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

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#276051 Jul 29, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>It's just too frikking funny!
After humiliating himself by posting a video showing a flir device set at 0M and 120C, he now posts a video showing the exact same thing but rather than panning through the device settings, stills are taken showing one moment that really tells us nothing about the temperature of the fires inside the building!
This is yet another saver of his utter Ignorance and stupidity!!!
twoof = epic stupidity.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#276052 Jul 29, 2014
Nah, whats funny is you don't understand the concept of a fire's temperature effect upon its surroundings or the lowering temperature of that fire right before collapse.

More hilarious still, is how you disregard the other 20 points in that video clip that show you to be dimwitted.

But the most comedic thing about you is how you require a provable idiot like the Charlie troll to validate you, so

Insults Are Easier

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276053 Jul 29, 2014
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
If I remember one of timetwits socks posted thermite and ice will explode
Of course ordinary office fires cant melt ice
Maybe that's just in twooferdumb where the rules of speshul physics apply?

Don't give him any ideas though, next he'll be citing pedo-tommy as an expert!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276054 Jul 29, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> twoof = epic stupidity.
On it's best day!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276056 Jul 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Nah, whats funny is you don't understand the concept of a fire's temperature effect upon its surroundings or the lowering temperature of that fire right before collapse.
More hilarious still, is how you disregard the other 20 points in that video clip that show you to be dimwitted.
But the most comedic thing about you is how you require a provable idiot like the Charlie troll to validate you, so
Insults Are Easier
What you don't understand is that the device is still set at 120C and most likely 0M as it was in the first idiotic video you posted.

The accuracy of any reading is going to be extremely low.

What you also don't understand is that the flames outside the building will be much lower that the inside given that the ambient temperature will cool the fire exposed to the outside and that the heat inside will continue to build.

Plus, fire science already knows the temperatures of fires in buildings is much, much higher than 120C...in fact that claim alone is so bloody laughable that I'll be saving it to humiliate you over and over again while amusing myself with your pure, unadulterated ignorance and stupidity!

Thanks for playing moron!

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#276057 Jul 29, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>

3. By your own admission, you have never read any of the official reports, which makes you unqualified to pass judgment.
I never said I haven't read any of the NIST reports, I simply said the question was how many of those 15,000 pages did you understand.

If you thoroughly read and understood the NIST reports, as you claim, you would be aware of these inconsistencies.

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235

no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99

recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133

"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2

NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"

"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_200 6. htm

This must be why

Insults Are Easier

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276058 Jul 29, 2014
Flame temperatures in room fires

"There is fairly broad agreement in the fire science community that flashover is reached when the average upper gas temperature in the room exceeds about 600°C. Prior to that point, no generalizations should be made: There will be zones of 900°C flame temperatures, but wide spatial variations will be seen. Of interest, however, is the peak fire temperature normally associated with room fires. The peak value is governed by ventilation and fuel supply characteristics [12] and so such values will form a wide frequency distribution. Of interest is the maximum value which is fairly regularly found. This value turns out to be around 1200°C, although a typical post-flashover room fire will more commonly be 900~1000°C. The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 [13] goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr. In actual fact, no jurisdiction demands fire endurance periods for over 4 hr, at which point the curve only reaches 1093°C.
The peak expected temperatures in room fires, then, are slightly greater than those found in free-burning fire plumes. This is to be expected. The amount that the fire plume's temperature drops below the adiabatic flame temperature is determined by the heat losses from the flame. When a flame is far away from any walls and does not heat up the enclosure, it radiates to surroundings which are essentially at 20°C. If the flame is big enough (or the room small enough) for the room walls to heat up substantially, then the flame exchanges radiation with a body that is several hundred °C; the consequence is smaller heat losses, and, therefore, a higher flame temperature."

http://www.doctorfire.com/flametmp.html

But what do fire scientists know about fires that anonymous idiots on youRube videos don't....right?

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!

Oh Ignorance, you just can`t open your mouth without shoving a foot or two in it!

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#276059 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
= epically delirious
I have that effect on all of you.:)

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#276060 Jul 29, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>What you don't understand is that the device is still set at 120C and most likely 0M as it was in the first idiotic video you posted.

The accuracy of any reading is going to be extremely low.

What you also don't understand is that the flames outside the building will be much lower that the inside given that the ambient temperature will cool the fire exposed to the outside and that the heat inside will continue to build.

Plus, fire science already knows the temperatures of fires in buildings is much, much higher than 120C...
What you have always failed to grasp, apart from the NIST investigation being completely unscientific, was the FLIR video always showed the fire cooling to below 120 c before the collapse.

Now as far as Building 7, NIST itself states no core heating above 250 c, far below the level where fire can account for the destruction of that building.

But, your too concerned with laughing at ideas than learning anything, so

Insults Are Easier
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#276061 Jul 29, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>It's just too frikking funny!
After humiliating himself by posting a video showing a flir device set at 0M and 120C, he now posts a video showing the exact same thing but rather than panning through the device settings, stills are taken showing one moment that really tells us nothing about the temperature of the fires inside the building!
This is yet another saver of his utter Ignorance and stupidity!!!
Too funny, missed that one, even if set right one would want reading showing a no rise over time, showing a reading when the building has not collapsed and saying the fires were not hot enough for a global collapse ..... well, I'm giving too much credit but might be a clue as to why the buildings were standing when the readings were taken,
Pegasus

Plainville, MA

#276062 Jul 29, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
For a lawyer, Sheen sure does spend a lot of time here ...I wonder if his two clients know that?
It's none of their business.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276063 Jul 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
What you have always failed to grasp, apart from the NIST investigation being completely unscientific, was the FLIR video always showed the fire cooling to below 120 c before the collapse.
Now as far as Building 7, NIST itself states no core heating above 250 c, far below the level where fire can account for the destruction of that building.
But, your too concerned with laughing at ideas than learning anything, so
Insults Are Easier
You really are a sucker for punishment and humiliation aren`t you Ignorance!

Again, the fire temp taken with a device not properly set will not be accurate in any way, shape or form.

The temp outside the building will not reflect the interior temperatures that are not exposed to ambient temps.

NIST did not make that claim....you never read it in the NIST report, you were told that`s what it said and believed it in your usual mindless fashion.

The reality is that NIST used cracking and spalling of paints to determine minimum temperatures the fires reached and morons like you have been too dumb to figure out you were lied to by your charlatan masters who continue to make you look like the biggest of fools around!

Good luck with that you freaking moron!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#276064 Jul 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said I haven't read any of the NIST reports, I simply said the question was how many of those 15,000 pages did you understand.
If you thoroughly read and understood the NIST reports, as you claim, you would be aware of these inconsistencies.
"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235
no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99
recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133
"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2
NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_200 6. htm
This must be why
Insults Are Easier
YAWN

Now you claim to have read 15,000 pages.

Your out of context cherry picking impresses no one.

Nice try though.

GLAD I COULD HELP

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#276065 Jul 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said I haven't read any of the NIST reports, I simply said the question was how many of those 15,000 pages did you understand.
If you thoroughly read and understood the NIST reports, as you claim, you would be aware of these inconsistencies.
"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235
no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99
recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133
"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2
NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"
"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_200 6. htm
This must be why
Insults Are Easier
... all is pointless due to the fact that planes hit the buildings causing massive fires and severing standpipes feeding fire sprinkler systems. What's more fire were oxygen feed by huge updrafts causing the floor trusses to deflect, pulling the outer structural members inward to the point of failure. I have already posted links to the sources of this information.

GLAD I COULD HELP

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Calgary, Canada

#276067 Jul 29, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
YAWN
Now you claim to have read 15,000 pages.
Your out of context cherry picking impresses no one.
Nice try though.
GLAD I COULD HELP
He's obviously never read it.

He copy and pasted his idiotic crap from another conspiracy website here,

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread991...

Busted!

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#276068 Jul 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
What you have always failed to grasp, apart from the NIST investigation being completely unscientific, was the FLIR video always showed the fire cooling to below 120 c before the collapse.
Now as far as Building 7, NIST itself states no core heating above 250 c, far below the level where fire can account for the destruction of that building.
But, your too concerned with laughing at ideas than learning anything, so
Insults Are Easier
The fire was less than a burning candle?

Ok..lol

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#276069 Jul 29, 2014
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>The fire was less than a burning candle?

Ok..lol
Yup.

That's how dumb twoof is.

What the idiots don't realize and will never understand is that a) high temps were not required for structural failure and b) even if NIST was wrong about every detail, the fact that structural failure and gravity caused collapse would still be true and twoof would not "win" by default.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#276070 Jul 29, 2014
Another rather funny aspect of Ignorances ignorance is that the section of the report his list is from addresses distinct steel members that can be identified to their as built locations.

What the dishonest morons do is cherry pick statements unique to a distinct test piece then pretend it's a general statement by NIST for all recovered steel.

Read the report and the dishonesty of these sheep becomes very obvious.
MUQ1

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#276071 Jul 29, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>The rest of your inane drivel aside, both the above claims are nothing but empty assertions from you, a scientifically illiterate fool.
Claiming the towers couldn't be brought down (from the bottom) regardless of the amount of explosives used is as preposterous as anything you idiots have ever claimed and totally unsupportable.
Oh and gravity has a vector....it's straight down.
Get a grip....and go learn something before coming here spouting nonsense.
If Gravity is a vector, then what is "controlled demolition"?

Why they have to use computers and place explosives at "strategic points"?

Why not put "Lost of explosives" on Ground Floor and let "gravity vector" do its trick.

It is not me, but you who look idiotic and without any knowledge.
MUQ1

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#276072 Jul 29, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Any evidence of that, who were the people and how were they placed in key posts?
Dick Cheney to start with!!

Catch him and rest would follow!!

The head of NIST investigation team is another guy.

Catch the Big Fishes and small fishes would come in the net by themselves.

Have you the guts?

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 26,491
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 min Gods r Delusion x... 685,823
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 52 min Jake999 619,750
Why it's time for Donald Trump to RESIGN...in d... 54 min Johnny 40
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr arrr 985,713
Why some in the south tower got what they had c... 3 hr Doctor REALITY 2
Glorious ECLIPSE coming TODAY @10:45 am in Arka... 5 hr Doctor REALITY 1
More from around the web