Merged 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[bill smith]

Sadly, no, I wouldn't. Plenty of people are stupid enough to think that there's a suspect coincidence involved in the fact that the people who filmed the first impact were still at the scene and filming half an hour later.

Dave

I do point that out to people but they often say....'Yeah'....'filming the back of the buildings and catching the second plane by coincidence'

...and I get the same kind of reaction with he missing steel clips, the plane that should have hit WTC7 and many others. You can't account for folk. They often seem to have minds of their own.

 

[beachnut]

I do point that out to people but they often say....'Yeah'....'filming the back of the buildings and catching the second plane by coincidence'

...and I get the same kind of reaction with he missing steel clips, the plane that should have hit WTC7 and many others. You can't account for folk. They often seem to have minds of their own.

911Truth is built on hearsay, lies, and fantasy. You believe 911Truth because?

What missing steel clips?
No plane was going to hit WTC7. The terrorist aimed at large buildings, they have a better chance of hitting the largest buildings they can find.

You seem to be a very gullible person making up or believing the lies about the video.

 

[twinstead]

I get the image in my head of bill smith furiously googling Pavel Hlava...

 

[bill smith]

I get the image in my head of bill smith furiously googling Pavel Hlava...

googlegooglegoogle. lol

 

[Dave Rogers]

I do point that out to people but they often say....'Yeah'....'filming the back of the buildings and catching the second plane by coincidence'

Yes, because all square buildings have a well-defined front and back, and hand-held cameras are so difficult to move that nobody ever shifts location when they're using one. And even if they did move, what are the odds of them moving to a place where they might have caught the second impact? [1]

...and I get the same kind of reaction with he missing steel clips, the plane that should have hit WTC7 and many others. You can't account for folk. They often seem to have minds of their own.

But haven't figured out how to use them. So basically you're saying that when you lie to people, they believe you? Doesn't seem to happen a lot round here.

Dave

[1] This is a hard one, that requires actual arithmetic. The answer is 0.5, if you're having trouble.

 

[bonavada]

I get the image in my head of bill smith furiously googling Pavel Hlava...

Ditto here.

And Pavel filmed the second impact too, life is full of coincidences huh?

BV

 

[johnny karate]

You can't account for folk. They often seem to have minds of their own.

And then they come to an Internet forum and post nonsense that's demonstrably false without the slightest bit of shame or self-awareness. Crazy world, huh?

 

[The Big Dog]

I do point that out to people but they often say....'Yeah'....'filming the back of the buildings and catching the second plane by coincidence'

...and I get the same kind of reaction with he missing steel clips, the plane that should have hit WTC7 and many others. You can't account for folk. They often seem to have minds of their own.

Filming the back of the buildings??? Perhaps these people have never seen a skyscraper?? Coincidence? WTF?

Hey Bill, ya gotta admit that when you are talking about those "some people," those people are no planer half-wits. Do what the rest of us do, ignore them!

 

[bill smith]

The missing components.

911Truth is built on hearsay, lies, and fantasy. You believe 911Truth because?

What missing steel clips?
No plane was going to hit WTC7. The terrorist aimed at large buildings, they have a better chance of hitting the largest buildings they can find.

You seem to be a very gullible person making up or believing the lies about the video.

The missing components.

There was extremely little concrete left in the rubble on the ground. Even if the force of the collapse had broken it up there should have been millions of pieces of concrete strewn and piled everywhere quite apart from the percentage that had been pulverised. There should have been 100,000 tons of structural steel in and around each footprint including 5,000 floor pans that the concrete floors were poured into. Plus 110 ACRES of rebar or wire mesh reinforcing for the floors.
If you look at the attached animated gif- allow it to load and cycle a few times you get the impression of how little rubble there WAS on the ground after the collapse.Concrete, steel, wire mesh or anything else. Even more tellingly, reverse the view in your mind and watch the Two biggest Towers in the world grow and reassemble hemselves from the paltry few sticks and stones we can see on the ground. Always remembering that the inside of the buildng was full of structure too, including 110 one-acre 4'' thick concrete floors.


.
http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HTR/web-content/Images/HTRTitleAnim.gif animated gif
http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/wtc-photo.jpg Huge photo (slow loading,zoomable)

(F11 may toggle fullscreen on/off on yur computer)

 

[beachnut]

The missing components.

There was extremely little concrete left in the rubble on the ground. Even if the force of the collapse had broken it up there should have been millions of pieces of concrete strewn and piled everywhere quite apart from the percentage that had been pulverised. There should have been 100,000 tons of structural steel in and around each footprint including 5,000 floor pans that the concrete floors were poured into. Plus 110 ACRES of rebar or wire mesh reinforcing for the floors.
If you look at the attached animated gif- allow it to load and cycle a few times you get the impression of how little rubble there WAS on the ground after the collapse.Concrete, steel, wire mesh or anything else. Even more tellingly, reverse the view in your mind and watch the Two biggest Towers in the world grow and reassemble hemselves from the paltry few sticks and stones we can see on the ground. Always remembering that the inside of the buildng was full of structure too, including 110 one-acre 4'' thick concrete floors.


.
http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HTR/web-content/Images/HTRTitleAnim.gif animated gif
http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/wtc-photo.jpg Huge photo (slow loading,zoomable)

(F11 may toggle fullscreen on/off on yur computer)

And you believe this junk? Ace Baker, he believes the planes were faked. Good job hooking up to the train that constantly wrecks in 911Truth fantasyland.

Sorry, all the concrete was there. Try again.

It was all there you have presented lies from 911Truth.

You failed to read anything about 911 save the idiotic ideas?

Wow, where did the air, 95 percent of the WTC go???? There was a pile of 5 stories of junk all over 19 acres. So two 1 acre size buildings 95 percent air make 5 stories of ruble. Do the math. Got math?

 

[Dave Rogers]

There was extremely little concrete left in the rubble on the ground. Even if the force of the collapse had broken it up there should have been millions of pieces of concrete strewn and piled everywhere quite apart from the percentage that had been pulverised. There should have been 100,000 tons of structural steel in and around each footprint including 5,000 floor pans that the concrete floors were poured into. Plus 110 ACRES of rebar or wire mesh reinforcing for the floors.

And here we have it, a classic no-claimer argument. None of the pretend inconsistencies here could possibly be a result of explosives, thermite, remote controlled planes or any of the other 9/11 truther theories that, while still utterly insane, at least acknowledge the existence of the laws of physics. No, this is full-blown appeal to magic, the suggestion that 9/11 was perpetrated in some unknown way that actually caused solid physical objects to vanish abruptly. The "missing steel" argument is a nosedive into total tinfoil hat, Ace-Baker-is-my-hero, "Judy Would" style gibbering, barking, incoherent insanity. But bill smith doesn't want to give that impression, so he'll stick to the no-claimer position, where if he can invent something that he believes is unexplained, it refutes any position he wants and proves any other he wants.

Bill, I have a prediction: you will never, as long as you live, formulate even the vague beginnings of a self-consistent hypothesis about what happened on 9/11, because your starting points are lies, misinterpretations and misunderstandings. And you will never achieve anything by presenting these arguments other than the respect of those with no judgement, and the amusement of those who understand the subjects you think you're talking about.

Dave

 

[bill smith]

And here we have it, a classic no-claimer argument. None of the pretend inconsistencies here could possibly be a result of explosives, thermite, remote controlled planes or any of the other 9/11 truther theories that, while still utterly insane, at least acknowledge the existence of the laws of physics. No, this is full-blown appeal to magic, the suggestion that 9/11 was perpetrated in some unknown way that actually caused solid physical objects to vanish abruptly. The "missing steel" argument is a nosedive into total tinfoil hat, Ace-Baker-is-my-hero, "Judy Would" style gibbering, barking, incoherent insanity. But bill smith doesn't want to give that impression, so he'll stick to the no-claimer position, where if he can invent something that he believes is unexplained, it refutes any position he wants and proves any other he wants.

Bill, I have a prediction: you will never, as long as you live, formulate even the vague beginnings of a self-consistent hypothesis about what happened on 9/11, because your starting points are lies, misinterpretations and misunderstandings. And you will never achieve anything by presenting these arguments other than the respect of those with no judgement, and the amusement of those who understand the subjects you think you're talking about.



Dave

In the piece on the missing components I merely suggest that people use their own eyes Dave. Can you explain the missing (massive) volume of material yourself ?

 

[beachnut]

The missing components. ...

including 110 one-acre 4'' thick concrete floors. ...

WOW@WOW I think you have broken the story wide open.

Yes 100 4-inch floors; where are they in the 5 story ruble pile?

Gee, let me see?
110 floors
4 inches
440 inches (warning math may esplode 911Truth believers bubbles)
36.67 feet tall pile of floors.

Wow, you broke the case take your 36.67 feet to the Pulitzer Prize committee and collect your award; it comes with money. Why are you truth believes afraid to get the Pulitzer Prize, the Watergate was over in 2 years, the president resigned and you 911Truth guys can’t get your story past the delusional stage closing in on 8 years.

That was a gigantic pile of concrete you got!
Got math?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

The missing components.

There was extremely little concrete left in the rubble on the ground. Even if the force of the collapse had broken it up there should have been millions of pieces of concrete strewn and piled everywhere quite apart from the percentage that had been pulverised.

LINK
Plenty of concrete there... I'm not sure why you imply that there should have been a pile of visibly recognizeable floors like in the collapse of smaller buildings... The concrete comprising the floors was an acre in area, and a few inches deep. I'm not at all shocked by what I see, regardless of whichj that's an old claim, and has no weight in it whatsoever

If you look at the attached animated gif- allow it to load and cycle a few times you get the impression of how little rubble there WAS on the ground after the collapse.Concrete, steel, wire mesh or anything else. Even more tellingly, reverse the view in your mind and watch the Two biggest Towers in the world grow and reassemble hemselves from the paltry few sticks and stones we can see on the ground.

You call this a small pile of sticks?

LINK
http://www.flickr.com/photos/slagheap/132105494/sizes/l/
LINK

I don't care how small it looks compared with the intact towers, that pile was by no means insignificant, nor is their any reason to contend that the pile would be more than a few stories high. The difference in volume of the actual structure compared with the volume of office space the structure enclosed is huge.

2009 and people still think something is strange in the collapse behavior.... amazing...

 

[kookbreaker]

Has Bill gone past 'no planer' and onto 'no towers'?

 

[bonavada]

The missing components

Here's some. Many more where these come from. Top down views don't really show what remained right? Unless you are Ace "Bonkers" Baker, Judy "Wonky" Woods, or Andrew "Inside Jobby Job" Johnson.

BV

 

[beachnut]

In the piece on the missing components I merely suggest that prople use their own eyes Dave. Can you explain the missing (massive) volume of material yourself ?

The missing volume from the WTC is air.

AIR! The missing volume in the gravity collapse of the WTC is AIR.

LOL – with 4 inch floors the rest of the space was AIR, the purpose of the building was to rent empty space so people can work. That is why there is more volume in the WTC than material so you can make money like 911Truth, they make money selling lies, hearsay, and fantasy on DVD, they have no evidence 911Truth is 100 percent air. No ruble when 911Truth fails, just an upset follower when he or she discovers they believed in lies made up by 911Truth delusion experts.

This simple math. Learn to use math. Your big pile of 4-inch floors comes to 36.7 feet. The towers released the energy of 130 TONS of TNT when they fell due to gravitational potential energy. Physics is good; take a physics course instead of spreading delusions built on ignorance.

 

[bill smith]

Here's some. Many more where these come from. Top down views don't really show what remained right? Unless you are Ace "Bonkers" Baker, Judy "Wonky" Woods, or Andrew "Inside Jobby Job" Johnson.




[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/87484840988429cfc.jpg[/qimg]


BV

I've never seen that photo before. Do you have more ? Ideally with more backgound/context.

 

[The Big Dog]

In the piece on the missing components I merely suggest that people use their own eyes Dave. Can you explain the missing (massive) volume of material yourself ?

Uh, you do know that the Towers were built in a "bathtub" 70 feet deep don't you that was filled with debris after the collapse?

 

[bill smith]

The missing volume from the WTC is air.

AIR! The missing volume in the gravity collapse of the WTC is AIR.

LOL – with 4 inch floors the rest of the space was AIR, the purpose of the building was to rent empty space so people can work. That is why there is more volume in the WTC than material so you can make money like 911Truth, they make money selling lies, hearsay, and fantasy on DVD, they have no evidence 911Truth is 100 percent air. No ruble when 911Truth fails, just an upset follower when he or she discovers they believed in lies made up by 911Truth delusion experts.

This simple math. Learn to use math. Your big pile of 4-inch floors comes to 36.7 feet. The towers released the energy of 130 TONS of TNT when they fell due to gravitational potential energy. Physics is good; take a physics course instead of spreading delusions built on ignorance.

So you are accepting that there is a missing volume of tubble ? You no longer think you are looking at 500,000 tons of rubble round each footprint ?