Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252338 Jan 27, 2013
Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you suggesting that the failure of 5/8" bolts is what caused the disintegration of the Towers? What about all the evidence of extremely high temperatures at Ground Zero? Iron- and silicate-rich microspheres as documented in the USGS dust atlases and in the RJ Lee Report? The "unusual" high-temperature corrosion of steel members as documented in the FEMA Report Appendix C? Reports by crews working the site? Thermal imaging?
Plane fuel and updrafts cause high temperatures. Go to you-tube and observe how the towers fall. If you find the right footage, you will see the upper part tilt into the hole cut by the aircraft just as a tree falls. This huge chunk weighing many thousands of tons then pounds the rest of the building fracturing the horizontal supports held together with 5/8" bolts. Next observe the debris after the collapse. Parts of the upper towers remains in tack while another huge chunk cuts through the center of WTC7. Observe the fact that around 1,400 vehicles are burned on the ground proving the flames from the upper part of the buildings were very hot and spread out setting numerous fires at street level.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252339 Jan 27, 2013
Bill wrote:
<quoted text>

Question:"Any number of measurements using a variety of methods indicate the northwest corner of WTC 7 fell with an acceleration within a few percent of the acceleration of gravity. Yet your report contradicts this, claiming 40 percent slower than free fall, based on a single data point."
False. The building took over 24 seconds to descend. This is easy to determine using You-tube video. You can watch the counter counting precisely from the moment the penthouse structure moves.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252340 Jan 27, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Plane fuel and updrafts cause high temperatures. Go to you-tube and observe how the towers fall.
You are so clueless...
The hot heat blast that came with the impact fireball was short lived. It wasn't there long enough to heat the steel. Have you ever heard of a heat sink.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_sink
.
Where's the fire...

.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/phot...
.
Where's the 1000's of degree heat?
http://investigate911.org/Woman-in-WTC-Tower-...
.
Serious fires raged through WTC 5 for hours. Despite the massive structural damage shown by the holes, and fires far more severe than those in WTC 1, 2, and 7, WTC 5 did not collapse. FEMA's report has a number of photographs of Building 5 wreckage, and concludes that fires caused the collapse of portions of this building, without making a convincing case.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc5.h...
.
Listen to what these people are saying. They are all nuts and you are not you are saying eh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252341 Jan 27, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
False. The building took over 24 seconds to descend. This is easy to determine using You-tube video. You can watch the counter counting precisely from the moment the penthouse structure moves.
"The building took over 24 seconds to descend"
Source please.

WTC 7 Falls in under 7 seconds. The rate of free fall for the 47 story building is 6.8 seconds.

.
WTC 7 compared to a demo'd bldg.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252342 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so clueless...
The hot heat blast that came with the impact fireball was short lived. It wasn't there long enough to heat the steel. Have you ever heard of a heat sink.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_sink
.
Where's the fire...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =lQFxd-wMT90XX
.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/phot...
.
Where's the 1000's of degree heat?
http://investigate911.org/Woman-in-WTC-Tower-...
.
Serious fires raged through WTC 5 for hours. Despite the massive structural damage shown by the holes, and fires far more severe than those in WTC 1, 2, and 7, WTC 5 did not collapse. FEMA's report has a number of photographs of Building 5 wreckage, and concludes that fires caused the collapse of portions of this building, without making a convincing case.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc5.h...
.
Listen to what these people are saying. They are all nuts and you are not you are saying eh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
The evidence proves your theories and links to be false.

1. The fires burned even after the towers fell and set fires to 1,400 vehicles on the street. Why are structural members coated if building fires are low temperature and short lived? False on all counts.

2. Fires were intense in spots around the elevator shafts away from the woman. Videos provide evidence of hundreds of people leaping to their death rather than being burned to death. Your theory about the fire is false.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252343 Jan 27, 2013
There is no way you could have read those links in and posted a reply in under 3 minutes, to call them false, and without pointing out the falsehoods you claim.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-oXsCSwsq8v...
.
"1. The fires burned even after the towers fell and set fires to 1,400 vehicles on the street. Why are structural members coated if building fires are low temperature and short lived?"
I/w..
And what was it that burned for months in 5 hot spots? Are you saying all the office materials gathered together in these spots?
And show me where jet fuel went all the way down an elevator shaft and blew the lobby up?
Most of it burned up in the fire ball....outside
.
You just keep believing the govt.'s official stupidity report.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252345 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
"The building took over 24 seconds to descend"
Source please.
WTC 7 Falls in under 7 seconds. The rate of free fall for the 47 story building is 6.8 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Ml_n5gJgQ_UXX
.
WTC 7 compared to a demo'd bldg.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
You are misinformed as usual. If you look at the penthouse structure and watch your counter, you will see that the building fall in around 24 seconds. Why do you have to promote false propaganda?
alan

Kansas City, MO

#252346 Jan 27, 2013
Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
The kindest thing we can say about NIST's lead investigators is that John Gross and Shyam Sunder are "idiots," because the other possibility is that they are accessories to mass-murder, engaging in ham-fisted cover-up and obstruction.
Technology is only as good as the info put into it and human error is the factor that will limit its effectiveness. Humans and technology will collide, its already happening. Big brother is watching, listening. When will it end? Never, its to late to stop its progression. Humans want to live forever.Imagine some humans you know living forever,,,I would clock out of life....game over. Some humans want to live forever and really don't have a clue why. Thank goodness that humans will never live forever. I know science thinks is possible. The only things that will last forever are the earth and the sky....humans have a shelf life.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252347 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
There is no way you could have read those links in and posted a reply in under 3 minutes, to call them false, and without pointing out the falsehoods you claim.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-oXsCSwsq8v...
.
"1. The fires burned even after the towers fell and set fires to 1,400 vehicles on the street. Why are structural members coated if building fires are low temperature and short lived?"
I/w..
And what was it that burned for months in 5 hot spots? Are you saying all the office materials gathered together in these spots?
And show me where jet fuel went all the way down an elevator shaft and blew the lobby up?
Most of it burned up in the fire ball....outside
.
You just keep believing the govt.'s official stupidity report.
The facts I presented are readily verifiable from many independent sources. Hot spots are meaningless other than the fact that the buildings got very hot where the planes crashed. The flames went down the elevator shafts as well as hot debris. As usual, you are grasping at straws.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252348 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
There is no way you could have read those links in and posted a reply in under 3 minutes, to call them false, and without pointing out the falsehoods you claim.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-oXsCSwsq8v...
.
"1. The fires burned even after the towers fell and set fires to 1,400 vehicles on the street. Why are structural members coated if building fires are low temperature and short lived?"
I/w..
And what was it that burned for months in 5 hot spots? Are you saying all the office materials gathered together in these spots?
And show me where jet fuel went all the way down an elevator shaft and blew the lobby up?
Most of it burned up in the fire ball....outside
.
You just keep believing the govt.'s official stupidity report.
Please explain how 1,400 vehicles burned at street level.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252349 Jan 27, 2013
And those office fires that were burning were snuffed out during the collapse. Unless you are saying your pancake theory let them stay protected from going out

.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
.
Now please explain how burning plastic, wood and fabric stayed burning during those collapses.....all the way to the ground.
What ever was burning in the sub-levels for months later was not office materials, Unless you are saying all that burning material just went into the basement from the impact floors. Now if you could explain that, please.
And if the jet fuel went into the elevator shafts, how did anything burn on all of the other floors beneath and above the impact zone.......that were untouched by fire?
Explain that also, please.

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#252350 Jan 27, 2013
WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.

In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?

In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_... ), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.

To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.

The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.p... ) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-9%... ).

The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:
•Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
•Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
•Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity


This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252351 Jan 27, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
You are misinformed as usual. If you look at the penthouse structure and watch your counter, you will see that the building fall in around 24 seconds. Why do you have to promote false propaganda?
Show me your 24 second proof. If you are going to make claims, then you have to show where you acquired that info.
A mere verbal opinion is just not enough.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252352 Jan 27, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain how 1,400 vehicles burned at street level.
You tell me.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252353 Jan 27, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
The facts I presented are readily verifiable from many independent sources. Hot spots are meaningless other than the fact that the buildings got very hot where the planes crashed. The flames went down the elevator shafts as well as hot debris. As usual, you are grasping at straws.
"The facts I presented are readily verifiable from many independent sources."
I/w..
But you never post them with your replies. Now why is that? Oh we are just suppose to take your word for it eh?
.
Y/w..
Hot spots are meaningless other than the fact that the buildings got very hot where the planes crashed. The flames went down the elevator shafts as well as hot debris.
.
No they are not meaningless. What was burning for months later in those hot spots? And how long did those flames burn in the elevator shafts a few minutes maybe?

.
Les Robertson Confirms Molten Metal in WTC Basement
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Office fires made metal molten eh?
.
9/11/01: First Time In History Skyscrapers Collapse Due To Fire
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
.
I'd say you are the straw man grasping at straws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252354 Jan 27, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
WTC 7's collapse,
To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video.
You just keep preaching your govie garbage b/s, mr well paid shill.
https://www.google.com/search...
.
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#252355 Jan 27, 2013
Start answering the q's I presented, instead of giving me a bunch of...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BvyQ0ZDQDqU/TtBZGX7...
Bill

Austin, TX

#252356 Jan 27, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse....

etc.
Was that supposed to clarify anything?

First of all, NIST's model doesn't behave like the building that we can all see in the videos. Even if we took the computer cartoons to represent only the (soft?) interior of the building (the part that we can't see directly, conveniently, and so can only theorize about), there are many points in the visualizations where the interior structure has twisted beyond the visible envelope, the allegedly rigid "outer shell" of the building, as you put it. A competent, honest investigator might call that a violation of boundary conditions that renders the computer model invalid. There are many other reason to reject the computer modeling as invalid (for example, the fact that active fires in the model don't coincide with reality, or that the model's structural specifications don't coincide with reality...).

And you have failed to address the fact that the visible exterior itself should be providing structural resistance to upper perimeter and roof-line. Nevertheless, we see the roof-line suddenly and symmetrically dropping at free-fall acceleration. How is that possible, unless something caused the simultaneous failure of all perimeter columns (and any lingering interior attachemnts) in a building with a very large footprint?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252357 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
And those office fires that were burning were snuffed out during the collapse. Unless you are saying your pancake theory let them stay protected from going out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =dh4r-gHdyPUXX
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
.
Now please explain how burning plastic, wood and fabric stayed burning during those collapses.....all the way to the ground.
What ever was burning in the sub-levels for months later was not office materials, Unless you are saying all that burning material just went into the basement from the impact floors. Now if you could explain that, please.
And if the jet fuel went into the elevator shafts, how did anything burn on all of the other floors beneath and above the impact zone.......that were untouched by fire?
Explain that also, please.
How did the 1,400 vehicles and subsequent fires start? Your scenario about fires being squelched is obviously false.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#252358 Jan 27, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
You tell me.
They were ignited by the flames where the fire originally started which now came down to street level. It ain't rocket science. BTW, those fires were prolonged and hot to create molten metal.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 4 min here 36,852
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min Regina 640,864
How come girls don't like to date east indian g... (Dec '09) 22 min Theresa000 171
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 26 min Steve III 618,244
Play "end of the word" part 2 31 min ImFree2Choose 1,690
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 44 min WasteWater 104,533
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr The Hangman 969,756
More from around the web