the WTC 7 damage.

More asymmetrical damage... but no where near the scale of the Twin Towers or (alleged) source of heat to weaken the structure.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

In time, this "pancake effect" will go down in history right along side the "magic bullet theory" in the Warren Commission.

Look, even with what you are suggesting about the construction of the building, I now find it hard to believe that it would have been a total failure of the entire structure and it should not have been symmetrical in nature.

Lol considering the warren commission and Allen Spector didn't take into account the inboard position of the jump seats in the Lincoln. I don't think that report holds much water.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Deflection. Meaning you won't answer the simple question of why they would bring them straight down instead of toppling them to cause more damage.

How is that a simple question... asking me to read what is in the conspirator's minds and what their motives are?

Deflection? Really, Grand?