created by: djhixx | Oct 13, 2007

Top Stories

53,512 votes

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Click on an option to vote

  • yes
  • no
  • well, im not sure
Comments
235,401 - 235,420 of 258,144 Comments Last updated 3 hrs ago
onemale

Pana, IL

#253458 Feb 19, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>"Was 911 a conspiracy?"
Reading comprehension is not your friend...which explains why you're gullible enough to fall for twoof.
Hint: we can all answer "yes" to the above question regardless of who we think perpetrated 911.
Your crackpot insults have have no logic, it just shows your ignorance.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#253459 Feb 19, 2013
we all voted YES Goofball .... 9/11 was a conspiracy ... by the al-Qaeda terror network ... smarten up
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Your crackpot insults have have no logic, it just shows your ignorance.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Carstairs, Canada

#253460 Feb 19, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Your crackpot insults have have no logic, it just shows your ignorance.
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 300°C, and at 600°C 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 840°C at 30 minutes and then increases more gradually to 1090°C 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.
Which is why science is on my side and stupid is on yours right?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Carstairs, Canada

#253461 Feb 19, 2013
YellowPissreality wrote:
we all voted YES Goofball .... 9/11 was a conspiracy ... by the al-Qaeda terror network ... smarten up
<quoted text>
Note how he avoided addressing exactly that point...all twoofer like;-)
onemale

Pana, IL

#253462 Feb 19, 2013
YellowPissreality wrote:
we all voted YES Goofball .... 9/11 was a conspiracy ... by the al-Qaeda terror network ... smarten up
<quoted text>
Why we cannot trust the Controlled Media

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corpor...

“Dying 4 ur sins-so tell me”

Since: Jan 09

Fort Worth

#253463 Feb 19, 2013
When you look at the big picture , the official NIST , 911 commission report, and all other explanations of the terrible atrocities on Sept 11 2001 are all just theories. The NIST report states this at the very beginning of the document by the words "probable collapse sequence " . If it wasn't a theory it would not be "probable " .
Since we all agree it required more than one person to accomplish this mass murder it would be a conspiracy .

This makes anyone on either side of this argument a " conspiracy theorist " . That is unless some one has factual, verifiable knowledge of said event...... That would make them an accomplice . And they should be murdered just like the thousands of innocent people on both sides of this petroleum war.No trial needed, they didn't get one....

So unless you are a "terrorist" involved in the event ,you are just a conspiracy theorist just like everyone else on this thread, no matter what qualifications or how many" peer review papers" you've read.

Peace
ppp

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#253464 Feb 19, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>Why we cannot trust the Controlled Media

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corpor...
Yet pretty much every claim twoof makes is based on the same sources rationalists use. The difference being that twoof pre-determines that anything they can spin into pseudo-support is true and everything they can't is false.

A great example of this is fire fighter reports of molten steel and explosions is accepted as true but fire fighter reports of WTC 7 leaning and in danger of collapse is not accepted as true.

The failures of logic in twooferdumb are many!
onemale

Pana, IL

#253465 Feb 19, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet pretty much every claim twoof makes is based on the same sources rationalists use. The difference being that twoof pre-determines that anything they can spin into pseudo-support is true and everything they can't is false.
A great example of this is fire fighter reports of molten steel and explosions is accepted as true but fire fighter reports of WTC 7 leaning and in danger of collapse is not accepted as true.
The failures of logic in twooferdumb are many!
I will forever trust the opinons of 1500+ engineers, architects, physicists and other professionals.



“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#253466 Feb 19, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>I will forever trust the opinons of 1500+ engineers, architects, physicists and other professionals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =X-V1CiuGMJoXX
Good for you!

I'll trust the opinions of the other 99.9% of the worlds engineers, architects, physicists and professionals...including the ones I've personally spoken with about twoof.

Arguments from authority are so fun!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#253467 Feb 19, 2013
How The NIST Report Failed To Adequately Investigate 9/11
.
Or The Fox Is Guarding The Henhouse Here Folks
.
“Nothing has such power to broaden the mind as the ability to investigate systematically and truly all that comes under thy observation in life.” Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
.
Any serious investigation into the reasons why the Twin Towers were completely destroyed would attempt to find out why the strong steel frames below the impact and fire areas lost their strength and gave way.
.
But NIST deliberately decided not to do this. NIST excluded – quite systematically and based on the explicit argument that only the few columns with a known asbuilt location in the mpact and fire areas were of interest for the investigation – the columns from the parts that failed and gave way so unexpectedly, i.e., the columns with as-built locations below the impact and fire areas, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes.
.
Scientists and engineers in relevant fields should know that those parts of the structure that gave way need to be included in the investigation of a building failure. There are many indications that NIST’s scientists and engineers have been actually well aware that the failure of the load bearing structures of the Twin Towers cannot be investigated by focusing exclusively on the collection of data concerning the impact and fire areas.
.
For example, NIST developed a "structural database" that included the data for the structural members from bottom to top (and not just for the structural members in the impact and fire areas).
.
They developed "global structural models" for both Towers that stretched over their full heights (based on the named structural database, blueprints and other documents). And they analyzed the performance of the undamaged structures (using its global structural models) for three loading cases, and checked the demand/capacity ratio for the structural components.
.
NIST examined (as part of the same “Project 3: "Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of Structural Steel,” which systematically excluded steel from outside the impact and fire areas from being adequately examined) samples of all steel qualities used throughout the buildings to check if they complied with the demanded quality standards.
.
NIST cannot justify the exclusion of the steel from being adequately examined for damage and failure modes by its published result of the investigation, i.e., the “how the point of collapse initiation was reached” models and the few lines with suggestions why “global collapse ensued.” The named models and suggestions were presented by NIST as results of the investigation, so they should not have influenced decisions at the beginning of the investigation.
.
Examining the evidence and collecting data based on the evidence was a task that NIST needed to perform before any hypotheses were formulated.
.
But NIST excluded identified core columns and perimeter columns that were built-in outside the impact and fire areas, and columns with an unknown as-built location, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes at the very beginning of the investigation.
.
Thus, by a process of circular reasoning NIST avoided an adequate analysis of the physical evidence of the steel for data that might have answered the question why the strong steel frames below the impact and fire areas gave way as completely and quickly as they did; by proceeding on the basis of a preconceived premise, NIST compromised the validity of the investigation.
.
http://www.ae911truth.org/documents/How_NIST_...
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha aha h
.
That’s Still Funny After All These Years

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#253468 Feb 19, 2013
mu shu had a lot of fun being the schoolyard bully. Taunting the other kids, calling them names. His dad must have tortured him to make him so mean.
.
He never outgrew his childhood. What a mean little mu shu piggie porker.
.
Ad Hom much, big brave internet bully?
.
Oops I almost forgot pyschoinfantile, pedophilic, narcissistic, sophist, ideologue, lying bwunker.
.
Jet fuel ha ha ha ha
.
That's A Good Joke Huh Eh !

“WELL PAID GOVIE SHILL ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#253469 Feb 19, 2013
NIST with charged with finding the cause of the collapse. NIST and most engineers also realize that once the collapse initiated nothing but the ground was going to stop it so there was no need to look into the entire collapse
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
How The NIST Report Failed To Adequately Investigate 9/11
.
Or The Fox Is Guarding The Henhouse Here Folks
.
“Nothing has such power to broaden the mind as the ability to investigate systematically and truly all that comes under thy observation in life.” Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
.
Any serious investigation into the reasons why the Twin Towers were completely destroyed would .
But NIST deliberately decided not to do this. NIST excluded – quite systematically and based on the explicit argument that only the few columns with a known asbuilt location in the mpact and fire areas were of interest for the investigation – the columns from the parts that failed and gave way so unexpectedly, i.e., the columns with as-built locations below the impact and fire areas, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes.
.
Scientists and engineers in relevant fields should know that those parts of the structure that gave way need to be included in the investigation of a building failure. There are many indications that NIST’s scientists and engineers have been actually well aware that the failure of the load bearing structures of the Twin Towers cannot be investigated by focusing exclusively on the collection of data concerning the impact and fire areas.
.
For example, NIST developed a "structural database" that included the data for the structural members from bottom to top (and not just for the structural members in the impact and fire areas).
.
They developed "global structural models" for both Towers that stretched over their full heights (based on the named structural database, blueprints and other documents). And they analyzed the performance of the undamaged structures (using its global structural models) for three loading cases, and checked the demand/capacity ratio for the structural components.
.
NIST examined (as part of the same “Project 3: "Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of Structural Steel,” which systematically excluded steel from outside the impact and fire areas from being adequately examined) samples of all steel qualities used throughout the buildings to check if they complied with the demanded quality standards.
.
NIST cannot justify the exclusion of the steel from being adequately examined for damage and failure modes by its published result of the investigation, i.e., the “how the point of collapse initiation was reached” models and the few lines with suggestions why “global collapse ensued.” The named models and suggestions were presented by NIST as results of the investigation, so they should not have influenced decisions at the beginning of the investigation.
.
Examining the evidence and collecting data based on the evidence was a task that NIST needed to perform before any hypotheses were formulated.
.
But NIST excluded identified core columns and perimeter columns that were built-in outside the impact and fire areas, and columns with an unknown as-built location, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes at the very beginning of the investigation.
.
Thus, by a process of circular reasoning NIST avoided an adequate analysis of the physical evidence of the steel for data that might have answered the question why the strong steel frames below the impact and fire areas gave way as completely and quickly as they did; by proceeding on the basis of a preconceived premise, NIST compromised the validity of the investigation.
.
http://www.ae911truth.org/documents/How_NIST_...
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha aha h
.
That’s Still Funny After All These Years

“WELL PAID GOVIE SHILL ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#253470 Feb 19, 2013
it's good to trust the opinions of electrical and landscape engineers when it comes to a building collapse
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I will forever trust the opinons of 1500+ engineers, architects, physicists and other professionals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =X-V1CiuGMJoXX
Say the Truth

Eatontown, NJ

#253471 Feb 19, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
How The NIST Report Failed To Adequately Investigate 9/11
.
Or The Fox Is Guarding The Henhouse Here Folks
Folks? FOLKS???

Terry, is that you?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253472 Feb 19, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Any serious investigation into the reasons why the Twin Towers were completely destroyed would attempt to find out why the strong steel frames below the impact and fire areas lost their strength and gave way.
From the NIST report, page xxxvii:

The focus of the Investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the “probable collapse sequence,” although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#253473 Feb 19, 2013
Question:

Why did the strong steel frame work below the impact and fire areas which were totally undamaged and unheated, give way as completely and quickly as they did?
.
How do you explain away increasing momentum straight down along the line of most resistance?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
.
That's A Good One Huh eh !

“WELL PAID GOVIE SHILL ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#253474 Feb 19, 2013
DOWN is the path of gravity Oh CLUELESS ONE .... now of you can't figure out why tens of thousand of tons of building moving at 100MPH was not stopped by the rest of the building then we can't help you
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Question:
Why did the strong steel frame work below the impact and fire areas which were totally undamaged and unheated, give way as completely and quickly as they did?
.
How do you explain away increasing momentum straight down along the line of most resistance?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
.
That's A Good One Huh eh !

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#253475 Feb 19, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
DOWN is the path of gravity Oh CLUELESS ONE .... now of you can't figure out why tens of thousand of tons of building moving at 100MPH was not stopped by the rest of the building then we can't help you
<quoted text>
What video of the collapse were you watching when you measured 100 mph? How many floors at a time was your imaginary speed of 100 mph sustained for?
.
Show your math. You said you were a business major. Don't they use math?
.
About 9/11, no FDNY ever said "explosion". Not once in any early interview and not in any later interviews.
.
If someone tells you the FDNY claim to have seen or heard "explosions", they are lying and the FDNY is lying to keep their jobs!
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha
.
That's No Lie, It's A Joke And It's On Us See Huh Eh !
Charlie Sheen

Martell, NE

#253476 Feb 19, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I will forever trust the opinons of 1500+ engineers, architects, physicists and other professionals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =X-V1CiuGMJoXX
Yes, Especial those architects and theologians.
Charlie Sheen

Martell, NE

#253477 Feb 19, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>

About 9/11, no FDNY ever said "explosion".
There is more than one FDNY or is that the jet fuel huffing speaking?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 2 min Naveen kumar 5,352
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Stilgar Fifrawi 733,694
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 8 min Patrick 226,503
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 8 min Freebird USA 173,299
do right by your woman 8 min pusherman_ 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 26 min Epiphany2 600,142
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 50 min yon 2,514
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 3 hr JUDEletePete 118,091
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 19 hr Tiffany 107
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••