Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

53,964 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253982 Mar 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
20 fake pilots??? I need proof.
I'm waiting for proof too, trust me, it never comes.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#253983 Mar 14, 2013
EXPLAINING THE THEORY
Just before the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11, loud explosions were heard inside, leading conspiracy theorists to believe they were caused by explosives.
But according to Christian Simensen of the Norwegian Research Institute SINTEF, these were actually the result of a chemical reaction which caused both buildings to come down.
His theory is that the aluminium used to make the aeroplanes flown by the terrorists melted in the 2,700f heat and dripped down through the building where it mixed with the hundreds of litres of water from the sprinklers.

The combination of the two caused a chemical reaction similar to dynamite which was strong enough to destroy chunks of the building.
Combined with the ferocious heat, this would have been enough to collapse both buildings.
The explosions heard by witnesses were the explosive hydrogen being fired off by the reaction of the liquid aluminium and water, nothing more.
http://houstonfreethinkers.com/all-news/92-91...

And that's why the towers fell.....due to exploding aluminum
Yeah right
And The core with 5" thick steel was blown out by this exploding aluminum and water,eh?
Lmao.....Yeah right.
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#253984 Mar 14, 2013
2,700f heat caused by jet fuel and office materials.... That's another.....lmao
Ryan also notes that National Geographic Today and the History Channel asserted fire temperatures of 2,900 and 2,700 F.

Since jet fuel fires burn at a maximum of around 1,500 F (unless in a special combustion chamber) and the melting point of steel is around 2,800 F, the claim that jet fuel fires melted structural steel is absurd. Although the official reports do not hold that the WTC fires melted steel, the origins of this idea is important, since it has been used as a straw-man attack by official story defenders such as Popular Mechanics.

Ryan notes that steel temperatures lag behind gas temperatures in both time and magnitude, and that none of the official reports have performed thermodynamic calculations about the probable steel temperatures. Ryan's own calculations show that steel temperatures in the impact zones probably did not exceed 600 F.
Yet, as Ryan notes, there is always an official explanation for terrorist events. Ryan reviews anomalies in the official account of the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and notes that in that case, as in the case of the World Trade Center, a small group of engineers produced reports supporting the official story.

Ryan shows that the same principals headed the various government investigations of the WTC collapses, the Pentagon crash, and Oklahoma City bombing, despite the fact that the investigations involved assessments of entirely different kinds of structures inflicted with different kinds of damage. Why do the same five or so individuals turn up in investigations relating to terrorist attack, when, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), there are 1.5 million engineers in the US? The authors of the official report on the Murrah Federal Building -- Gene Corley, Charles Thornton, Paul Mlaker, and Mete Sozen -- were all among the initial team of the ASCE WTC investigation. Several of these individuals have strong connections to industries that benefited from the attack, such as armaments makers and oil and gas producers.
.
NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed fires -- 590,000 MJ of energy
Office furnishings in the impact zone would have provided 490,000 MJ of energy
Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, a maximum temp in the impact zone can be calculated.
The result is less than 600 degrees F
Assuming fuel burned with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the impact zone, no heat escaped by conduction, steel and concrete had unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/kevin_rya...

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#253985 Mar 14, 2013
Nigel wrote:
<quoted text>
There was tens of tons of advanced nanothermitic material and residues of thermite reaction in the World Trace Center dust!
Prove it!!!

That's a false claim. No devices were found by anyone. There is nothing which qualifies as evidence of such material.

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#253986 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
2,700f heat caused by jet fuel and office materials.... That's another.....lmao
Ryan also notes that National Geographic Today and the History Channel asserted fire temperatures of 2,900 and 2,700 F.
Since jet fuel fires burn at a maximum of around 1,500 F (unless in a special combustion chamber) and the melting point of steel is around 2,800 F, the claim that jet fuel fires melted structural steel is absurd. Although the official reports do not hold that the WTC fires melted steel, the origins of this idea is important, since it has been used as a straw-man attack by official story defenders such as Popular Mechanics.
Ryan notes that steel temperatures lag behind gas temperatures in both time and magnitude, and that none of the official reports have performed thermodynamic calculations about the probable steel temperatures. Ryan's own calculations show that steel temperatures in the impact zones probably did not exceed 600 F.
Yet, as Ryan notes, there is always an official explanation for terrorist events. Ryan reviews anomalies in the official account of the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and notes that in that case, as in the case of the World Trade Center, a small group of engineers produced reports supporting the official story.
Ryan shows that the same principals headed the various government investigations of the WTC collapses, the Pentagon crash, and Oklahoma City bombing, despite the fact that the investigations involved assessments of entirely different kinds of structures inflicted with different kinds of damage. Why do the same five or so individuals turn up in investigations relating to terrorist attack, when, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), there are 1.5 million engineers in the US? The authors of the official report on the Murrah Federal Building -- Gene Corley, Charles Thornton, Paul Mlaker, and Mete Sozen -- were all among the initial team of the ASCE WTC investigation. Several of these individuals have strong connections to industries that benefited from the attack, such as armaments makers and oil and gas producers.
.
NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed fires -- 590,000 MJ of energy
Office furnishings in the impact zone would have provided 490,000 MJ of energy
Using masses and specific heats for materials heated, a maximum temp in the impact zone can be calculated.
The result is less than 600 degrees F
Assuming fuel burned with perfect efficiency, that no hot gases left the impact zone, no heat escaped by conduction, steel and concrete had unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/kevin_rya...
False conclusion. Updrafts cause high combustion temperatures!!!

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#253987 Mar 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
A chemical engineer and a scientist found thermite residue in the dust.
NIST admitted they didn't check the dust for any type of explosive resdue. Your problem is you listen to the news.
Doesn't count. Could have been planted just to make up a story. Besides, nobody found any devices or evidence of such. Let's go with your theory of devices. What about the unexploded devices such as those which failed and those place above the point of impact? Get the drift?
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253989 Mar 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
The cockpit recorder would have told what language was being used, either Arabian or Arabian accent. And how they could fly a 100 ton jetliner in a fashion that airline pilots have said was impossible.
Impossible? Well, that is moot, since it obviously was flown the way it was.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#253990 Mar 14, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
False conclusion. Updrafts cause high combustion temperatures!!!
Up drafts from where? Elevator shafts? The impact hole?
http://img312.imageshack.us/img312/3716/wtcel...

I doubt it very much, seeing after the initial explosion of fuel,
http://media.washtimes.com/media/community/vi...
there were hardly any roaring fires burning.
http://crisis.prj.hu/hostlogic/%257Enick/wtc/...
.
https://www.google.com/search...
.
Verses these buildings which had hotter, longer burning fires and they did NOT collapse.
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...
.
But of course you shills will concoct something up to defend your precious leaders....even if it's a lie that they told you, you still defend them.
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253991 Mar 14, 2013
Amee wrote:
9/11 In Plane Sight,watch it.A lot of facts that we have never seen
LMAO!!!
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253992 Mar 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
A chemical engineer and a scientist found thermite residue in the dust.
NIST admitted they didn't check the dust for any type of explosive resdue. Your problem is you listen to the news.
Did they collect it themselves?
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#253993 Mar 14, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I just found that interesting, and it is interesting how so many flight recorders didn't make it. The law of averages doesn't match.
The law of what??

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#253994 Mar 14, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't count. Could have been planted just to make up a story. Besides, nobody found any devices or evidence of such. Let's go with your theory of devices. What about the unexploded devices such as those which failed and those place above the point of impact? Get the drift?
Ha ha ha....
Could have, should have, might have been, probably was, most likely, maybe it, appears as, looks like....
Those are the only words that allow you to keep spewing the lies of the govt.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#253995 Mar 14, 2013
Say the truth with a lie is back from his other nick.....Charlie tuna Sheen.
Here you go say the twoof.... Fill the boarsd up now with all your off topic troll trash nonsense and b/s
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T7ORUIL...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253996 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
Verses these buildings which had hotter, longer burning fires and they did NOT collapse.
Not the same kind of damage or buildings moobs, but the Windsor towers metal framed section did suffer total collapse, you know, the one PICTURED ON YOUR WEBSITE, THAT WAS NOT EVEN STRUCTURALLY DAMAGED BY A HUGE AIRPLANE!

FIRE ALONE DID IT MOOBS!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253997 Mar 14, 2013
Are you crying again MOOBS? A 60 year old man in tears over the net, Pathetic!
Timesten wrote:
Say the truth with a lie is back from his other nick.....Charlie tuna Sheen.
Here you go say the twoof.... Fill the boarsd up now with all your off topic troll trash nonsense and b/s
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T7ORUIL...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253998 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
Up drafts from where? Elevator shafts? The impact hole?
Yea, Moobs, that all works! Or did they build the first fully submersible towers?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#253999 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
2,700f heat caused by jet fuel and office materials.... That's another.....lmao
Ryan also notes that National Geographic Today and the History Channel asserted fire temperatures of 2,900 and 2,700 F.
Since jet fuel fires burn at a maximum of around 1,500 F
Yes, Moobs, no one ever said the jet fuel caused the collapse, it set everything on fire, such as hot burning poly products like CARPET!

STRAWMAN FROM AN UNEMPLOYED MAN!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#254000 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
EXPLAINING THE THEORY
Just before the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11, loud explosions were heard inside, leading conspiracy theorists to believe they were caused by explosives.
Yea, Because just before collapse when everything was buckling and snapping IT SHOULD BE A TOTALLY QUIET EVENT!
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#254001 Mar 14, 2013
Timesten wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha ha ha....
Could have, should have, might have been, probably was, most likely, maybe it, appears as, looks like....
Those are the only words that allow you to keep spewing the lies of the govt.
I don't use another nick, you dick.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#254002 Mar 14, 2013
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't use another nick, you dick.
Yea, One would think that Tommy could figure that one out by location and posting/writing style.

A big hint Tom, I'm the jerk that finds it so easy to push your buttons and get your panties in a bunch in the most immature way possible when you refuse to debate or constantly repeat totally debunked material.

There is another guy here who shoots you down most of the time with serious well thought out posts and a few jabs now and then.

Think about it all night, and if you have not figured out who is who, wake up for work, suddenly remember that you are unemployed and think about it some more.

PS: There is a third guy here that comes from the same land as Justin Bieber (Oh, I know I will pay for that one!)

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
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 min Rosa_Winkel 96,831
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 min Lumajuice 777,300
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 min His Eminency dr S... 605,251
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 25 min _Bad Company 1,920
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 26 min USA Born 560,116
Gay snapchat names 1 hr gn2k14 161
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 1 hr UIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 4,813
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Roberta G 175,772
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 6 hr Lumajuice 441,807
More from around the web