Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,258 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Carstairs, Canada

#253069 Feb 13, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
If the impact of the jet really brought down the building it would have happened upon impact. Simply watch any video and you can clearly see most of the jet fuel burned up in the initial fireball. In my area I can burn trash, and a good hot fire burns clean but a slow smoldering fire smokes.
All the buildings surrounding the towers were damaged much more than the towers. Why didn't they collapse?
Again, one of the dumber twoofer arguments.

Hydrocarbon fires produce black smoke.

Funny how twoofers rely on such nonsense!
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>Of course!
Why not just have permit offices remove the "controlled" portion of controlled demolition and light them on fire!
Reality is that fire has always been a threat to steel framed buildings which is why an entire industry is dedicated to products and services regarding fire protection exists.
Fallacious logic like yours only works in twooferdumb and is utterly ignored by scientists.
"Steel, like all materials, loses strength at temperatures in excess of 300C, and at 600C retains around 50% of its room temperature yield strength.1 To protect the structural steel frame or cold-formed steel floor and wall assemblies under fire conditions, building codes have assigned fire-resistance ratings to structural assemblies and components. In Canada fire testing as per CAN/ULC-S101 is used to establish fire resistance ratings. In these tests building construction assemblies are exposed to a standard time-temperature curve that rises rapidly to 840C at 30 minutes and then increases more gradually to 1090C at four hours."
http://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/new...
"Numerous research programmes show that some types of fully stressed steel sections can achieve a fire resistance of 30 minutes without any additional protection materials being applied. However, these apply to a limited number of steel sections only, based on the allowable Section Factor Hp/A. Section Factor is a common term used in fire protection for steelwork."
http://www.promat-ap.com/applications/constru...
"Fyreguard is a Queensland owned company established in 1984 specialising in Passive Fire Protection. Fyreguard provides services including the supply of Passive Fire Protection products and the design and certification of Passive Fire products and systems. Fyreguard also has a contracting division to meet any supply and installation requirements."
http://www.fyreguard.com/structural-steel-pro...
"The ability of structural steel to withstand major fires is questionable."
http://www.uk-bar.org/fire_protection.htm
It really doesn't matter that twoofers don't get it.
Whoops, you forgot to address that.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Carstairs, Canada

#253070 Feb 13, 2013
science wrote:
<quoted text>
shill science at its best
Twoofer avoidance at its best!

go
twoof
gone

“Bright Waters House ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#253071 Feb 13, 2013
Twoofer Stupidity at it's best !!!!!!!
science wrote:
<quoted text>
shill science at its best
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253072 Feb 13, 2013
science wrote:
<quoted text>
she blinded me with science
and hit me with technology
pointless and idiotic, as always....
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253073 Feb 13, 2013
The Worlds Biggest Lie wrote:
This President has no plan!
NOTHING!!!
What else do you expect of the Rabble-rouser in Chief?
onemale

Pana, IL

#253077 Feb 14, 2013
I'm not an architect or a structural engineer or a physicist, but as a machinist I have machined various types of metal for 20+ years, I feel I know something about metals and what it takes to cut it.

In my opinion it is totally impossible for a plane made out of aluminum sheet metal to KNIFE through massive steel beams in-cased in concrete. Especially in the fashion that was shown on television; it looked like the plane was knifing through butter... impossible! Even if the nose could have penetrated the building, the wings should have been sheared off by the massive vertical beams. They doctored up the video and we saw what they wanted us to see, and anything can be done with computer alterations. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible for aluminum to cut through metal, let alone massive metal beams and concrete. In this short video, the plane sliced into the building as if it was butter, this is nothing short of totally impossible: Also note: the pause between the impact and the explosion... interesting!


I know from my years as a machinist: To cut metal you have to use something that is harder than the metal you are cutting. I used a lot of carbide tooling which is made from the hardest metal known to mankind, diamond tipped tooling was used in certain applications, I used cobalt drills to drill through hardened steel. Without this hard material, metal could never be machined. Hacksaw blades are made from tempted high carbon steel, standard drills are made from a metal called high speed tooling or drill rod.

There are other factors here besides a plane. In the video below I find it strange there was such of a huge explosion on the opposite side of the building because according to architects each tower had 244 vertical beams, therefore, the plane would have been demolished upon entry. Only a bomb would be capable of blowing out the opposite side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...



Say the Truth

Eatontown, NJ

#253079 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
I'm not an architect or a structural engineer or a physicist, but as a machinist I have machined various types of metal for 20+ years, I feel I know something about metals and what it takes to cut it.
In my opinion it is totally impossible for a plane made out of aluminum sheet metal to KNIFE through massive steel beams in-cased in concrete. Especially in the fashion that was shown on television; it looked like the plane was knifing through butter... impossible! Even if the nose could have penetrated the building, the wings should have been sheared off by the massive vertical beams. They doctored up the video and we saw what they wanted us to see, and anything can be done with computer alterations. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible for aluminum to cut through metal, let alone massive metal beams and concrete. In this short video, the plane sliced into the building as if it was butter, this is nothing short of totally impossible: Also note: the pause between the impact and the explosion... interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LSDfbm8OhCgXX
I know from my years as a machinist: To cut metal you have to use something that is harder than the metal you are cutting. I used a lot of carbide tooling which is made from the hardest metal known to mankind, diamond tipped tooling was used in certain applications, I used cobalt drills to drill through hardened steel. Without this hard material, metal could never be machined. Hacksaw blades are made from tempted high carbon steel, standard drills are made from a metal called high speed tooling or drill rod.
There are other factors here besides a plane. In the video below I find it strange there was such of a huge explosion on the opposite side of the building because according to architects each tower had 244 vertical beams, therefore, the plane would have been demolished upon entry. Only a bomb would be capable of blowing out the opposite side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
If you were a physicist, or even if you passed College Physics 101, you would understand the concept of momentum. Then your ignorant remarks would be as comical to you as it is to me.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253080 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
I'm not an architect or a structural engineer or a physicist, but as a machinist I have machined various types of metal for 20+ years, I feel I know something about metals and what it takes to cut it.
How much experience do you have cutting through metal and concrete with a 767 flying at 500 MPH?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#253081 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
I'm not an architect or a structural engineer or a physicist, but as a machinist I have machined various types of metal for 20+ years, I feel I know something about metals and what it takes to cut it.

In my opinion it is totally impossible for a plane made out of aluminum sheet metal to KNIFE through massive steel beams in-cased in concrete. Especially in the fashion that was shown on television; it looked like the plane was knifing through butter... impossible! Even if the nose could have penetrated the building, the wings should have been sheared off by the massive vertical beams. They doctored up the video and we saw what they wanted us to see, and anything can be done with computer alterations. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible for aluminum to cut through metal, let alone massive metal beams and concrete. In this short video, the plane sliced into the building as if it was butter, this is nothing short of totally impossible: Also note: the pause between the impact and the explosion... interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LSDfbm8OhCgXX

I know from my years as a machinist: To cut metal you have to use something that is harder than the metal you are cutting. I used a lot of carbide tooling which is made from the hardest metal known to mankind, diamond tipped tooling was used in certain applications, I used cobalt drills to drill through hardened steel. Without this hard material, metal could never be machined. Hacksaw blades are made from tempted high carbon steel, standard drills are made from a metal called high speed tooling or drill rod.

There are other factors here besides a plane. In the video below I find it strange there was such of a huge explosion on the opposite side of the building because according to architects each tower had 244 vertical beams, therefore, the plane would have been demolished upon entry. Only a bomb would be capable of blowing out the opposite side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
They obviously never taught you about dynamics or momentum in your courses.

Perhaps you should have paid attention in school!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#253082 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
I'm not an architect or a structural engineer or a physicist, but as a machinist I have machined various types of metal for 20+ years, I feel I know something about metals and what it takes to cut it.
In my opinion it is totally impossible for a plane made out of aluminum sheet metal to KNIFE through massive steel beams in-cased in concrete. Especially in the fashion that was shown on television; it looked like the plane was knifing through butter... impossible! Even if the nose could have penetrated the building, the wings should have been sheared off by the massive vertical beams. They doctored up the video and we saw what they wanted us to see, and anything can be done with computer alterations. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible for aluminum to cut through metal, let alone massive metal beams and concrete. In this short video, the plane sliced into the building as if it was butter, this is nothing short of totally impossible: Also note: the pause between the impact and the explosion... interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LSDfbm8OhCgXX
I know from my years as a machinist: To cut metal you have to use something that is harder than the metal you are cutting. I used a lot of carbide tooling which is made from the hardest metal known to mankind, diamond tipped tooling was used in certain applications, I used cobalt drills to drill through hardened steel. Without this hard material, metal could never be machined. Hacksaw blades are made from tempted high carbon steel, standard drills are made from a metal called high speed tooling or drill rod.
There are other factors here besides a plane. In the video below I find it strange there was such of a huge explosion on the opposite side of the building because according to architects each tower had 244 vertical beams, therefore, the plane would have been demolished upon entry. Only a bomb would be capable of blowing out the opposite side.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Since there were no massive steel beams encased in concrete and actual footage of the planes penetrating the towers, what is it you are trying to say here? An engine went clean through the building and landed in the next block. You missed that too huh?

“Bright Waters House ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#253083 Feb 14, 2013
so did part of the landing gear .... it ended up on Murray Street
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Since there were no massive steel beams encased in concrete and actual footage of the planes penetrating the towers, what is it you are trying to say here? An engine went clean through the building and landed in the next block. You missed that too huh?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#253084 Feb 14, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
so did part of the landing gear .... it ended up on Murray Street
<quoted text>
Did you see the surrealistic video shot by a couple of guys with a camera walking around the Plaza after the plane hit? There was some kind of Muzak playing over the Plaza speakers as they video taped all the paper, shattered airplane skin, and personal effects that had rained down.

She's Always a Woman by Billy Joel played on a clarinet.



http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
youtube

AOL

#253085 Feb 14, 2013
.

NASA's 2015 "SIGN" ---- ID's WW3 & Final 7 Years




.
onemale

Pana, IL

#253086 Feb 14, 2013
As one physicist said you have two choices either believe physics or believe the NIST report.
onemale

Pana, IL

#253087 Feb 14, 2013
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
If you were a physicist, or even if you passed College Physics 101, you would understand the concept of momentum. Then your ignorant remarks would be as comical to you as it is to me.
The towers were designed to withstand a jet crash.
onemale

Pana, IL

#253088 Feb 14, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
They obviously never taught you about dynamics or momentum in your courses.
Perhaps you should have paid attention in school!
So you are saying if you crash into a very large tree with an auto if your momentum is high enough you will snap through the tree... I have a bridge I'd like sell you.
onemale

Pana, IL

#253089 Feb 14, 2013
According to architects the towers were designed to withstand a 707 airplane crash. Yes a 767 (the jet that crashed into the south tower) is bigger but here are figures from structural engineers:

The kinetic energy released by the impact of a Boeing 707 at cruise speed is
= 0.5 x 336,000 x (890)^2/32.174
= 4.136 billion ft lbs force (5,607,720 Kilojoules).

The kinetic energy released by the impact of a Boeing 767 at cruise speed is
= 0.5 x 395,000 x (777)^2/32.174
= 3.706 billion ft lbs force (5,024,650 Kilojoules).

From this, we see a Boeing 707 would smash into the WTC with about 10 percent more energy than would the slightly heavier Boeing 767. A Boeing 707 would do more damage than a Boeing 767.

Source:
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-...

P.S. How could a heavier plane cause less damage? Due to better aerodynamics of the 767 the designer engineers could use thinner metal and secondary parts were made from carbon fiber. They did this to improve energy efficiency. Higher efficiency planes helped to keep the airlines afloat.
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253090 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
The towers were designed to withstand a jet crash.
And they did.
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253091 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
As one physicist said you have two choices either believe physics or believe the NIST report.
One.

So how many physicists are there?
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253092 Feb 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying if you crash into a very large tree with an auto if your momentum is high enough you will snap through the tree... I have a bridge I'd like sell you.
How about a former tree?

http://www.nc911.com/images/031306carvspole/m...

http://racineuncovered.org/wp-content/uploads...

http://www.nc911.com/images/031306carvspole/m...

How much for the bridge?

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 min Tide with Beach 816,974
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 7 min mike 609,721
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min USA Born 578,556
No one should blaspheme Prophet Mohammad, peace... 10 min Neville Thompson 91
sex (May '13) 18 min girls united states 112
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 57 min sangili karuppan 5,902
News Prosecutors: Evidence Germanwings co-pilot hid ... 1 hr disgusted 1
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 2 hr IWANNAPLAY 187
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 6 hr bacon hater 97,948
More from around the web