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

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259957 Sep 28, 2013
http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/9/1291/...

"Collapse of Tall Buildings in Multi-Storey Fires"

CONCLUSIONS
The collapse of tall buildings in densely populated urban setting is a scenario too terrible to contemplate.
Buildings are routinely designed to resist this limit state under the extreme load conditions of high winds
and earthquakes etc. however the potential of multiple floor fires to cause such a disaster remains
unrecognised in the profession as no current building codes require the consideration of this type of
extreme loading. It is clearly demonstrated in this paper that collapse of tall buildings in multiple floor fires is a distinct possibility as the mechanisms that can cause this are easily reproduced using a non-linear finite element analysis programme.
The events of September 11, 2001 saw three very tall buildings collapse within hours of each other
primarily because of fire. The simple analysis carried out here further confirms the computational models
used to investigate these events and points to a significant vulnerability in the design of the WTC structure for large fires, albeit no regulations required this, and still don’t, which in the light of recent research such as this seems unfortunate.
This paper clearly shows that the assessment of the collapse potential of a frame in multiple floor fires need not always require rigorous, labour intensive and time consuming finite element analyses. It is possible for frames of relatively regular geometry to be assessed using these simple, cost effective and quick methods.

----------

But twoof has registered sex offenders and romeo rose!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259958 Sep 28, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Another list of twoofers who have proved nothing.
How long is this list going to get?
Exactly, zero qualification.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259959 Sep 28, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Twoofers in tin foil hats who question 9/11.
Then there's you...
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Except those stories reference steel that is plated and an office fire melted the plating.
And those building didn't symmetrically completely collapse and at no point did they free fall.
And NIST didn't provide a cover up for those investigations as it did for 9/11.
But debunking is hard and
Insults Are Easier
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...

No they didn't.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259960 Sep 28, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
So this is your science???
That's okay I wasn't expecting an intelligent answer.
You have no science or you would understand that there could not have been any demolition.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259961 Sep 28, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Some Peer Reviewed Papers in Engineering Journals
What Did and Did not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York
Authors Bazant, Le, Greening & Benson. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE 134 (2008).
Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions Co-author Verdure. PDF. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE 133 (2007): pp. 308–319
Discussion and replies to June 2006 Bazant & Verdure paper: James Gourley, G. Szuladinski
Bazant & Zhou, 2001-2002: Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis J. Engineering Mechanics ASCE, Sept. 28, 2001, addendum March, 2002.
Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation. Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C., JOM v. 53, no. 12,(2001): 8-12.
Dissecting the Collapses Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5,(2002): 36-46.
A suggested cause of the fire-induced collapse of the World Trade Towers. By: Quintiere, J.G.; di Marzo, M.; Becker, R.. Fire Safety Journal, Oct2002, Vol. 37 Issue 7, p707, 10p.
S. W. Banovic, T. Foecke, W.E. Luecke, et al.“The role of metallurgy in the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center towers collapse”, JOM, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 22-29, November 2007.
Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center. By: Karim, Mohammed R.; Fatt, Michelle S. Hoo. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Oct2005, Vol. 131 Issue 10, p1066-1072.
Could the world trade center have been modified to prevent its collapse?; Newland, D. E.; Cebon, D. Journal of Engineering Mechanics; 2002 Vol. 128 Issue 7, p795-800, 6p.
"Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers" Clifton, Charles G., HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.
How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center; Wierzbicki, T.; Teng, X. International Journal of Impact Engineering; 2003 Vol. 28, p601-625, 25p
Stability of the World Trade Center Twin Towers Structural Frame in Multiple Floor Fires. By: Usmani, A. S.. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Jun2005, Vol. 131 Issue 6, p654-657.
Structural Responses of World Trade Center under Aircraft Attacks. Omika, Yukihiro.; Fukuzawa, Eiji.; Koshika, Norihide. Journal of Structural Engineering v. 131 no1 (January 2005) p. 6-15
The Structural Steel of the World Trade Center Towers. Gayle, Frank W.; Banovic, Stephen W.; Foecke, Tim. Advanced Materials & Processes v. 162 no10 (October 2004) p. 37-9
WTC Findings Uphold Structural Design. Post, Nadine M. ENR v. 253 no17 (November 1 2004) p. 10-11
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations" Monahan, B., Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3,(2002): 134-135.
Ming Wang, Peter Chang, James Quintiere, and Andre Marshall "Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1" Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities Volume 21, Issue 6, pp. 414-421
All debunked ages ago. Pure TWOOF.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#259962 Sep 28, 2013
The question is, why do twoofers feel the need to lie in their quest for twoof?

Oh right, because twoof is a lie defended by more lies all told by liars.

Case in point,
Insults Are Easier wrote:
The WTC towers were designed withstand the impact of two, count them, two 707's. 707's are considerably smaller then those aircraft that struck the towers, yet not considerably lighter due to the composite materials the newer aircraft are constructed with.
I said,

Porkpie Hat wrote, "<quoted text>
You've been shown time after time that the designer of the buildings did a few calculations to prove the buildings would survive a hit from a slow moving 707 lost in fog and no fuel loading was taken into account.
But then there's the fact that the buildings did survive the impacts..,.d'oh!
"

Leslie Robertson, lead designer of WTC 1 & 2 said,

"The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires."

He also said,

"Figure 3 shows the comparative energy of impact for the Mitchell bomber that hit the Empire State Building during World War II, a 707, and a 767. The energy contained in the fuel is shown in Figure 4. Considerations of larger aircraft are shown in Figures 5 and 6. The physical sizes of these aircraft are compared with the size of the floor plate of one of the towers in Figure 7. These charts demonstrate conclusively that we should not and cannot design buildings and structures to resist the impact of these aircraft."

http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Bridge/Engine...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259963 Sep 28, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Another list of twoofers who have proved nothing.
How long is this list going to get?
Of course. I just scrolled by that nonsense as the text flew by in a blur with the flick of a finger. lol

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#259964 Sep 28, 2013
And then there's the observant (see "non") nature of the average twoofer,
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Check out the FLIR footage of the WTC fires, not near the temps to melt steel, or make aluminum glow orange-yellow as it drips pre-collapse.

http://youtu.be/xQEd8PgY8vo

Insults Are Easier
didn't watch this until this morning and I have to say, what an excellent example of the non-observant nature of twoofer idiocy this is!

First, the range this device is set at is from +15 to +120C.

Second, the distance setting is at 0M.

So the device is set to measure to a maximum of 120C giving a colour coded readout of that parameter at a location of 0M!

Now it's a given that losers like Ignorance is Bliss have no clue a device like this works but seriously....do the not have any ability to use even basic logic?

That is too funny!!!!!"

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259965 Sep 28, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
Truthers why wouldn't the terrorists of 911 choose a baseball park lit up like a bowl of light in the night over 2 outstanding targets in New York.
How about a huge pentagon?
Timing is everything......couple that with a cloud free sky,..hundreds of miles of visibility and you have a high percentage of success.
And speaking of timing Peg, why wait for 8 hours to cause the collapse of a building when the worlds media are all filming innstead of having it collapse within the dust cloud created by the collapse of a 110 story building beside it?

Are nefarious plans always so bloody stupid?
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#259966 Sep 28, 2013
Thanks to all the blind idiots who have proven they couldn't answer the difficult question... how can aluminum and tempted steel vaporize while paper and plactic survives. Your childish and elementary insults only proves my point, Thanks!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259967 Sep 28, 2013
Oh and snce Manyfails doesn't believe anything he didn't slurp and swallow from some idiotic twoofer yourube, perhaps he should take advantage of resources in his local area when asking extremely stupid questions;

https://www.google.ca/#q=list+of+fire+station...

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259968 Sep 28, 2013
onemale wrote:
Thanks to all the blind idiots who have proven they couldn't answer the difficult question... how can aluminum and tempted steel vaporize while paper and plactic survives. Your childish and elementary insults only proves my point, Thanks!
It's an extremely stupid question asked by an extremely stupid twoofer who has ran away from every answer he's been given to date...and never answered any question asked of him.
conspiracy

Stafford, TX

#259969 Sep 28, 2013

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#259970 Sep 28, 2013
onemale wrote:
Thanks to all the blind idiots ...<snip>... Your childish and elementary insults only proves my point, Thanks!
Oh the twoofing irony!
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#259971 Sep 28, 2013
onemale wrote:
6 weeks later Mohamed Atta stood up and was alive in front of cameras at a Saudi Arabia television station!!
Link me to this prior claim or admit you were lying and I will be glad to address claims made after the above one.

Otherwise what is the point of addressing you at all, you will just lie to try to find the twoof!

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#259972 Sep 28, 2013
Notice how the resident debunkers will spam away tangible points, through repetition? More than the shared twoofer terminology, they each have a child-like maturity and inability to address real-world information.

Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)– Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career.

Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident....

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view.…

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged.…

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."

http://www.physics911.net

Insults Are Easier

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259973 Sep 28, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Notice how the resident debunkers will spam away tangible points, through repetition? More than the shared twoofer terminology, they each have a child-like maturity and inability to address real-world information.
Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret)– Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career.
Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident....
The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view.…
With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged.…
As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."
http://www.physics911.net
Insults Are Easier
Not really. Any unbiased person would simply realize that nothing other than flight 77 flew into the Pentagon given all the facts. Besides, if it didn't fly into the Pentagon, where could it have gone and how could it happen undetected?

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#259974 Sep 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Not really. Any unbiased person would simply realize that nothing other than flight 77 flew into the Pentagon given all the facts. Besides, if it didn't fly into the Pentagon, where could it have gone and how could it happen undetected?
Well, you are hardly unbiased as evidenced by your need to enter this forum under false pretenses, pretending to be a twoofer.

If you weren't such a bold-faced undignified liar, I still would find your assertions not logical nor believable.

The Nebraskan meth head himself copied a bunch of stuff from 911myths.com stating the differences of primary and secondary radar coverage and how planes with their transponder turned off can fly undetected through these secondary zones. Even the military (which I don't believe) claimed they didn't have complete radar coverage. So who knows what happened.

But on its face, theories aren't true simply because you aren't aware of an alternate.

But tell me, why do you think Porkpie Hat didn't attack you once during your first month here pretending to be a twoofer and calling everyone names? I mean, he attacks every truther, so why not you?

Insults Are Easier

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#259976 Sep 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really. Any unbiased person would simply realize that nothing other than flight 77 flew into the Pentagon given all the facts. Besides, if it didn't fly into the Pentagon, where could it have gone and how could it happen undetected?
There are no FACTS that prove flight 77 flew into the Pentagon. If you want to know what happened to this alleged flight ask Dean T. Hartwell.

He has written a book about it. What are your qualifications to do anything other than whine and complain about something you know nothing about.

http://www.amazon.com/Planes-without-Passenge...

The hole in the side of the Pentagon is too small.

There are no visible signs of a plane crash. To date no time stamped serial numbered piece of wreckage alleged to be from any plane alleged to have caused 9/11 has been identified back to the original aircraft in question.

Huh Eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259977 Sep 28, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you are hardly unbiased as evidenced by your need to enter this forum under false pretenses, pretending to be a twoofer.
If you weren't such a bold-faced undignified liar, I still would find your assertions not logical nor believable.
The Nebraskan meth head himself copied a bunch of stuff from 911myths.com stating the differences of primary and secondary radar coverage and how planes with their transponder turned off can fly undetected through these secondary zones. Even the military (which I don't believe) claimed they didn't have complete radar coverage. So who knows what happened.
But on its face, theories aren't true simply because you aren't aware of an alternate.
But tell me, why do you think Porkpie Hat didn't attack you once during your first month here pretending to be a twoofer and calling everyone names? I mean, he attacks every truther, so why not you?
Insults Are Easier
Wrong again. I looked at all the facts and changed my mind. The biggest no deal was flight 77. There is simply no other possibility than flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon given all the facts.

Your post is pure ad hominem BS, as usual.

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) 17 min Joe Fortuna 88,519
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 33 min gundee123 1,262
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min truth 665,601
Anyone wanna masturbate on FaceTime together (Jan '14) 2 hr Jmr 8
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 2 hr Classic 3,955
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 hr X Pendable 184,814
The Future of Politics in America 3 hr It aint necessari... 312
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 hr Unruh 977,504
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 16 hr truth 696
More from around the web