Umm.. don't think "lots of people" here believe the official version, tbh. You keep saying they do, but I don't see it. I don't get that impression, anyway. 
9/11 Conspiracy Theories - How the Towers Fell
(1218 posts, started )
Great, so we are agreed that 2 aircraft and a diesel tank didn't take out 3 steel framed skyscrapers ?
Nope.
LOL 
Two aircraft took out two skyscrapers. I've very tempted to say that the resulting collapse was the reason for 7 falling down later, but since I don't know much about that building/story/conspiracy I'll just leave it at:
2 aircraft took out two buildings and maybe a third.
No. You already know exactly what I think. Or you damn well better do. I posted in this thread, and you've posted since, and you better be reading everyone else's posts as well as posting your own!
Incidentally, I'm informed that there is no way to set a thermite charge to cut a vertical column. No such charge exists.
Yes Sam, I'm certainly reading everyones posts, It's just that that IS the official theory and in my mind, as well as many other peoples the official story is dubious at best.
See my post 184, Senior members of the US military, Scientists, CIA staff, Engineers, Ex Presidents and Government ministers all believe that the official story is a lie.
That's why I would like people who choose to believe the official story to try to explain some of the massive discrepencies.
It's really just giving people an opportunity to work things through for themselves, if you still accept the official story then fine, it's just that a large number of people are pointing out the problems with this theory.
See my post 184, Senior members of the US military, Scientists, CIA staff, Engineers, Ex Presidents and Government ministers all believe that the official story is a lie.
That's why I would like people who choose to believe the official story to try to explain some of the massive discrepencies.
It's really just giving people an opportunity to work things through for themselves, if you still accept the official story then fine, it's just that a large number of people are pointing out the problems with this theory.
Thats right, however a derivitive of Thermite, Thermate is a more modern military version of silently functioning destructive charge. In practical uses it is built so it creates a very hot cutting spray penetrating even steels.
I've also read some stuff saying that secretly the WTCs may have had charges built in in the event of a collapse to guide it down straight 'n true rather than having a 110 storey building fall sideways on many others.
I dont see why we are arguing over the WTC incident tbh - it's obvious that planes featured in the destruction - and I don't think that a bunch of forumers will ever prove one way or another that the destruction was caused by the US or Terrorists, but what I think most of us WILL agree on is that there ARE issues.
Personally I think that the floor needed repairing, and that any decent amount of research would have found this out - they realised this structural weakness and took advantage and "luckily" the force of the plane + the jet fuel + the combustables was enough to start the chain reaction of floors falling on top of each other.
EDIT - Thermite is used in the military as a device destroyer - you can chuck a grenade in a room full of computers, radios etc and know they'll be nothing else left - iirc is needs an explosive to get the maximum yeild out though.
I dont see why we are arguing over the WTC incident tbh - it's obvious that planes featured in the destruction - and I don't think that a bunch of forumers will ever prove one way or another that the destruction was caused by the US or Terrorists, but what I think most of us WILL agree on is that there ARE issues.
Personally I think that the floor needed repairing, and that any decent amount of research would have found this out - they realised this structural weakness and took advantage and "luckily" the force of the plane + the jet fuel + the combustables was enough to start the chain reaction of floors falling on top of each other.
EDIT - Thermite is used in the military as a device destroyer - you can chuck a grenade in a room full of computers, radios etc and know they'll be nothing else left - iirc is needs an explosive to get the maximum yeild out though.
Okay, I have discovered a very full and comprehensive explanation for the molten metals and the glowing hot girders, found 6 weeks after the collapse.
I appreciate that the conspiracy theorists are highly qualified scientists, and that they can offer absolutely no explanation for it, but I've found a link to an extremely scientific website which those scientists probably aren't familiar with - it's a bit leading-edge for those experts, tbh, so it's obvious that they're not deliberately misleading anyone or exploiting anyone's suspicious nature, or even exploiting their lack of scientific understanding. They simply don't have access to this level of research...
http://www.highlightskids.com/ ... nBurns.asp?subTitleID=159
I think we have our answer, tbh. I've done quite a bit of follow-up since reading that, and everything points quite sensibly to iron-fire through oxidation.
I appreciate that the conspiracy theorists are highly qualified scientists, and that they can offer absolutely no explanation for it, but I've found a link to an extremely scientific website which those scientists probably aren't familiar with - it's a bit leading-edge for those experts, tbh, so it's obvious that they're not deliberately misleading anyone or exploiting anyone's suspicious nature, or even exploiting their lack of scientific understanding. They simply don't have access to this level of research...
http://www.highlightskids.com/ ... nBurns.asp?subTitleID=159
I think we have our answer, tbh. I've done quite a bit of follow-up since reading that, and everything points quite sensibly to iron-fire through oxidation.
odd... flagwaving and patriotism is what europeans dislike probably the most about americans as a nation
baaad physics
it didnt level out over time it was already leveled out long ago
Argh, foiled by this level of research - lol.
Does it apply to structural steel though ?.
How does structural steel differ from 'normal' steel?
a mere mech engineering bachelor like you wouldnt understand but to anyone with more knowledge its obvious that anything other than nukes wont have the slightest effect on structural steel
Oh I see. Must be some clever, combined machining process, after grinding and super heat treating, probably on some totally carbon base steel, plated with something cool like platinum oxide with a few hundreths and thousands sprinkled on top for good measure.
That should resist melting...
That should resist melting...
totally carbon based steel sounds like a perfectly resonable explanation... melting coal must be a real challenge
Well.. yeah! LOL! Steel is mostly iron, don't forget. It's just what you add to iron that makes it different types of steel.
Another interesting point that we've missed until now is that sulphur-rich charcoal is used in iron foundries to lower the relative melting temperature of iron. Most organic materials (plasterboard, office desks, office chairs, window blinds, carpet, doors..) give off a LOT of sulphur when burning.
Oh, and another thing.. another characteristic of steel being heated is a significant amount of expansion. Expansion of a cross-beam of steel will buckle two vertical steel beams that it's connected between, and this will happen when the steel is ~650 degrees. Lower, in the presence of sulphur.
I reckon that's that one well and truly bagged, mate. The only question that's really still remaining, in my mind, is how the **** these so-called experts who are pushing these theories about thermite explosives and shit.. how the hell is it possible that they're so goddamn stupid as to COMPLETELY omit this basic (I say basic, but I didn't know it.. but any mofo with a degree in this shit goddamn well better) information?
THAT's the conspiracy I'm lookin' at!!
Tell me, have YOU ever seen molten coal? I sure as hell haven't! But if I did, I bet it would last for ages. All night probably.
The way I would describe it, is that since nothing like this had ever happened before, therefore finding out what had happened, would be a very complex and difficult problem, and it would be likely that there were considerations that would be overlooked (since not really having any basis for being sure what facts might later turn out to have been possibly significant), and there were competing concerns, such as cleaning the place up. And of course, there was the obvious fact that jetliners had crashed into the buildings, which would seem to provide a straightforward explanation for what happened (if only they had started out with a presumption that the whole thing was a plot by Dick Cheney, to launch a war against Iraq, then things might have turned out very differently).
I believe a lot of the passengers were chatting on mobile phones just before impact, right? So, could the radiation given off by mobile phones have collected in one uber lump of radiation (a bit like crossing the beams in Ghostbusters), and caused New York to suddenly have random blobs of molten alien material lying around?
I reckon that's a great theory. I might write a blog entry somewhere, and make a 20 minute Youtube documentary about it to prove it as fact too!
I reckon that's a great theory. I might write a blog entry somewhere, and make a 20 minute Youtube documentary about it to prove it as fact too!
keep in mind that mobiles operate in the microwave band so it would be like shoving a bunch of microwave ovens up the wtcs arse
additionally theres the lithium ion batteries that will burn at fairly high temperatures
additionally theres the lithium ion batteries that will burn at fairly high temperatures
However the WTC's (and building 7) fell, i think most of us agrees that this was NOT done by couple of Arabians with Curan in their hands flying passanger jets with uber precision with 1 hour "experience" in Cesna planes.. 
Why not? Flying isn't hard, and hitting something that big with something that big isn't difficult. Try it in X-Plane or MSFS (you might want to choose something different as the WTC were removed) - it's easy. Even if you follow all the checklists and fly as realistically as you can manage.
Edit: As Woz suggests below landing (properly) might be a bit harder! I wussed out like a girl faced with landing a Cessna on a grass strip, but all other aspects of flying are very simple really.
Edit: As Woz suggests below landing (properly) might be a bit harder! I wussed out like a girl faced with landing a Cessna on a grass strip, but all other aspects of flying are very simple really.
Maybe, but stuff like passports and documents found on the street, and 20 other suspicious and wierd stuff makes me think otherwise..
9/11 Conspiracy Theories - How the Towers Fell
(1218 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG