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

RedHorseRevelati on

AOL

#256640 Jun 25, 2013
.

Bible PROOF 1.5 BIL MUSLIMS to die --

http://youtu.be/n7ok0g8iwJI

.
Charlie Sheen

Matthews, NC

#256641 Jun 25, 2013
Zealous_Guy wrote:
Dear oh dear.
This thread may finally be on to something.
Well, It is likely one of us is on something, why does CruciFRIEDguy wear long sleeves in July?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256643 Jun 25, 2013
destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>FU!!!!! GO suck A C@CK Fagggittt!!!!!! Those towers were demod very OBVIOUS u F@CKING idiot
DUDE!

Take your meds.
Charlie Sheen

Matthews, NC

#256644 Jun 25, 2013
destroyer wrote:
<quoted text>FU!!!!! GO suck A C@CK Fagggittt!!!!!! Those towers were demod very OBVIOUS u F@CKING idiot
And the new group, "Third Grade boys for 9/11 truth" is formed!

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256645 Jun 25, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
It has to do with some claiming aluminum can't penetrate steel.
If I remember correctly, that's one of the idiotic memes Onemale has shilled for his uneducated masters.
Water = aluminum...... ok whatever

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256646 Jun 25, 2013
Plasma cuts steel.... laser light can penetrate steel . but jet fuel and office furniture fires only heat it up they do not cut or penetrate steel.
What is the temp. to actually cut the structural steel the towers were made of ? Would this be included in the base line performance formula used by nist to derive at the equation to come up with the predetermined global collapse explanation ?
Charlie Sheen

Matthews, NC

#256647 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
Plasma cuts steel.... laser light can penetrate steel . but jet fuel and office furniture fires only heat it up they do not cut or penetrate steel.
What is the temp. to actually cut the structural steel the towers were made of ? Would this be included in the base line performance formula used by nist to derive at the equation to come up with the predetermined global collapse explanation ?
Oh God, Junkie is heading for the space lasers!

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#256648 Jun 25, 2013
"Evidently it( gravity) took a vacation on sept 11 2001"

This is perhaps one of the most stupid comments ever posted on Topix
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Where ya been ? Why didn't gravity work on the towers ? Evidently it took a vacation on sept 11 2001 or pieces of these towers would not have hit a building 100 yards away ... Don't be stupid , I know you can provide better answers than this .

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256652 Jun 25, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
"Evidently it( gravity) took a vacation on sept 11 2001"
This is perhaps one of the most stupid comments ever posted on Topix
<quoted text>
The part where I said you could come up with a better answer was evidently the stupid comment your referring to. Because gravity means things fall straight down , on sept 11 2001 , a building 100 yards away from a collapsing building was supposedly hit by a chunk of debris from the collapsing building hard enough to cause a 200 foot hole that ignited fires that eventually caused the global collapse of the damaged building. Since your such a genius , I'm sure you can provide me with the baseline performance evaluation formula nist used to determine their preempted global collapse explanation.Should be easy for you .Even though not one person on this thread has ever attempted this task. I wonder why? Could it be it would not support their rehearsed answers? lmfao Go figure...
Charlie Sheen

Matthews, NC

#256653 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
The part where I said you could come up with a better answer was evidently the stupid comment your referring to. Because gravity means things fall straight down ,
Wrong druggie, it means things fall down, not up, wind, metal beams flexing and snapping, all may result is some outward trajectory.

Get off the goop and think before you post.

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256654 Jun 25, 2013
Here's a little hint for you rad they only considered four , astonishingly only one supported their global collapse theory . After all that is what the official nist report is ... a theory.. an educated guess if you will. No matter how you try you cannot debunk this statement.The ncstar 1 report itself states this by stating their report only supplies the probable collapse sequence.
Key word here is probable not definite , not absolute , but probable.Go ahead Prove me wrong .Or try anyway ... ha ha ha ha ..... Bet you can't.
Impact to initiation ....A plane hit the building .
The nist report in 5 words. thank you very much.
Charlie Sheen

Wahoo, NE

#256655 Jun 25, 2013
Very few things fall straight down drugie, that does not mean their is no gravity.
crucifiedguy wrote:
Here's a little hint for you rad they only considered four , astonishingly only one supported their global collapse theory . After all that is what the official nist report is ... a theory.. an educated guess if you will. No matter how you try you cannot debunk this statement.The ncstar 1 report itself states this by stating their report only supplies the probable collapse sequence.
Key word here is probable not definite , not absolute , but probable.Go ahead Prove me wrong .Or try anyway ... ha ha ha ha ..... Bet you can't.
Impact to initiation ....A plane hit the building .
The nist report in 5 words. thank you very much.
Charlie Sheen

Wahoo, NE

#256656 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
The part where I said you could come up with a better answer was evidently the stupid comment your referring to. Because gravity means things fall straight down , on sept 11 2001 , a building 100 yards away from a collapsing building was supposedly hit by a chunk of debris
In order to allow time for lateral motion, the exterior column(s) that hit WFC 3 were most probably from the upper half of WTC 1. A fall from 1,000 feet to 240 feet would take SQR(2*h/g)= around 6.9 seconds where h = 760 feet and g = 32.17 ft/s^2. In the horizontal plane, a uniform acceleration of 20 m/s^2 for the first second followed by negligible deceleration due to drag for the remaining 5.9 seconds would provide 10 +(5.9 * 20)= 128 metres = 420 feet displacement. At 1,000 feet the WTC 1 perimeter columns, per story, were comprised of:

two flanges of 1/2 x 13.5 x 144 inches each, totalling 1,944 ins^3
one outer web of 1/4 x 13 x 144 inches = 468 ins^3
one inner web of 1/4 x 15.75 x 92 inches = 362 ins^3
one spandrel plate of 3/8 x 40 x 52 inches = 780 ins^3

...totalling 3,554 ins^3 per floor or 10,662 ins^3 = 6.17 ft^3 for a three-floor section which at 490 lb/ft^3 is 3,023 lb (84 pounds per lineal foot) or 1,371 kg.(There is some uncertainty as to the flange thickness; it was known to be only 1/4" at the very highest floors.) The force require to produce an acceleration of 20 m/s^2 in an inertia mass of 1,371 kg is 20 * 1371 = 27,420 N = 6,165 lbf.

The cross-section presented to a wind, per floor, would be 40 x 52 = 2,080 ins^2 for the spandrel plate and 15.75 x 92 = 1,449 ins^2 for the inner web, totalling 3,529 ins^2 per floor or 10,587 ins^2 = 6.83 m^2 for a three-story section of exterior column.(So the required pressure is well under 1 psi.) From the drag equation of

d = Cd * A * r * 0.5 * v^2

we obtain

v = SQR(2 * d /(Cd * A * r))

where r = density of air ~ 1.2 kg/m^3 and assuming a relatively high drag coefficient Cd of 4 / pi ~ 1.27 for a flat plate and d = the previously calculated force of 27,420 N and A = 6.83 m^2 as calculated above. This places the required wind at 72.6 m/s = 162 mph for one second duration. Actual windspeed on the day was up to 10 mph on the ground and up to 20 mph at higher altitude.

Suppose we imagine the collapse initiating at 1,200 feet, and proceeding as per the "pancaking" theory to 1,000 feet. After freely falling 200 feet, the terminal velocity would be SQR(2 * 200 * 32.17 ft/s^2)= 113.4 fps = 77.3 mph. In this theory, there is a small delay due to resistance of the intact building below, but the falling upper section smashes its way through each floor in about 0.1 seconds at the 1,000 feet level. The volume of air per floor is approximately 12 * 200 * 200 feet = 480,000 ft^3. Some will go down, but if the total was forced out through a perimeter of 800 feet by an average height of 6 feet which is an exiting area of 4,800 ft^2, it would (continuing outward) extend for some 100 feet at the end of the 0.1 seconds which is a velocity of 1,000 fps or 682 mph.

Let's set the exiting gases velocity at just 700 fps = 213 m/s, in which case the force acting on the exterior column for 0.1 seconds is given by:

d = Cd * A * r * 0.5 * v^2

= 1.27 * 6.83 * 1.2 * 0.5 * 213^2 ~ 236,000 N

to produce an acceleration of F / m = 236,000 N / 1,371 kg = 172 m/s^2. After 0.1 seconds the velocity of the steel is 17.2 m/s = 38.5 mph, and the horizontal displacement is 0.86 metres. Following another 6.8 seconds at 17.2 m/s the total distance travelled horizontally is 0.86 plus 6.8 * 17.2 ~ 118 metres = 387 feet. The columns have to shear off quickly enough, and the pancaking theory has the problem that the gravitational potential appears to be too low for all the energy sinks, but even this scenario does not appear to rule out the idea that debris could end up a few hundred feet away.

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256657 Jun 25, 2013
once again can anyone provide the formula used to derive at the baseline performance ? Building 3 is not building 7 . lmfao....
Charlie Sheen

Wahoo, NE

#256658 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
once again can anyone provide the formula used to derive at the baseline performance ? Building 3 is not building 7 . lmfao....
Can you provide me with proof of sobriety junkie and about a million New Yorkers who would have heard such a huge explosion to send things fling that far?

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256659 Jun 25, 2013
In the words of ben stein in ferris bueler's day off... Anyone.. anyone..?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256660 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
Plasma cuts steel.... laser light can penetrate steel . but jet fuel and office furniture fires only heat it up they do not cut or penetrate steel.
What is the temp. to actually cut the structural steel the towers were made of ? Would this be included in the base line performance formula used by nist to derive at the equation to come up with the predetermined global collapse explanation ?
There was no cut steel. What is your point?

The answer is massive structural failure.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256661 Jun 25, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
In the words of ben stein in ferris bueler's day off... Anyone.. anyone..?
Run Forrest Run!!!!!

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#256662 Jun 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Run Forrest Run!!!!!
Are you never bored with your own idiotic remarks?

I know I am.

Insults Are Easier

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256663 Jun 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no cut steel. What is your point?
The answer is massive structural failure.
no baseline performance formula?

anyone? anyone ?

fun fun fun!!!

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
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 14 min Rider on the Storm 4,492
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 27 min Rosesz 695,312
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 28 min Deep Grope 58,817
MESSAGE to Adam Lanza IN HELL 52 min How Do You Know 4
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Peter Ross 446,233
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr Tellthetruth 994,016
Looking for someone GOOD to take my online clas... (Sep '13) 4 hr wetakeyourclass 18
More from around the web