proof that 9/11 was planned by us gov.

[willard 0]

Quote

well here are nasa thermal satellite images 9/11 and the days after. notice the hot spots under wtc 1+2 and BUILDING 7 which immediatedly rules the ridiculous idea that these were caused by aluminum from the planes. multiple hot spots estimated to be from 800-1300F were observed.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=robert_shaler

if you're suggesting that the elements spontaniously came together to create thermite and melt the steel this strikes me as being highly unlikely and probably impossible.

Most of us learned as children that when you take something that is burning and bury it under dirt, debris, etc. that restricts but doesn't stop the supply of oxygen it will continue to burn for a very, very long time. When my neighbors barn burned down, with over 5000 bales of hay and straw inside, it was almost two weeks before they could get close enough to the debris pile with a loader so they could spread it out and let it finish burning. It would be a major surprise if satellite photos DIDN'T show hot spots.

Nobody is suggesting that thermite was formed during the fire and caused the steel to melt, only that it was formed. Hell, the components needed to form thermite are found virtually everywhere. Read the entire post. You are the only one here who ever suggested that ANY steel melted. All others are telling you it did not melt and did not need to melt.

#7 fell in it's own footprint? BFD. Most building that collapse DO fall in their own footprint unless a force inside causes the collapse to go outward. Even most bombed out buildings during WWII fell in on their own footprint.

But don't give up hope! You are convincing us all of one thing....that you want so badly to believe that there is a giant coverup concerning 9/11 that you are willing to accept as fact anything put on the web by anyone. People here have offered air-tight explanations, including mathematical data based on sound principles, yet you choose not to accept it but instead continue to scoff and say it's just BS cause somebody you don't even know managed to convince you otherwise with a pretty good smoke-n-mirrors routine.

But, on the other hand, it does make perfect sense that the hundreds of people it would take to pull this off would be willing to sacrifice their own friends and family in NY and DC, along with hundreds more innocent lives, would keep it all secret, just so the U.S. government would have an excuse to go to war. When was the last time the U.S. government needed an excuse to go to war??? If they want to bomb the shit out of something they just go ahead and do it.

Last, but not least, "Ockham's razor".

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

this is from nist 2005( note that its difficult to keep track as they keep changing their theories over and over.

''Observations of paint cracking due to thermal expansion. Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC: east face, floor 98, inner web; east face, floor 92, inner web; and north face, floor 98, floor truss connector. Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC. (p 90/140) ''

so they found some samples from "perimeter columns" that may have been shielded from the parts of the structure that took the bulk of the heat damage. Whoopty shit. when the whole structure went down, they still would have been pulled down with it.

or is the vast evil conspiracy theory more likely?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Last, but not least, "Ockham's razor".

Um conspiracy theorists reject the principal of Occam's razor. They use what I call "Occam's Minoxidil."

In other words: To explain a phenomenon, use the MAXIMUM amount of entities possible.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[billvon 2,990]

>Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column
> panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached
> temperatures above 250 ºC . . .

That's what I would expect. The panels that remained after impact were exposed to open air; they're well-cooled.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Last, but not least, "Ockham's razor".

Um conspiracy theorists reject the principal of Occam's razor. They use what I call "Occam's Minoxidil."

In other words: To explain a phenomenon, use the MAXIMUM amount of entities possible.

That just made my day!

[skinnyflyer 0]

''You are the only one here who ever suggested that ANY steel melted. All others are telling you it did not melt and did not need to melt.'' -willard

me and the pictures and the firefighters;
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.html
and the nasa satellites.

''Most building that collapse DO fall in their own footprint unless a force inside causes the collapse to go outward''-willard

read the whoe thread if you're going to post this stuff here;

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/collapsecases.html

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[SpeedRacer 1]

There's so much half-assed bullshit on those links that it's hard to know where to even begin.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[skinnyflyer 0]

in more than 100 years of steel framed skyscrapers there is no evidence that any have collapsed due to fire let alone into their own footprint, oh wait except in controlled demolition.

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[skinnyflyer 0]

in 1945 a b25 bomber hit the empire state building;

http://www.withthecommand.com/2002-Jan/NY-empireplane.html

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[skinnyflyer 0]

any asymmetry results in an asymmetrical collapse as this video of a botched controlled demolition shows;

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/dakota_demolition.mov

the idea that buildin7 self collapsed is ludicrous;

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[willard 0]

Quote

in 1945 a b25 bomber hit the empire state building;

http://www.withthecommand.com/2002-Jan/NY-empireplane.html

Sorry to say this will be my last post on this thread as it is pointless to try to convince you of how absurd your "conspiracy" sounds.
However, FYI, there is a huge difference between a 225 mph,22,000 B-25 carrying less than 1000 gals. of avgas and a modern commercial airliner fully loaded with jet-A. Ok, for the sake of argument, we'll say 1/2 fuel...at over 500 mph!
Let's see...only three steel skyscrapers ever collapsed due to fire. Hmmm...two took direct hits by massive fuel laden aircraft, and the other was right next to them, burning, and being hit with large chunks of debris from the other two. Damn! Must be the coincidence of the century!

Think and believe what you want, just don't try to design a building. Or fly a plane. Or teach common sense.

[skinnyflyer 0]

willard

''...only three steel skyscrapers ever collapsed due to fire. Hmmm...two took direct hits by massive fuel laden aircraft, and the other was right next to them, burning, and being hit with large chunks of debris from the other two. Damn! Must be the coincidence of the century! ''-willard

the example of the empire state building was not offered as proof, but to show that a building being hit by a large plane doesn't necessitate collapse as the official story would have you belive.

Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center-''The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting. ''

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[chrismgtis 0]

You guys seriously need to stop believing everything you read and see on televison or in Internet videos. Whether or not you heard "secondary explosions" in a video presents no evidence whatsoever. I could cook up a video that would "prove" that anything existed that I pleased, at least by your way of reasoning and understanding, in under 5 minutes with VirtualDub, Adobe Premiere, Adobe After Effects or similiar software. The average child these days can use this software with ease. That isn't even the point though.

Don't be so gullible. Believe nothing but what you see and hear with your own eyes. To believe anything else with 100% certainty shows stupidity.

It is one thing to be open minded to the idea that a conspiracy could exist, but to believe that that conspiracy does in fact exist by what you have read on the Internet or seen in videos or "heard from eyewitnesses" is further proof of how easy it is to manipulate a person.

Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033
Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan

[skinnyflyer 0]

kind of like ..THIS ONE;

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

if you study the nist report carefully it concludes that most of the fires did not exceed 200-300C but then their collapse model goes on to say that the steel had to reach 700C to lose enough support.

Doesn't say that at all . but if it did, then: Hmm, then the drunk skydivers at my dropzone could build a bonfire that would melt beer bottle glass (which melts at 1000 degrees Celsius). But a huge jet airliner filled with fuel crashing into a large building & burning all the shit in there would never attain temperatures even one third that high.

I got it now. Obviously 9/11 was caused by drunk skydivers. Only their activities could result in temperatures that high.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Thermite welding is the current state-of-the-art in continuous welding rail here in the US. Its not slaggy at all. I've seen it done many times, and I work for the largest railroad company in the United States.

OK, I was just recalling research done by the AAR some 20 years ago.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skinnyflyer 0]

''>not to forget but these nist experiments completely failed to take
>into account the xthousands of tons of steel and its thermal
>conductive ability.

Careful there; you're arguing against your own thesis here.'' -billvon

when a section of steel is heated, the atached steel columns will draw away the heat therefore making it more difficult to reach failing temperatures.

i thought you were an engineer?

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[skinnyflyer 0]

Denial is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact that is too painful to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.

hmm... it looks like controlled demolition, sounds like one and all the evidence supports that it is one (but to even consider it is crazy conspiracy theory)

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[billvon 2,990]

> in 1945 a b25 bomber hit the empire state building;

B25:
Weight 27,000 lbs
Fuel 1000 gallons
Speed at impact approx 50kts (stalled)
Energy at impact 3.8 million joules


767:
Weight 400,000 lbs
Fuel 24,000 gallons
Speed at impact approx 450kts (cruise power)
Energy at impact 4606.9 joules (more than 1000 times the B25)

Which do you think is more likely to cause serious damage to a building? (hint - it might be the one that fell down)

BTW I just learned of a new conspiracy theory - that no aircraft at all hit the WTC. You know how no aircraft hit the pentagon, that it was a cruise missile or something? Well, now a favorite theory is that ALL the airplanes were faked. So it doesn't matter whether a B25 hit the empire state building because no airplanes were involved in the WTC!

I have a new conspiracy theory. I'll call it the Billvon Hypothesis. The WTC towers were never hit, and never knocked down. They're still standing there. The Port Authority just faked their destruction so they could collect on the insurance, and have been projecting pictures of empty sky on the sides ever since. When they "rebuild" the twin towers, they'll slap a new facade on the buildings, rent em out at twice the old rent, and laugh all the way to the bank.

Ever wonder why people are not allowed into the Ground Zero crater? Huh? Oh sure, they claim that it's dangerous and all. That's just a smokescreen - because if you tried it, you'd just end up in the lobby looking at some old dusty marble!

Hey, so it's unlikely. Prove it's wrong!

[billvon 2,990]

>i thought you were an engineer?

Yeah, but I also took a class in logic. Check this out -

You keep bringing up the NIST study to "prove" your case - but you also say that the NIST study is faulty. Therefore you have scuttled your own proof.

[skinnyflyer 0]

billvon thanks for all the 'engineering talk'

obviously there are lots of ridiculous conspiracy theories but assigning them to me is straw man.

controlled demolition clearly meets occam's razor especially for building number7 and the fact that this was not even considered in any official investigation is a little more than passing strange.

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[skinnyflyer 0]

''Yeah, but I also took a class in logic. Check this out -

You keep bringing up the NIST study to "prove" your case - but you also say that the NIST study is faulty. Therefore you have scuttled your own proof. ''-billvon

the fact that the nist investigation- a group of people brought together with the purpose of demonstrating how fire and debris caused three collapses- have been unable, even with faulty logic, assumptions etc., to demonstrate how the buildings collapsed does help to prove my point.

i hope your engineering classes were better than your logic classes.

"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives."
A. Sachs

[champu 1]

Quote

>jeff king is an engineer from MIT who supports c.d.

I had a floormate at MIT who was positive that the government was watching him, and that they had implanted a bug in his skull that sometimes controlled his actions. Don't know what became of him. Name wasn't Jeff though.

Has anyone from the colleges of engineering at either the University of Illinois or the University of Southern California come forward in support of the theory that a controlled demolition brought the World Trade Center down?

I'd hate to have to take my diplomas off the wall...

[billvon 2,990]

>have been unable, even with faulty logic, assumptions etc., to
>demonstrate how the buildings collapsed does help to prove my point.

They have. You just don't like the answers they came up with.

A suggestion - if you disagree with them, by all means, state your case. But this saying false things to try to make your case makes your arguments somewhat invalid from the very start. It's as if I said "since no one has ever survived a skydive, I can prove without a doubt that we need to improve our gear." Gear may need improving, but by lying about the issue to begin with I would not be taken seriously.

[rhys 0]

Quote

You guys seriously need to stop believing everything you read and see on televison or in Internet videos.

so isn't believing the origional story and not listening direct evidence from witnessess at the scene and scientific evidence.

stop believeing the news and what we are informed of? is that what you mean.

that is what we are doing.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix