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

“One For the Money”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#265165 Jan 30, 2014
Well if we do not think the architects and engineers are experienced enough to understand 911 was an inside job.
We will just work our way down the professors who contradict the findings

I can't wait to read and post what such a brilliant person has to say about September 11th the day our government committed genocide on its own citizens.


What a resume!

David L. Griscom, PhD – Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service.

Fellow of the American Physical Society. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México in Mexico City (1997).

Visiting professorships of research at the Universities of Paris and Saint-Etienne, France, and Tokyo Institute of Technology (2000 - 2003).

Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona (2004 - 2005).

Winner of the 1993 N. F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996

Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL.

Principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work which is highly cited by his peers!

Officially credited with largest number of papers by any author on list of 100 most cited articles authored at NRL between 1973 and 1988.

“One For the Money”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#265166 Jan 30, 2014
David Griscom....... snippets from his articles.

Sudden Onset: In controlled demolition, the onset of the collapse is sudden. One moment, the building is perfectly motionless; the next moment, it suddenly begins to collapse.
But steel, when heated, does not suddenly buckle or break.

So in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual.

Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend.
But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes.

The buildings were perfectly motionless up to the moment they began their collapse.

(Steel does not suddenly buckle or break)
true

Steel does not even begin to melt until it reaches almost 2800° Fahrenheit.And yet open fires fueled by hydrocarbons, such as kerosene---which is what jet fuel is---can at most rise to 1700°F, which is almost 1100 degrees below the melting point of steel

The fire was 1100 degrees below the melting point for steel. say what!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265167 Jan 30, 2014
LOL NO PLANES, NO PLANES

Griscom holds the distinction of having the single-most offensive theory in 9-11 Troofy Troof. As he wrote:

I envision a similar 9/11 scheme, but one where the passengers boarded under their true names. Indeed, the seat occupancies on all four aircraft allegedly hijacked on 9/11 were very much lower that industry average (averaging 26% of capacity vis-à-vis 71% for all domestic flights in July 2001). So, here I extend my “all passengers survived” postulate to all four 9/11 “hijacked” flights on the notion that this small number of passengers might have been considered by conspirators as the minimum number for public credulity, while at the same time not exceeding the maximum number of “true believers in the cause” willing to accept long separations from their loved ones (sweetened by handsome Swiss bank accounts).

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/05/...
-Web wrote:
Well if we do not think the architects and engineers are experienced enough to understand 911 was an inside job.
We will just work our way down the professors who contradict the findings
I can't wait to read and post what such a brilliant person has to say about September 11th the day our government committed genocide on its own citizens.
What a resume!
David L. Griscom, PhD – Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service.
Fellow of the American Physical Society. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México in Mexico City (1997).
Visiting professorships of research at the Universities of Paris and Saint-Etienne, France, and Tokyo Institute of Technology (2000 - 2003).
Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona (2004 - 2005).
Winner of the 1993 N. F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996
Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL.
Principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work which is highly cited by his peers!
Officially credited with largest number of papers by any author on list of 100 most cited articles authored at NRL between 1973 and 1988.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265168 Jan 30, 2014
-Web wrote:
David L. Griscom, PhD – Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service.
David Griscom Promotes:'All Hijacked Passengers Survived' Theory

By Arabesque

An article by David Griscom promotes the theory that "All Hijacked Passengers Survived." His website includes several articles with the introduction, "How could they have pulled it off? Check out Dave's carefully researched hypotheses." The first visible article is entitled, "Towards a Comprehensive 9/11 Conspiracy Theory: The 'All Hijacked Passengers Survived' Hypothesis":

...An underlying postulate, or working hypothesis, of my earlier Pentagon model was that the passengers on AA-77 volunteered to feign their deaths in return for cushy “witness protection” programs...

AND EVEN FELLOW TWOFFERS THINK HE'S NUTS.

This article by Griscom can only serve to discredit the 9/11 truth movement and his judgment for writing it should be questioned. Many family members support the 9/11 truth movement but many false claims and hoaxes discredit real questions about the event itself. The 9/11 commission itself was only created after intense pressure from family members. After submitting a list of hundreds of questions, the Family Steering Committee received answers to 30% of their questions.

Update: September 28, 2008

Upon contacting Griscom, I suggested that he remove his article from circulation and offer an apology for its content. After some debate he has not retracted the article from circulation at this point in time. Instead, he has published a revised version which still contains many of the statements that I marked as objectionable above. As well, his newest version does not mention or account for the DNA reports that I have cited above.

http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/09/davi...

“One For the Money”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#265169 Jan 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings on the air that he was given a warning that the WTC was about to collapse; a warning which was not forwarded to the firefighters in the towers. Now Giuliani is trying to "Orwell" the story by claiming that he did not receive any kind of warning.
Later he states:
Giuliani replied by saying, "I didn't realize the towers would collapse." He later added, "No one that I know of had any idea they would implode. That was a complete surprise." [wnbc.com 05/29/07]
Lies and propaganda from the former mayor of NYC, re: his involvement in 9/11.
Huh Eh !
Odd you posted this because my mother told me she read before Peter Jennings died he said that if the American people knew what he knew there would be an uprising in America.

I have searched trying to find out if he ever told what he knew to no avail.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265170 Jan 30, 2014
-Web wrote:
Well if we do not think the architects and engineers are experienced enough to understand 911 was an inside job.
We will just work our way down the professors who contradict the findings
I can't wait to read and post what such a brilliant person has to say about September 11th the day our government committed genocide on its own citizens.
What a resume!
David L. Griscom, PhD – Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service.
Fellow of the American Physical Society. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México in Mexico City (1997).
Visiting professorships of research at the Universities of Paris and Saint-Etienne, France, and Tokyo Institute of Technology (2000 - 2003).
Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona (2004 - 2005).
Winner of the 1993 N. F. Mott Award sponsored by the Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, the 1995 Otto Schott Award offered by the Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (Germany), a 1996
Outstanding Graduate School Alumnus Award at Brown University, and the 1997 Sigma Xi Pure Science Award at NRL.
Principal author of 109 of his 185 published works, a body of work which is highly cited by his peers!
Officially credited with largest number of papers by any author on list of 100 most cited articles authored at NRL between 1973 and 1988.
Resumes don't count.

Proves nothing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265171 Jan 30, 2014
-Web wrote:
David Griscom....... snippets from his articles.
Sudden Onset: In controlled demolition, the onset of the collapse is sudden. One moment, the building is perfectly motionless; the next moment, it suddenly begins to collapse.
But steel, when heated, does not suddenly buckle or break.
So in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual.
Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend.
But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes.
The buildings were perfectly motionless up to the moment they began their collapse.
(Steel does not suddenly buckle or break)
true
Steel does not even begin to melt until it reaches almost 2800° Fahrenheit.And yet open fires fueled by hydrocarbons, such as kerosene---which is what jet fuel is---can at most rise to 1700°F, which is almost 1100 degrees below the melting point of steel
The fire was 1100 degrees below the melting point for steel. say what!
1. Fires got hotter due to the fact that there were significant updrafts. This is the principal of blast furnaces.

2. Trusses deflected pulling the outer walls inward. There is plenty of visual evidence proving this to be the case. After 5' the outer structure failed and did snap at the connections.

You proved nothing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265172 Jan 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
LOL NO PLANES, NO PLANES
Griscom holds the distinction of having the single-most offensive theory in 9-11 Troofy Troof. As he wrote:
I envision a similar 9/11 scheme, but one where the passengers boarded under their true names. Indeed, the seat occupancies on all four aircraft allegedly hijacked on 9/11 were very much lower that industry average (averaging 26% of capacity vis-à-vis 71% for all domestic flights in July 2001). So, here I extend my “all passengers survived” postulate to all four 9/11 “hijacked” flights on the notion that this small number of passengers might have been considered by conspirators as the minimum number for public credulity, while at the same time not exceeding the maximum number of “true believers in the cause” willing to accept long separations from their loved ones (sweetened by handsome Swiss bank accounts).
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/05/...
<quoted text>
2 + 2 = Twoof huh?

That's some goofy shit.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265173 Jan 30, 2014
-Web wrote:
<quoted text>
Odd you posted this because my mother told me she read before Peter Jennings died he said that if the American people knew what he knew there would be an uprising in America.

I have searched trying to find out if he ever told what he knew to no avail.
Yea, That should tell you something, tell a twoofer anything and they just assume it true.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265174 Jan 30, 2014
Post

Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings on the air that he was given a warning that the WTC was about to collapse; a warning which was not forwarded to the firefighters in the towers. Now Giuliani is trying to "Orwell" the story by claiming that he did not receive any kind of warning.

Reply
-Web wrote:
<quoted text>
Odd you posted this because my mother told me she read before Peter Jennings died he said that if the American people knew what he knew there would be an uprising in America.
I have searched trying to find out if he ever told what he knew to no avail.
Point proven, he can't supply any sort of link to the statement in the top and you assume it true dirty diddler.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265175 Jan 30, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Fires got hotter due to the fact that there were significant updrafts. This is the principal of blast furnaces.
2. Trusses deflected pulling the outer walls inward. There is plenty of visual evidence proving this to be the case. After 5' the outer structure failed and did snap at the connections.
You proved nothing.
No kidding, how long does it take a 5/8 inch hardened bolt to snap, they do not snap gradually.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265176 Jan 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
No kidding, how long does it take a 5/8 inch hardened bolt to snap, they do not snap gradually.
Actually I came across another explanation which showed the outer structure being pulled inward by the trusses which were connected with 5/8" bolts. Instead of the bolts shearing, which was a preliminary theory, they actually held but the deflection of the outer shell caused the catastrophic failure at around 5' of deflection.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265177 Jan 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
No kidding, how long does it take a 5/8 inch hardened bolt to snap, they do not snap gradually.
Here are some interesting links.

This one has some great photos and explanations.

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapte...

Here is the perimeter column pull explanation. Scroll down and the bow is plainly visible.

http://www.debunking911.com/sag.htm
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#265178 Jan 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
LMFAO - You did not even read it mommy diddler, try reading 2-1, it has nothing to do with FEMA camps or putting civilians in camps!
What part of "Civilian Inmate Labor Program" don't you understand "Civilian" is the keyword here.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#265179 Jan 30, 2014
Personally I like a good in-depth investigation

The Bilderberg Conspiracy

Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265181 Jan 30, 2014
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "Civilian Inmate Labor Program" don't you understand "Civilian" is the keyword here.
I know you are a retarded diddler but it speaks of labor from people already in prison for crimes, the usage is common in both the private and public sectors.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#265182 Jan 30, 2014
onemale wrote:
Personally I like a good in-depth investigation
The Bilderberg Conspiracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =gP6erO9X0gwXX
So do I nutty!

Lets see, the best you ever had, that would make you at least bi!
onemale wrote:
I consider myself as straight, but let a guy give me a bj and it was the best I ever had. It was a one time thing, he just wanted to know what it was like. No, I did NOT return the favor.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/sex/T7HGJ9UHL...

Bu hold on Mommy diddler!
onemale wrote:
onemale
Mattoon, IL
You are wrong AIDS and HIV knows no boundaries.
The gay men deliberately gave AIDS to straight people so the government would fund more research for it. That is why I hate gay men, there should have been an open season on them. But bi-men are the worse they are the ones giving it to women.
thought not!
P.S. You just stepped on your own dick
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...

YOU WANT open season ON YOURSELF!

You brain really is busted!

“One For the Money”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#265183 Jan 30, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Fires got hotter due to the fact that there were significant updrafts. This is the principal of blast furnaces.
2. Trusses deflected pulling the outer walls inward. There is plenty of visual evidence proving this to be the case. After 5' the outer structure failed and did snap at the connections.
You proved nothing.
This has to be the most ridiculous explanation I have heard thus far.

550 miles of steel melt and collapse in 2 hrs.and 28 minutes because of an updraft.
And you can tell this by visual evidence?

psst thanks for the laugh you proved you can be a comedian.

“One For the Money”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#265184 Jan 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
Post
Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings on the air that he was given a warning that the WTC was about to collapse; a warning which was not forwarded to the firefighters in the towers. Now Giuliani is trying to "Orwell" the story by claiming that he did not receive any kind of warning.
Reply
<quoted text>
Point proven, he can't supply any sort of link to the statement in the top and you assume it true dirty diddler.
He may not be able to supply a link I have searched the net many times trying to find out what Peter Jennings knew because my mother told me Peter Jennings had some big secret at the time I didn't know what she was talking about.

So today I glanced over his post and thought it was odd he had also read something about Peter Jennings.

Seriously whats up with you calling every one diddlers its creepy.
shudders

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#265185 Jan 30, 2014
-Web wrote:
<quoted text>
This has to be the most ridiculous explanation I have heard thus far.
550 miles of steel melt and collapse in 2 hrs.and 28 minutes because of an updraft.
And you can tell this by visual evidence?
psst thanks for the laugh you proved you can be a comedian.
Not really but you obviously can't think clearly.

1. Critical pieces deflected causing structural failure.

2. A small amount of metal melted in places as evidenced by puddles of molten steel and hot debris which rained down upon trapped firemen.

550 miles of steel? WTF is that all about?

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 3 min ImPeach 26,099
David Duke: "We're going to take our country ba... 6 min UMORONRACEMAKEWOR... 53
to Maria Chapelle-Nadal: it's time to ROLL, sista' 14 min Doctor REALITY 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min Gods r Delusion x... 685,740
I hate Haiti (Jan '10) 1 hr Anne Nonymiss 109
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr nanoanomaly 985,687
"BIGGEST SCAM in WORLD HISTORY...." 2 hr YTube 1st 1
More from around the web