The online racing simulator
Quote from Racer X NZ :Then why were there still pools of molten steel SIX WEEKS after the buildings fell if as you say the steel didn't melt ??

You know what - this ONE anomaly does not in any way change my opinion that the towers collapsed because they failed structurally. Just because ONE little thing cannot be explained, does not mean that the entire story is false.

Oh, and - please, state any other reasons why you think the towers were brought down by explosives. We have MANY reasons as to why the towers were not sabotaged, but so far all you've pointed out is this. And all the reasons I've given so far cannot be argued with. I'd like to see you come up with as many points that cannot be debunked. I look forward to your list.
Quote from niall09 :You forgot that they had Pentalawn

The image I knew fitted perfectly but CBA to google for

Sam, I would argue the Snopes article re the wings issue but tbh my eyes hurt too much and i'd probably make a fool of myself.
Quote from Stang70Fastback :this ONE anomaly

I don't even think it's an anomaly. There's an underground fire that's been burning, now, for about 20 years under a part of Yorkshire (near me), in a coal seam. It burns incredibly hot, and it's buried hundreds of feet under the ground. Aliens are not involved. Or.. are they? :rolleyes:
Quote from Jakg :Sam, I would argue the Snopes article re the wings issue but tbh my eyes hurt too much and i'd probably make a fool of myself.

I do see evidence of damage along the side of the building, and there's definitely a lot more damage to the interior rings of the building than you'll see evidenced on the conspiracy pages. There's definitely debris on the lawn, despite the conspiracy theorists claims, and I saw that photo a long time ago so I'm damn sure THEY have too. Yet still they're claiming there was no debris. This is clearly a lie. Why would anyone trust the word of some conspiracy theorist who's absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, lying?
Quote from Boris Lozac :Exactly my thoughts... Don't get me wrong, there's something really iffy with all this, especially the Pentagon part,

Have a look at the links posted by Sam on the previous page, and these two
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.co ... onflight77evidencesummary
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/pentagonattackpage2

Quote from Boris Lozac :but why would they have to bomb the WTC's, as if planes hitting them wasn't spectactular enough?

An interesting point you raise.

Why would they attack the Pentagon and whatever target they had in mind with Flight 93 ? Isn't it enough that two terrorist planes flew into the World Trade Towers to give them enough emotional justification in the eyes of the American public to wage war on this alleged "Axis of Evil" ? (Thats not necessarily a question aimed at you Boris, rather those in this thread trying to push this 'inside job' conspiracy theory)
Quote from Racer X NZ :At last, some thought !

Then why were there still pools of molten steel SIX WEEKS after the buildings fell if as you say the steel didn't melt ??

You can't have it both ways !

The other point is the initial fires weren't major, if you listen to the firemans recording you'll hear that the fires in WTC1 & 2 were under control. - Wait, sorry I forgot you didn't pay any attention to what trained firefighters said. After all, what do they know ?

Do you know anything at all about the melting and solidification of metals? Phase change diagrams? Specific heat capacities.
I don't mean do you have a doctorate in them, just do you know what they are, and how to use/understand one?

If yes, then think. THINK.

Take a large quantity of molten metal. Leave it on the ground, even buried under concrete for a week. Will it still be molten? No, I didn't think so.

So, if there WAS molten metal there it MUST have been put there afterwards. Not very likely even with a cover up.

Therefore we must assume it WASN'T there, and the person who said there was molten metal still there was wrong, lying or misinterpreted whatever facts he saw badly.

However, lets move on a notch (further into the realms of make believe)... Lets say the frame work didn't melt because of the jet fuel (although perhaps some of the fixing did? I digress...). When all that comes crashing down it's going to release a lot of potential energy, and a lot of that will go into heating the structures that supported it. Perhaps that latent heat would, if somehow insulated, still be detectable six weeks later?

Have you any idea how long concrete takes to harden? Any ideas of the amount of energy released as it does so (contrete being an exothermic reaction)?

By all means believe the conspiracies. We can't stop you. But don't assume what is blindy written on the website with the words "I know what I'm talking about, honest" actually make it true. I have a crappy mechanical engineering degree (not civil engineering), and I can debunk most of your theories whilst concentrating more on blinking... Please, use your own brain rather than quoting drivel as evidence.

But then again, coming from the religious debates, it's probably nice to have ANYTHING even vaguely close to 'evidence'.
If people are happy with the official story then thats fine, if people really feel that everything that happened that day has been fully explained thats also fine. If you feel that everyone who reported explosions are suffering some mass hallucination then thats your choice.

For anyone else who feels that there is something slightly strange
about those events here are a number of links so you can do your own research and make your own mind up.

Explosions reported by Firefighters and Newsmedia at the time.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html

Eyewitness accounts of explosions in subbasement and lobby
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xe ... nderground_explosions.htm

Seismic evidence of large explosions and gereral overview.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/bollyn2.htm

Just for Tristan - FDNY fireman talking about non existent molten metal 8 weeks later. ( guess he doesn't know what he's talking about either.... )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx33GuVsUtE

Physics review of WTC7 collapse
http://www.journalof911studies ... ngsCompletelyCollapse.pdf

As for why this may have been carried out, well do some research on the USS Maine, the Reichstag fire, Tomkin incident , Pearl Harbour, and so the list goes on ..........
Ok, so - all these people saying that there were bombs placed underground and at ground level at the base of the tower... what exactly would have been the point? To blow up the building and cause it to collapse? It doesn't make ANY sense. The buildings collapsed from the top down - so what effect did these explosives at the bottom have? Nothing. Even blasts as large as they claim occurred are nowhere near big enough to largely threaten the structural integrity of the building. I'm talking about the blasts that supposedly happened before the building collapsed, not as it collapsed.
Quote from SamH :I do see evidence of damage along the side of the building, and there's definitely a lot more damage to the interior rings of the building than you'll see evidenced on the conspiracy pages. There's definitely debris on the lawn, despite the conspiracy theorists claims, and I saw that photo a long time ago so I'm damn sure THEY have too. Yet still they're claiming there was no debris. This is clearly a lie. Why would anyone trust the word of some conspiracy theorist who's absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, lying?

I don't buy that the wings just folded and went into the same hole as the cabin, - even if that was remotely the case you still have to explain the engines, at six tons each they are the heaviest and most solid part of the plane, they would punch holes in the wall far easier than the cabin - but even the windows were still in place in the areas where the engines would have impacted the building, so thats out for me, I need a better explanation.
as I understand it there was no passengers bodies found in the wreckage as they were supposed to have vapourised along with the plane, but yet they managed to indentify something like 170 of the 176 bodies of the workers in the building at the time, how come at least some of these were not vapourised also?

The wreckage of the plane that was found outside the building were not from a plane of the type that was supposed to have hit the building.

If this is all conspiracy, would it not be so easy to debunk it by showing the footage, surely they have nothing to hide and everything to gain?
I honestly, truly would like to see someone like Bill Gates fund the building of a full-scale model of one of the pentagon's sides and then actually crash a real plane into it and see what happens.
Quote from Stang70Fastback :Ok, so - all these people saying that there were bombs placed underground and at ground level at the base of the tower... what exactly would have been the point? To blow up the building and cause it to collapse? It doesn't make ANY sense. The buildings collapsed from the top down - so what effect did these explosives at the bottom have? Nothing. Even blasts as large as they claim occurred are nowhere near big enough to largely threaten the structural integrity of the building. I'm talking about the blasts that supposedly happened before the building collapsed, not as it collapsed.

If they did do this, then they had to make sure it was done properly, and that meant making sure of a total collapse, and taking out the foundations would ensure this.

Exactly why this was done you would have to ask an explosives expert - I'm not, but it seems from the many accounts that something very strange was going on.

Not only was the company that disposed of the debri was called "Controlled Demolition" the disposal of possible evidence was very controlled too.

As far as I can see, nothing was investigated properly, everyone at the top seemed very shifty, manipulative, and evasive. the whole thing just has a bad smell about it.
Just watched the "Loose change Final cut", watched the first version long time ago so i forgot things...

Soooooo many unanswered questions still remain and so many unexplainable stuff happened there, scary really...

I will answer my own question as to why did they have to demolish the buildings, well, it's freakin obvious, planes themselves wouldn't colapse those buildings, plain and simple, so they had to make sure they DO go down, to create a more bombastic attack, because planes hitting and buildings just burning wouldn't be bombastic enough, they're sick minds wanted that to look more spectacular and to create more hatred towards terrorists and at the same time, to have better justification to start a war in Iraq and Afghan...

And that passport found on the street, beloning to the pilot terorrist?? Give me a brake

These are sick stuff my friends... what are some people capable of doing for that green paper...
Quote from tristancliffe :Do you know anything at all about the melting and solidification of metals? Phase change diagrams? Specific heat capacities.
I don't mean do you have a doctorate in them, just do you know what they are, and how to use/understand one?

If yes, then think. THINK.

Take a large quantity of molten metal. Leave it on the ground, even buried under concrete for a week. Will it still be molten? No, I didn't think so.

So, if there WAS molten metal there it MUST have been put there afterwards. Not very likely even with a cover up.

Therefore we must assume it WASN'T there, and the person who said there was molten metal still there was wrong, lying or misinterpreted whatever facts he saw badly.

However, lets move on a notch (further into the realms of make believe)... Lets say the frame work didn't melt because of the jet fuel (although perhaps some of the fixing did? I digress...). When all that comes crashing down it's going to release a lot of potential energy, and a lot of that will go into heating the structures that supported it. Perhaps that latent heat would, if somehow insulated, still be detectable six weeks later?

Have you any idea how long concrete takes to harden? Any ideas of the amount of energy released as it does so (contrete being an exothermic reaction)?

Have you ever seen or heard about molten anything after a building being demolished caused just by the released potential energy? I've read that the steel was at 2000ºC when they found it molten. The fuel of the plane burns at 500ºC. I'm no expert on this issue, but i wouldnt say potential energy would be enough to cause a more than 1500ºC temperature raise, considering the temp it lost on 2 weeks.
If this is possible ok then, thats a point in favor of the official theory otherwise, i also read that one of substances used on controlled demolitions is thermite, which burns at 2000ºC, and they believe it was used for taking down the towers, dont ask me why i dont remember the details.

About the pentagon, i saw somewhere some time before or after, dont remember quite well, that the cameras filming the pentagon area were ordered to be removed, and that there wasnt a single photo or video found of an airplane crashing into it. Neither any photo taken after the incident, that showed any kind of airplane pieces.

Im open to any ideas. But from what i've read/saw, the idea that this was staged from inside, is ahead in points/arguments.
Here's a challenge, these photo's were taken of the pentagon just after the aircraft hit and before they doctored the lawn and collapsed the facard, hands up everyone who can see a 757 or even where one crashed.

Check the picture series for yourselves.
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/ ... /pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

And before the standard cynics start, yes this is the spot, the shots were taken by someone in the military.
And if a 757 hit why was all the security footage taken from every camera that may have seen the plane going in and why has it NEVER been released.
And, yes, they did release 5 frames which show nothing. If you have nothing to hide, why cover it up ?
Attached images
facade-intacte-hte-def1.jpg
facade-intacte-hte-def2.jpg
I don't see any wreckage, but tbh, I wouldn't expect much of the plane to come back onto the lawn after hitting the building at 300 mph. Besides, those shots cover a very small portion of the lawn.

Oh, and by the way, the lawn was covered in sand/dirt not to cover anything up, but to allow heavy trucks and machinery to access the building without getting stuck in the grass/soft dirt.
FYI - Check out this site for what you usually see after a 757 crash, like, bit's of aircraft, engines, odd things like that .....
http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/bts2937/photo.shtml

Unless of course it all got vaporised, or the pixies hid it or something .....

You'd think they'd manage to find an engine or two, the strange thing is that the one they found was never fitted to a 757, must be those damn pixies again.
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm
Well, I don't know. But I will point out that that debris fell from the sky - at likely not more than 200 MPH. This plane went INTO the Pentagon at 300+ meaning MOST of the debris was IN the building.
Check the photo's, no tail or wing, or even engine holes in the building. It's a round 18' hole.
Maybe it folded itself up before hitting, otherwise there should be wreckage outside, otherwise we're back with the pixies again - lol
Quote :Sam, I would argue the Snopes article re the wings issue but tbh my eyes hurt too much and i'd probably make a fool of myself.

I reckon they just used the burn tool in Photoshop :detective
Attached images
burn.jpg
I feel i can sum up the situation in a nutshell. The Bush family and associates have ties with big oil and defense contractors. Being greedy humans, plans were developed to convince the generally zombie like mainstream american citizen into believing FOREIGN terrorists were behind it. We go to war, Haliburton makes $$$$. We go to war with oil producing countries so gas goes up. (north of $118 weak USD last i saw)

These 'terrorists' are supposedly from afganistan and yet we also think Saddam is behind it(or something to that effect) and Iran is next. If only I could win the lottery, deposit my money into a swiss account and never have to worry about the economy then I'd be great.
And while I'm at it, let's look at the testimony of a US Navy pilot with 20 years experience and 6000 hours in 757/767's.

But I'm sure the cynics know more than he does too..........

Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, “At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.”

Commander Kolstad adds, “I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!”
He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, “Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?”

http://www.opednews.com/articl ... _u_s__navy__top_gun__.htm

Or even the senior US Military officers who feel that there's something dodgy regarding 9/11

January 14, 2008 – Twenty-five former U.S. military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They include former commander of U.S. Army Intelligence, Major General Albert Stubblebine, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Col. Ronald D. Ray, two former staff members of the Director of the National Security Agency; Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, and Major John M. Newman, PhD, and many others. They are among the rapidly growing number of military and intelligence service veterans, scientists, engineers, and architects challenging the government’s story. The officers’ statements appear below, listed alphabetically.


Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD “A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret). [1] With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col. Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.

“There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman. “Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible. Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.”

http://www.opednews.com/articl ... _twenty_five_u_s__mil.htm

Or perhaps a former Italian President -

Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio, has told Italy’s oldest and most widely read newspaper that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies. In what translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della Sera:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=7843

Or over 100 University Professors

Many respected and distinguished university professors have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. A number even allege government complicity in the terrorist acts of 9/11. Below are the highly revealing public statements on this vital topic of over 100 university professors with links for verification and further investigation.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/070618professorsquestion911

Or a former German Minister -

In a full-page interview with the Sunday edition (Jan. 13) of the Berlin Tagesspiegel daily, former German Minister of Technology, Andreas von Buelow, said he does not buy any of the official theories that have been presented to date, on the events of September 11.

The apparent failure of the U.S. Administration including its 26 secret agencies with an annual budget of $30 billion, to come up with any convincing assessment, was one big problem that von Buelow addressed, in quite some detail.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/VonBuelow.html

As an interesting point, a certain Zbigniew Brzezinski mentioned in this article just happens to be closely associated with a certain Barrack Obama that some of the US members may have heard of, just another surprising coincidence. ( "Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211) ) and ( And Brzezinski, that mad dog, already at his time as advisor to President Jimmy Carter, campaigned for the sole right of the USA to all the world's raw materials, especially crude oil and natural gas." )
http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard


But I guess all these people have no idea what their talking about either .......
From that photo just above, you can see the walls on each side of the main impact being pushed in, and to me that looks like it's from the wings. The Pentagon's a tough building, so I don't think you can expect a plane to cut through those walls like a cheese-knife through camembert. I can't answer his other questions, but even for me it's obvious? that there's damage from wings there, and I spent 30 seconds looking at the photograph.
Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, “At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.”

Commander Kolstad adds, “I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!”

He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, “Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the
wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?”

Commander Kolstad summarized his frustration with the investigation and disbelief of the official account of 9/11, “If one were to act as an accident investigator, one would look at the evidence, and then construct a plausible scenario as to what led to the accident. In this case, we were told the story and then the evidence was built to support the story. What happened to any intelligent investigation? Every question leads to another question that has not been answered by anyone in authority. This is just the beginning as to why I don’t believe the official ‘story’ and why I want the truth to be told.”

http://www.opednews.com/articles/gen..._top_gun__.htm

A US Navy pilot with 20 years experience, I'm prepared to accept he knows more about aircraft than I do ..............
However I am also interested in learning from what he says.

And he's not the only member ( or ex member ) of the US military who have serious doubts about the reality of the official conspiracy theory regarding 911, if even senior members of the US military feel that it was an inside job then, apart from the media who oddly choose to not report the fact, surely a real investigation of what happened that day is called for.

And, perhaps this time it could actually look at all the evidence.
That would make a remarkable change from the previous 'ommission' report.

Mind you, you might find a number of members of the US government charged with treason.
Since there is quite a few conspiracy theorists in this thread, I´d like to ask you what happened to MS Estonia?

The official report blamed the accident on the failure of locks on the bow visor, that broke under the strain of the waves.

But that´s boring. How about this theory. "The ship was carrying a secret cargo of military equipment smuggled from the Russians by the British MI6 on behalf of the CIA, as part of ongoing efforts to monitor the development of Russia's weapons." And was sunk because someone caused an explosion that blew off the visor.

The evidence to support this theory are:
  • an American private investigations finding traces of an explosion on a piece of metal retrieved from the ship,
  • the passengers heard large bangs, like an explosion, before the sinking,
  • the ship sank very fast and in the deepest part of the Tallinn - Stockholm shipping lane,
  • right after the wreck the captain was on the survivors list and supposedly some people saw him, but he hasn´t been seen since, the theorist believe he was whacked by the CIA or something,
  • the Estonia Agreement 1995, a treaty between Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Denmark, Russia and the United Kingdom (though the UK itself is not a Baltic state and hence the MI6 theories), declared sanctity over the site, prohibiting its citizens from even approaching the wreck and therefor stopping any independent investigations.
EDIT: I copied the Estonia Agreement part from Wikipedia and there seems to be an error there. It´s says that UK isn´t a Baltic state in a way which would imply that all the other members are Baltic states. That is not true. Baltic states are Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The rest are countrys by the Baltic sea but they´re not called Baltic states.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories - How the Towers Fell
(1218 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG