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

Canada

#262246 Nov 12, 2013
P equals MV wrote:
<quoted text>I'm so dumb I need someone to explain it to me, like you did when you explained free fall was an acceleration, not a velocity.
Sure, you're a moron and I'd be happy to help oh elevator boy-sheep-socky!

See dummy, you still have a massive problem with your idiotic claim. That problem is that you haven't supported the premise that free fall can only occur by use of nefarious means.

In the real world any relevant professionals not trying to dumb you down understands fully that the 3.5 seconds of free fall WTC 7 experienced occurred after the east and west mechanical penthouses sunk into the building which only happen if the interior structure beneath them had already failed.

Now given that there was no longer any ability for a portion of the building to withstand the force of gravity and the destruction of load bearing capability, the curtain wall fell.

You've been mainlining D.U.M.B.(Deliberate Uttering of Misinformation and Blatherings) for a long time elevator boy-sheep-socky so it's not like you'll understand a word of this.

Go into your local university and show my post...and your laughably idiotic bleatings to a structural engineering prof.

He'll help you see your folly!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#262247 Nov 12, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
So we are to believe an Interstate was destroyed by fire? Yeah right, at least post something half assed believable.
LOL, OK, So a fire from a burning fuel truck weakening an overpass with metal reinforcements is UNBELIEVABLE TO YOU!

But ....
onemale wrote:
George Bush Face On $20 Bill Watermark
After using a new $20 Bill as a bookmark in a bible book overnight the President Jackson watermark changed into President Bush's face with a devil horn in his forehead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =2TBzAJGNKOgXX
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...

THIS MAKES SENSE TO YOU, WOW, YOU ARE STUPID!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#262248 Nov 12, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
An overpass has much more concrete, even though concrete doesn't burn it is seriously weakened from a fire.
A highrise is supported by metal, and the metal is much stronger to hold up the tons of weight above and to withstand high winds.
Show your math on metal vs concrete weakening by strength percentage and temperature.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#262249 Nov 12, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text> 6 weeks later Mohamed Atta stood up and was alive in front of cameras at a Saudi Arabia television station!!
Link or LIE?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#262250 Nov 12, 2013
Inner C-ring wrote:
<quoted text>
the hole in the Pentagon façade was too small to allow the passage of a 757, wings and all no less and there was no mark where the engines would have been, only a single entrance hole from the fuselage. That other hole in the courtyard you are talking about is the entrance hole at the inner C-ring which could not have been made by the aluminum fuselage which disintegrated upon impact with the façade. In fact, whatever made that well demarcated punched out hole should have ended up on the other side either still intact or with the debris immediately obvious in the vicinity, neither of which we see on the photographs, and even if it did disintegrate at the inner C-ring I would have to question why it didn't disintegrate as it penetrated the outer walls first because that is when it had the most kinetic energy. It is impossible that it would have penetrated the other walls and remain intact and then disintegrate when it had the least kinetic energy at that point in the inner C-ring. If you know anything about physics you would realize how stupid you sound, unfortunately I don't think you know anything about physics which is why you are TSTKHSYO.
Were you there? Hundreds of witnesses say you are mistaken. Photographs also say so. Besides, it is all quite obvious. The walls were windows. You don't think a plane traveling around 500mph will go through a wall of windows?

Are you kidding me?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#262251 Nov 12, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
"Evidence of thermite zero." Investigation/testing of the presence of thermite also zero. So how was this theory produced?
"Evidence of production of iron rich micro spheres by other means) 35 years worth"
35 years of rusting of iron rich micro spheres created by welding of construction.
Iron of any size will rust in a dry environment as well as a wet one.
http://www.ask.com/question/what-conditions-c...
"The types of conditions that cause iron nails (much larger than micro spheres) to rust faster include damp, dark places. Rust loves areas with no sunshine or air or someplace that will dry up the liquid quickly."
http://www.ask.com/question/what-conditions-c...
You have no case drunkard.
Give it up. I won't call you stupid but you're close and persistent as well.
Anyone who has ever electric arc welded, or seen it, knows iron rich micro spheres are formed and are blasted everywhere around the arc formed during such welding.
There must have been a lot of electric arc welding during the construction of the WTC towers. Oxy-Acetylene cutting yes, which will create iron rich spheres and larger pieces of iron rich slag. I can assure you no Oxy-Acetylene welding was employed during construction of the WTC towers.
Any iron rich spheres found at ground zero were not originally caused by arc welding or oxy-acetylene cutting during construction. These original small (micro) beads or drops of iron will rust easily in any environment and could not last 35 years to be found in the extensive dust left all over Lower Manhattan after the collapse of the buildings.
Huh Eh !
Many assumptions. Everything could have been fabricated elsewhere meaning that no welding would have been necessary.

Iron rich spheres?

You are joking of course. More Twoofer dust? The towers collapsed due to damage and structural failure.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262252 Nov 12, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Anytime one group needs to label another to dishonestly make a point, I tend to gravitate towards that maligned group that doesn't resort to smear tactics.

Rust is why

Insults Are Easier
Your problem is that you've been extremely dishonest and twoof as a generality is based on dishonesty.

Pointing that fact out shouldn't be your issue, the fact that you've bought into a pile of lies should be your issue.

But then you are a liar for twoof and

[Your] Ignorance is [Your] Bliss

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262253 Nov 12, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Ever notice when smear campaigners make no sense they just start spamming?

Insults Are Easier
You've noticed elevator boy-sheep's penchant for spamming stupid too eh.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262254 Nov 12, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
The attached statement

Iron Microspheres in the Context of the World Trade Center Dust
Well, let’s start with the basics. The World Trade Center was a building with many iron&#8208;based components. There were structural components such as beams and electrical conduit. There were building contents such as desks and file cabinets.

Now, the building is hit by two jet airplanes resulting in a fire fed by jet fuel. The electrical system is compromised resulting in high voltage, high amperage electrical arcing between the wires and the conduit. The fire is in a building with a central core of elevator shafts that act like a chimney efficiently providing the oxygen needed for combustion. The air and other gasses are flowing with hurricane force speeds. The fire is sufficiently hot to exceed the plastic strength of the structural steel and the building collapses.

What about the iron microspheres? The iron has a thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape. The iron is heated red hot or hotter and subjected to hurricane force blast furnace like wind. The iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized. Like drops of water, the iron flakes form molten spheres that solidify and the fume also condenses into spheres, the most efficient geometrical form. Incidentally, iron is not the only material that formed spheres during the event. Some building material is made of minerals containing aluminum and silicon and alumino&#8208;silicate spheres were also observed in the dust.

The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino&#8208;silicate spheres in the well&#8208;studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces.
Rich Lee
But RJ Lee isn't a twoof sanctioned source so they'll just ignore reality...again.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262255 Nov 12, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>Why don't we let one of the twoofer's tell us how Steven Jones obtained the dust samples and where it came from.

I got a feeling they don't want to
Nor do they want anyone else having samples for independent testing.

Chris Mohr who organized the Millette tests asked for samples of twoofer dust and was told no by TTTB (the twoofers that be).

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#262256 Nov 12, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
"Evidence of thermite zero." Investigation/testing of the presence of thermite also zero. So how was this theory produced?
"Evidence of production of iron rich micro spheres by other means) 35 years worth"
35 years of rusting of iron rich micro spheres created by welding of construction.
Iron of any size will rust in a dry environment as well as a wet one.
http://www.ask.com/question/what-conditions-c...
"The types of conditions that cause iron nails (much larger than micro spheres) to rust faster include damp, dark places. Rust loves areas with no sunshine or air or someplace that will dry up the liquid quickly."
http://www.ask.com/question/what-conditions-c...
You have no case drunkard.
Give it up. I won't call you stupid but you're close and persistent as well.
Anyone who has ever electric arc welded, or seen it, knows iron rich micro spheres are formed and are blasted everywhere around the arc formed during such welding.
There must have been a lot of electric arc welding during the construction of the WTC towers. Oxy-Acetylene cutting yes, which will create iron rich spheres and larger pieces of iron rich slag. I can assure you no Oxy-Acetylene welding was employed during construction of the WTC towers.
Any iron rich spheres found at ground zero were not originally caused by arc welding or oxy-acetylene cutting during construction. These original small (micro) beads or drops of iron will rust easily in any environment and could not last 35 years to be found in the extensive dust left all over Lower Manhattan after the collapse of the buildings.
Huh Eh !
Oxy-Acetylene rigs were extensively used during the cleanup. The Twoofer dust was "discovered" after the clean up. Do you have any point at all here?
P equals MV

Georgetown, KY

#262260 Nov 12, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>Sure, you're a moron and I'd be happy to help oh elevator boy-sheep-socky!
See dummy, you still have a massive problem with your idiotic claim. That problem is that you haven't supported the premise that free fall can only occur by use of nefarious means.
In the real world any relevant professionals not trying to dumb you down understands fully that the 3.5 seconds of free fall WTC 7 experienced occurred after the east and west mechanical penthouses sunk into the building which only happen if the interior structure beneath them had already failed.
Now given that there was no longer any ability for a portion of the building to withstand the force of gravity and the destruction of load bearing capability, the curtain wall fell.
You've been mainlining D.U.M.B.(Deliberate Uttering of Misinformation and Blatherings) for a long time elevator boy-sheep-socky so it's not like you'll understand a word of this.
Go into your local university and show my post...and your laughably idiotic bleatings to a structural engineering prof.
He'll help you see your folly!
in the real world there is this thing called friction and resistance which has to be accounted for in p=mv, which means that velocity has to DIMINISH which means you cannot have acceleration of the collapse sequence which means that the energy imparted from the initial momentum gradually goes to ZERO since resistance is met with each successive floor...even a high school physics student knows this so there is no need to go to a university on this simple concept. But since you're a welder I can understand your difficulty in comprehending this.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262261 Nov 12, 2013
P equals MV wrote:
<quoted text>in the real world there is this thing called friction and resistance which has to be accounted for in p=mv, which means that velocity has to DIMINISH which means you cannot have acceleration of the collapse sequence which means that the energy imparted from the initial momentum gradually goes to ZERO since resistance is met with each successive floor...even a high school physics student knows this so there is no need to go to a university on this simple concept. But since you're a welder I can understand your difficulty in comprehending this.
That again is a lot of words to show you haven't for even the slightest clue what you're trying to say.

Reality-twoof claims fire induced structural failure is impossible.

Reality-twoof has done nothing to support that claim.

Reality-all the dancing in the world won't help you prove an unsupportable claim.

Reality-there is no physical law or reason that says fire induced structural failure could not have accounted for the collapse of WTC 7.

Reality-friction CAN be negligible in any collapse scenario if the mass of the moving object and the applies force (g) is sufficient.

Reality-the building interior had already partially collapsed as confirmed by the disappearance of the penthouses.

Reality-the calculation for the coefficient of static friction will be 0.

Reality-the coefficient of kinetic friction will also be 0.

Reality-the coefficient for steel on steel friction is 0.57.

Reality-0.57*0=0

Awww....twoof lost again!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#262262 Nov 12, 2013
Btw oh elevator boy-sheep-socky, where do you get the idea that in the presence of friction, velocity must decrease?

Do you even have a clue how dumb that is?

Do you get that what you're actually saying is that nothing could ever collapse as long as friction is present?

Of course you don't, you're really that dumb!

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#262263 Nov 12, 2013
P equals MV wrote:
<quoted text>
in the real world there is this thing called friction and resistance which has to be accounted for in p=mv, which means that velocity has to DIMINISH which means you cannot have acceleration of the collapse sequence which means that the energy imparted from the initial momentum gradually goes to ZERO since resistance is met with each successive floor...even a high school physics student knows this so there is no need to go to a university on this simple concept. But since you're a welder I can understand your difficulty in comprehending this.
That would be true if the collapsing mass was only the 1 floor above the collapse initiation point.
But it was way beyond design load limits from that point.
Catastrophic failure was eminent because of that.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#262264 Nov 12, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> That would be true if the collapsing mass was only the 1 floor above the collapse initiation point.
But it was way beyond design load limits from that point.
Catastrophic failure was eminent because of that.
You're being far to kind:-)

He's saying that friction always causes a decrease in velocity so in his world of make believe a load of 10kg at rest could never fall since it experiences Fn=Fg=mg.

Since the initial velocity is 0m/s there is no way to move the object in any direction except straight up...

Of course that's ludicrous and velocity can increase regardless of the presence of friction...although acceleration may decrease IF "m" stays constant or if the mass added to the system is insufficient to overcome friction.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#262265 Nov 12, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> That would be true if the collapsing mass was only the 1 floor above the collapse initiation point.
But it was way beyond design load limits from that point.
Catastrophic failure was eminent because of that.
Your story is just a repeat of govie BS that makes no sense.
The mass you are referring to was in the form of dust and multi ton beams ejected outward 600 feet away from the towers. There should have been a reduction in the weight above.
In addition to: The 47 core columns were designed to hold 3 times the weight above, and the 240+ perimeter columns were designed to hold 5 times the weight above.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#262266 Nov 12, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
That again is a lot of words to show you haven't for even the slightest clue what you're trying to say.
Reality-twoof claims fire induced structural failure is impossible.
Reality-twoof has done nothing to support that claim.
Reality-all the dancing in the world won't help you prove an unsupportable claim.
Reality-there is no physical law or reason that says fire induced structural failure could not have accounted for the collapse of WTC 7.
Reality-friction CAN be negligible in any collapse scenario if the mass of the moving object and the applies force (g) is sufficient.
Reality-the building interior had already partially collapsed as confirmed by the disappearance of the penthouses.
Reality-the calculation for the coefficient of static friction will be 0.
Reality-the coefficient of kinetic friction will also be 0.
Reality-the coefficient for steel on steel friction is 0.57.
Reality-0.57*0=0
Awww....twoof lost again!
How did WTC 7 fall from the bottom up when the fires were on the upper floors? Your claim makes no sense, but then what else is new?
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#262267 Nov 12, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Btw oh elevator boy-sheep-socky, where do you get the idea that in the presence of friction, velocity must decrease?
Do you even have a clue how dumb that is?
Do you get that what you're actually saying is that nothing could ever collapse as long as friction is present?
Of course you don't, you're really that dumb!
Now I understand your philosophy... a car running 60 mph hits a parked car and the impact doesn't slow down the moving car.
How dumb is that?
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#262268 Nov 12, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Show your math on metal vs concrete weakening by strength percentage and temperature.
It should be common knowledge.
Take a concrete block throw it in a brush fire.
When the fire is out see how brittle the block is.
A brick... same story.

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) 3 min Nohweh 55,895
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min Michael 650,004
Why do Turkish men cheat (Aug '10) 24 min randomgirl 547
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 46 min another viewer 971,761
snapchat name 57 min Tommy 3
chat with demi lovato 112 (the real official de... (Jan '09) 58 min Sexgirl 1,980
How to get Free Steam games, Steam Wallet codes... (Dec '13) 1 hr RandomGuy1334 145
my cousin touches me when i am asleep and i kin... (Mar '14) 17 hr Jesus 47
More from around the web