PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-05-29, 02:55:57
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 79
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 263173 times)
Group: Guest
You can not penetrate steel by aluminum in given speed - that's law.

I have not heard of that law.  Please bring forth your studies.  I am sure that there are so many examples of jetliners hitting skyscrapers that we have a wealth of data about this and know exactly what is and what is not possible.
   
Group: Guest
You have to actively practice this mode if you are going to watch any TV, especially the staged "State of the Nation" so called discussions where  "experts" like William Kristol and Richard Pearle seem to be arguing among themselves. This stuff is cleverly scripted to shape opinion. It is not a casual discussion.

Thank you for posting this honestly.  Now we all know you're a kook.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
Thank you for posting this honestly.  Now we all know you're a kook.

Thank you for the compliment! I am considering the source!


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
Cheappower:

I believe that 9/11 was an act committed by Muslim terrorists.  It was a "fix" for the 1993 bombing that got it right in their eyes.

The Iraq war is certainly a big can of worms but I don't believe that there was overt malicious intent on the part of the government when it decided to wage war.  I suppose the jury is still out on the whole war and what it ultimately will mean for the Iraqi people.

An easy thought experiment goes like this:  If nobody took down Saddam Hussein and he ended up committing some sort of major atrocity or waging a devastating war then the same people that hate the US government for going into Iraq would hate the US government for their inaction.

Ion:

You should resign from your position as "Global Moderator" and loose your Smurf colours because you clearly have lost it.  Just join us regular grunts and leave it at that.

Dumped:

Pound away as much as you want because in the final analysis if anybody bothers to think about this 10 years from now, they will realize that nothing you ever said came true.  You are the virtual manifestation of the dude that has been in Times Square for the past 25 years holding up a sign saying, "The End is Near."  You have been listening to Coast to Coast in rapture for far too long.

MileHigh
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
From MH:

Quote
Ion:

You should resign from your position as "Global Moderator" and loose your Smurf colours because you clearly have lost it.  Just join us regular grunts and leave it at that.

I reluctantly accepted this position and actually named a few others including you that I thought would be a better fit.

I will consider your request, I don't like titles anyway, and had nothing to do with the smurf colours

Considering whatever it is you perceive I have lost, I hope you find some of it, you could use it.

BTW, clever ploy aligning yourself with the "regular grunts" to garner support in your attack, that's right out of "Games People Play"....have you read the book?

So you are not a "Mile High" anymore, you are down in the trenches with the "regular grunts"...how nice, refreshing, I guess the hot air finally leaked out of the bag.

Sorry MH you are just too easy to read.



---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2408
EatinBarbeque
Why are you so Cranky??

What are your beliefs in this Matter??

Chet
Ps
HHHMMMMm
Everyone seems a little extra Cranky ?
Cept The killer [GK] seems like he knows how to have fun at a party
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1140
Quote from: MileHigh
I believe that 9/11 was an act committed by Muslim terrorists.  It was a "fix" for the 1993 bombing that got it right in their eyes.

The Iraq war is certainly a big can of worms but I don't believe that there was overt malicious intent on the part of the government when it decided to wage war.  I suppose the jury is still out on the whole war and what it ultimately will mean for the Iraqi people.

An easy thought experiment goes like this:  If nobody took down Saddam Hussein and he ended up committing some sort of major atrocity or waging a devastating war then the same people that hate the US government for going into Iraq would hate the US government for their inaction.
...

Hasbara.


---------------------------
“When an honest man realizes that he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.” –Anonymous
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
For those interseted in the tactics of hasbara:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hasbara

Interesting propaganda manual attached. We see some of these tactics being used here to discredit alternate theories of 9 / 11, and now we know why.
« Last Edit: 2011-12-04, 16:05:09 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
I have not heard of that law.  Please bring forth your studies.  I am sure that there are so many examples of jetliners hitting skyscrapers that we have a wealth of data about this and know exactly what is and what is not possible.
Why You need my studies  if you can't understand simplest things? If I tell you the Earth revolves about the Sun You ask my studies too?
If you have not heard of that law, that's Your problem and you need to go to study how aluminum penetrate steel.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2408
So Tytes3
Hows about I cut your steel with water ??
would that make you happy??

And you don't even have to Study...........
   
Group: Guest
So Tytes3
Hows about I cut your steel with water ??
would that make you happy??

And you don't even have to Study...........

I see you happy :) ,
but I'm not :(
You need to go to study too :(
"The plain water-abrasive mixture leaves the nozzle at more than 900 mph. The latest machines can cut to within two thousandths of an inch, and have jet speeds around Mach 3."

and you think that aluminum plane have the time like "watercut" mashine to cut trough like this?:
« Last Edit: 2011-12-04, 05:25:47 by tysb3 »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
So Tytes3
Hows about I cut your steel with water ??
would that make you happy??

And you don't even have to Study...........

Chet, I covered that earlier, and how much time it takes. Do not confuse the process of "erosion" of a metal with "cutting or shearing", as they are different processes. "Corrosion" will do the job too with acids or plain rust but it takes a long time to cut a large box column 2" thick with these processes.

tysb3 is completely correct.
« Last Edit: 2011-12-04, 16:09:41 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
EatinBarbeque
Why are you so Cranky??

What are your beliefs in this Matter??

Chet
Ps
HHHMMMMm
Everyone seems a little extra Cranky ?
Cept The killer [GK] seems like he knows how to have fun at a party

For the record, I do not eat barbeque.

As far as my beliefs, well, I would say that to me the hijacker evidence is plausible.  However, I am open to changing my mind.  What I am seeing from the other camp, which surprises me, is the level of certainty you guys have, given that we have near zero empirical evidence of jetliners hitting skyscrapers.  People talk with great certainty of these temperatures and velocities and structural strength, and frankly I do not see how you guys can be so certain about it.

An another hand, the inside job plot makes no sense.  Why the elaborate plot with planes?  Why not just blow up the buildings with explosives and say they were explosives planted by terrorists?  It would be completely plausible given, get this, the terrorists actually tried explosives on WTC a few years before.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 356
I see you happy :) ,
but I'm not :(
You need to go to study too :(
"The plain water-abrasive mixture leaves the nozzle at more than 900 mph. The latest machines can cut to within two thousandths of an inch, and have jet speeds around Mach 3."

and you think that aluminum plane have the time like "watercut" mashine to cut trough like this?:


Stop and think, The plane carries x amount of mass moving at y speed, I don't think it matters much what that mass is made of, it still carries z amount of energy when it hits the building, those steel beams are going to be deformed by the energy.  The beams cannot deform without tremendous pressure at the ends where they are bolted together.  The bolts failed and the beams came down.  How intelligent does a person need to be to see something as simple as that, I'm sure even you can.


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 356
For the record, I do not eat barbeque.

As far as my beliefs, well, I would say that to me the hijacker evidence is plausible.  However, I am open to changing my mind.  What I am seeing from the other camp, which surprises me, is the level of certainty you guys have, given that we have near zero empirical evidence of jetliners hitting skyscrapers.  People talk with great certainty of these temperatures and velocities and structural strength, and frankly I do not see how you guys can be so certain about it.

An another hand, the inside job plot makes no sense.  Why the elaborate plot with planes?  Why not just blow up the buildings with explosives and say they were explosives planted by terrorists?  It would be completely plausible given, get this, the terrorists actually tried explosives on WTC a few years before.

eatenbyagrue,

Don't let these guys sway you, If any of them knew anything about Islam we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Hey you guys try this on for size, see if it fits with your morals and values.  Please don't attack the messenger with your pitch forks and torches, this is not me saying this stuff.  This comes strait from the mouth of a great Islamic leader.



---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Group: Guest
eatenbyagrue,

Don't let these guys sway you, If any of them knew anything about Islam we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Hey you guys try this on for size, see if it fits with your morals and values.  Please don't attack the messenger with your pitch forks and torches, this is not me saying this stuff.  This comes strait from the mouth of a great Islamic leader.


Yes, for a science forum, the 9/11 truther people here are pretty unscientific.    They all have this preconceived notion that the "guvmunt is evil, durr", and they then look for any evidence to support their view with regard to what happened on 9/11, conveniently discarding all evidence that does not comport with their worldview.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 356
eaten,
yes I agree,  what they don't realize is they have fallen for some of the Islamic propaganda that is everywhere out there. Maybe someday they will come to realize that.

Don't get me wrong I am not saying our government is perfect far from it.


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
Stop and think, The plane carries x amount of mass moving at y speed, I don't think it matters much what that mass is made of, it still carries z amount of energy when it hits the building, those steel beams are going to be deformed by the energy.  The beams cannot deform without tremendous pressure at the ends where they are bolted together.  The bolts failed and the beams came down.  How intelligent does a person need to be to see something as simple as that, I'm sure even you can.

You make good points about the failure of the bolts, but I believe I read somewhere in the description of the construction of the twin towers that the beams were bolted AND welded together.

Also your model about energy is simplistic. Energy is absorbed in the structure of the plane itself as it crushes in on itself, just the way it does in automobiles that are designed to absorb the crash energy on impact. We don't see automobiles taking out bridge or overpass abutments, rather we see an extremely crumpled accordion of metal that absorbed the energy of impact and gave it off as heat in the process.

Posting those Khomeini quotes can be quite inflammatory and lead to others posting equally vile quotes from Judaic literature. Do you really want that?

Regardless of whether the planes brought down the towers , cut through beams etc. or not, one thing is for sure, there are people, corporations and nations that did benefit tremendously from the resulting invasions and wars that followed the destruction of the towers.

So even if it was the act of terrorists and you don't believe any alternative views, those terrorists did a lot of folks a big favor.

Israel benefited by having US, British etc. soldiers die to fight one of her enemies.

US war corporations and military industrial complex made a fortune on the war.

Somebody made a killing in the stock market on futures betting.

Larry Silverstein made a killing in insurance on his 3 buildings that went down.

Corporations in Israel received numerous contracts for new airport security scanners and other screening devices and made lots of $$$$.

The NY port authority no longer had to worry about abatement of the asbestos in those buildings and the fines they would have paid for non-compliance or the cost of demolishing them.

The list goes on and on, so the terrorists must be really sad that they caused so much good fortune for so many.

Who did not benefit from the alleged attack?

Average Joe US citizen who is footing the bill for much of the above.

The poor boots on the ground that had to do the dirty work.

The poor folks who perished in the Towers and their grieving families..

The poor Iraqis and Afghans who cannot even have a wedding without being blown to bits by erroneous US bombing. And the hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children in those countries that have been killed by US, British etc. bombs and bullets.

As a final statement, you would have to be pretty stupid and not think ahead at all to attack an enemy that is millions of times stronger than yourself, knowing full well that you and your people would pay an enormous price for such an act, and that you would be squashed like bugs by the military force that would be unleashed. Your cities, towns and villages would be bombed to rubble and thousands of your innocent family members would be rounded up and killed.
The disproportionate killing would be on the order of 500 to 1 or more.

This would be like chaining yourself to a tree and stirring a stick in a nearby fire ant's nest. I have trouble believing that anyone is that stupid.

I know, you're going to say that Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists are that stupid.

« Last Edit: 2011-12-05, 00:10:17 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 356
You make good points about the failure of the bolts, but I believe I read somewhere in the description of the construction of the twin towers that the beams were bolted AND welded together.

Also your model about energy is simplistic. Energy is absorbed in the structure of the plane itself as it crushes in on itself, just the way it does in automobiles that are designed to absorb the crash energy on impact. We don't see automobiles taking out bridge or overpass abutments, rather we see an extremely crumpled accordion of metal that absorbed the energy of impact and gave it off as heat in the process.

Posting those Khomeini quotes can be quite inflammatory and lead to others posting equally vile quotes from Judaic literature. Do you want that?

The beams bowing inward would put a shearing force on the bolts and whatever welding was done, most likely shearing them quite easily.

Do you mean 3000 year old manuscripts put up against 30 or so year old quotes.?


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3049
It's turtles all the way down
The beams bowing inward would put a shearing force on the bolts and whatever welding was done, most likely shearing them quite easily.

Do you mean 3000 year old manuscripts put up against 30 or so year old quotes.?

We have no proof either way so it is conjecture from both sides.

I'm sure Khomeini's quotes, if they are real and not more Israeli propaganda, are derived from mindsets and manuscripts that are quite old and perverted in their thinking just as it is with some of the Judaic literature.

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones, and the pot should not call the kettle "black"


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
Stop and think, The plane carries x amount of mass moving at y speed, I don't think it matters much what that mass is made of, it still carries z amount of energy when it hits the building, those steel beams are going to be deformed by the energy.  The beams cannot deform without tremendous pressure at the ends where they are bolted together.  The bolts failed and the beams came down.  How intelligent does a person need to be to see something as simple as that, I'm sure even you can.

that's interesting!:

--------------------

"Tower Blueprints
Surviving Evidence of the World Trade Center Attack

The blueprints to the Twin Towers and Building 7 remained off-limits to the public for more than five years after the attack, despite the fact that the buildings were built with public money and that the engineering drawings of public buildings are supposed to be public information. 1   Incredibly, the team of engineers from the ASCE that conducted the only investigation of the building "collapses" before Ground Zero had been cleaned up lacked access to the buildings' blueprints -- at least until they signed waivers that they would not use the evidence in a lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey."


some Tower Blueprints you can find there: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html

---------------------------------------
  

this is the pieces of story taken from this: http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/3873416/1/
(in red is my writings):



"Here are a few of the salient points that the NIST found in the discovered Port Authority documents from February 3, 1964:

1. A structural analysis was carried out by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson and is the most complete and detailed of any ever made for any building structure. The preliminary calculations alone cover 1,200 pages and involve over 100 detailed drawings.

2. The buildings have been designed for wind loads of 45 lbs per square foot which is 2.5 times the New York City Building Code requirements of 20 lbs per square foot, the design load for the Empire State, Pan American and Chrysler Buildings. In addition to static wind loads, a complete dynamic analysis has been made to take into account extremely high velocity gusts.

3. The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8. ) travelling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage ---- but not penetrate the whole building like shown in faked videos with planes --- which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

7. The design has been reviewed by some of the most knowledgeable people in the construction industry. In a letter to John Skilling, the Structural Engineer for the World Trade Center, the Chief Engineer of the American Bridge Division of U.S. Steel Corporation said:
"In reviewing this design with our Operating and Construction Departments, we are very optimistic that you have turned a new page in the design of structural steel."

---------------------------------------

"First of all, a fully fueled Boeing 707, carries 23,000 gallons of fuel and a fully fueled Boeing 767 carries 23,980 gallons of fuel. Not a significant difference, unless Robertson is correct about the status of the Boeing 707 the WTC Towers were designed to handle."

---------------------------------------

"The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s."

--------------------------------------

"Claiming the WTC Towers were never engineered for 600 mph 767 impacts, assuages his sense of guilt over those many lost lives.

A tragedy that he could never have prevented and holds no responsibility for.

82 year old Leslie Robertson is yet another innocent victim of the Inside Job."

----------------------------------

and again - full story about 911 is there. watch the 26 parts of video on the bottom: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_154.htm

this is my study as conspiracy theorist. You don't need to have skills of nuclear or constructor engineer. You need only logical thinking and an awareness that conspiracy exists.
that's it.  
   
Group: Guest
Yes, for a science forum, the 9/11 truther people here are pretty unscientific.    They all have this preconceived notion that the "guvmunt is evil, durr", and they then look for any evidence to support their view with regard to what happened on 9/11, conveniently discarding all evidence that does not comport with their worldview.

yes that's exactly what does criminal inspector who "are pretty unscientific" in most cases - remove false testimony and put in scientific facts from professionals.
   
Group: Guest
Tysb3:

Quote
3. The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8. ) travelling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage ---- but not penetrate the whole building like shown in faked videos with planes --- which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

Well I would say that the best building engineering and architectural minds doing their analysis in 1964 made a valiant attempt but unfortunately their calculations were wrong.  There is nothing wrong with the fact that they were wrong, we can assume that they did their best with good intentions.  Needless to say most of their calculations were probably done with slide-rulers and adding machines, and they may have run very simple computer simulations by paying for access to someone's mainframe computer.

I think you were the one making the big point about it being impossible for the planes to slice through the steel columns but we collectively refreshed ourselves about that one.  Only a few parts of the planes were capable of slicing through the steel columns, and what really happened is that steel column sections were "punched out" of the steel column matrix in the outer supporting walls by the impacts of the planes.  That pretty much takes the wind out of your argument but I'm not sure if you have at least acknowledged that point.

But when you insist that there were no planes and all of the amateur video was faked, 99.999% of the people, Truthers included, would think that you are a kook first, conspiracy theorist second.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2103
...
But when you insist that there were no planes and all of the amateur video was faked, 99.999% of the people, Truthers included, would think that you are a kook first, conspiracy theorist second.

MileHigh

Quite so -- I pointed out the EVIDENCE from numerous amateur video recordings and referred to a scholarly paper by Eric Salter providing evidence for real planes hitting the Towers (but not WTC7).  Many people on the ground also HEARD the sound of the low-flying incoming jets; I have talked to some of these.

  I have referenced the JournalOf911Studies.com earlier, but I should point out that this journal includes ONLY peer-reviewed papers by scholars in various fields, and makes a valiant effort to sort out fact from unsubstantiated fiction by requiring that EVIDENCE be brought to bear on various questions related to 9/11/2001.

Did real planes hit the WTC Towers?  Yes:  http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200610/Salter.pdf

Did nukes bring down the WTC Towers?  No:   http://journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the-Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf 

Did an energy beam from space (Judy Wood) knock down the Towers?  NO: http://journalof911studies.com/letters/b/scientific-critique-of-judy-woods-paper-star-wars-beam-weapons-by-james-gourley.pdf    -- and other papers in the same journal

What was the nature of the order by Dick Cheney to questioning assistant (Mineta testimony) just prior to the Pentagon hit?  http://journalof911studies.com/letters/OrderRegardingAA77HittingPentagonOn911.pdf

Is there a mathematical analysis of either Tower's collapse, which challenges the official story?  Yes: http://journalof911studies.com/letters/ProfKuttlerWTC1CollapseTimeCalculations.pdf

IOW, the so-called "Truther community" has indeed sought to sort out the wheat from the chaff, truth from error, evidentiary fact from nonsense. 
 
   
Group: Guest

Well I would say that the best building engineering and architectural minds doing their analysis in 1964 made a valiant attempt but unfortunately their calculations were wrong.  There is nothing wrong with the fact that they were wrong, we can assume that they did their best with good intentions.  Needless to say most of their calculations were probably done with slide-rulers and adding machines, and they may have run very simple computer simulations by paying for access to someone's mainframe computer.


you are not the best building engineer and architect. you can not evaluating their competence. that's only yours speculation. computers is not matter of argument. just mater in speed of calculations.
and I'm sure you don't have computer simulations which show how aluminum plane penetrate the buildings like in fake videos with planes.
because

 "The blueprints to the Twin Towers and Building 7 remained off-limits to the public for more than five years after the attack, despite the fact that the buildings were built with public money and that the engineering drawings of public buildings are supposed to be public information."


I think you were the one making the big point about it being impossible for the planes to slice through the steel columns but we collectively refreshed ourselves about that one.  Only a few parts of the planes were capable of slicing through the steel columns, and what really happened is that steel column sections were "punched out" of the steel column matrix in the outer supporting walls by the impacts of the planes.  That pretty much takes the wind out of your argument but I'm not sure if you have at least acknowledged that point.


My acknowledge that the explosives placed on the steel constructions do pretty much better that job than aluminum plane and takes the wind out of your argument but I'm not sure if you have at least acknowledged that point.


But when you insist that there were no planes and all of the amateur video was faked, 99.999% of the people, Truthers included, would think that you are a kook first, conspiracy theorist second.


First: I do not insist. I show the proofs. watch the video where is the proven fake videos:   full story about 911 is there. watch the 26 parts of video on the bottom: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_154.htm

Second: you insist by calling names and show your self what you are. call the name ?  ;)



« Last Edit: 2011-12-04, 23:33:05 by tysb3 »
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 79
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-05-29, 02:55:57