No Explosives Here?

[TexasJack]

The 9/11 Comm was a "half-baked farce" not my words, but those of the editor of Fire Engineering Magazine.

Wow, not this again, of course he wasn't referring to the 911 Commission, because when he wrote this, it had not been formed yet. And since the NIST investigation, has shown no dissatisfaction with the report.

 

[atavisms]

And don't fall for the "nanothermite as explosive" excuse. You'll find no steel that was severed through that sort of force either.

alright, it wasnt thermite or explosive thermite, great...
what was it then?

 

[fourtoe]

The 9/11 Comm was a "half-baked farce" not my words, but those of the editor of Fire Engineering Magazine. A few glaring problems with the report are it's ignoring of evidence (i.e Mineta and first responders), the changing of timelines, (Cheney's whereabouts) and not even a mention of WTC 7, Which is pretty astonishing surreal considering they were charged with compiling "fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11"
The report also stated that, "whomever funded the attacks it is of little significance" and on the 'put and call options' by saying that despite how suspicious these look on the surface that they were all purchased by a "single US institutional investor with no possible ties to al qaeda"
That's called putting the cart before the horse and is not the way investigations should operate.

I cannot believe this is still being argued. WTC7 was not attacked by terrorists. The 911C was tasked with investigating the attacks. Plus it was kind of a meta-investigation--look to the FBI for the hardcore investigation in the events on 911.

 

[atavisms]

So is arguing from ignorance

the point i was trying to make is that one can get an 'expert' to say anything which is what your highlighted section points out, agreeing with me. (and why its a fallacy to appeal to authority)

re 'arguing from ignorance', If there is something incorrect about the facts I listed you might point it or them out, otherwise youve only spoken but not actually said anything meaningful to anyone else,.. but yourself.

 

[dtugg]

alright, it wasnt thermite or explosive thermite, great...
what was it then?

Impact damage, fire, and gravity.

 

[atavisms]

You do realise that aircraft have quite a few navigation aids besides a compass don't you?This happened in 2001,not 1901.

interesting - but you dont say how they might have found their targets so successfully (being so far away and at cruising altitude)

 

[dtugg]

interesting - but you dont say how they might have found their targets so successfully (being so far away and at cruising altitude)

Autopilot.

GPS.

You are one ignorant twoofer.

 

[fourtoe]

interesting - but you dont say how they might have found their targets so successfully (being so far away and at cruising altitude)

Multiple ppl have made posts already addressing the fact that the terrorists didn't hijack the freaking Wright Brother's plane!

They also had digital watches I bet. It is a magical world we live in.

 

[atavisms]

Ok, than explain this car that I found?? There also seems to be some kind of metal rolling caart in there too. How about all the concrete surrounding it?? Hummm.... [qimg]http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/concreteremains2.jpg[/qimg] This next one kinda gives it some prospective. [qimg]http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/5277x.jpg[/qimg] Have I seen the debris field?? You must be new around here. I was there, and spent the next ~4 months on that pile. I knew that pile in great detail, and spent a lot of time trying to find my Brothers in the pile. I pulled hundreds of body parts from that pile. I know how tall it was. Here is a picture that gives it some more prospective. [qimg]http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/911_devistation2-1.jpg[/qimg] 800 foot radius, but it was in most places 6-7 storeys tall. Don't try to use that picture with me. I have a link to the original file, and its huge. So, in conclusion, have you talked to anyone who was there?? HINT HINT!! I am one.

Hi
The car was in a lower level garage? I know a number of the sub-level spaces remained perfectly intact. The point of the towers demise is how explosive it was, how they both behaved the same way, (despite the plane impacts being different) There is, quite simply, nothing natural looking about it.

I am not 'trying to use' anything. That sounds like you have caught someone trying to deceive you but that could not be further from the truth.
That is a photo of the debris field of the towers. (if u'r referring to what Im thinking) That's all. Are you saying it was not explosive? or that the tower were not completely blown apart? Im sure you would answer, no in both cases.

I got there on 9/11/01 after the towers had already come down. and I have spoken to a few people who 'worked the pile' (firefighters & emt's among them) and a neighbor works for the PA and was down there regularly from 9/12 onwards, for a while - Why do you ask?

Im not sure how you think these people got so badly blasted apart (for you to have personally removed 'hundreds of body parts' yourself confirms what the facts reveal, that people (and the towers themselves) were blown to bits. How could it all get so badly damaged from getting crushed by a gravity driven collapse of an intact structure. Wouldn't that just squash things down and not have blown them so violently (and forcefully) apart?

 

[TokenMac]

Multiple ppl have made posts already addressing the fact that the terrorists didn't hijack the freaking Wright Brother's plane!

They also had digital watches I bet. It is a magical world we live in.

Hell even the Wrights* could find "Latitude: 40°43′″N Longitude: 74°00′″W"


*just not from one of their planes

 

[atavisms]

continued.....

"The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.

the point remains as valid, they did not test for explosives.

 

[atavisms]

That's why people study engineering. Intuition is not enough.

perhaps for some things,.,,but for this, a working knowledge of the facts, and simple common sense are enough for most people to grasp that these events could only have been achieved through the use of explosives. one does not need to be an engineer to realize this obvious implication.

Why do you think most Americans have never even heard of WTC 7? It isnt bc the thing does not look like a planned implosion - that's exactly why they dont now of it. It was shown only on 9/11 and almost never again afterward. Why do you think that is? How can Americans be so uninformed about such a major aspect of such a major event?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

the point remains as valid, they did not test for explosives.

Fact: Explosives always generate very large and distinctive seismic spikes.

Fact: No such spikes appeared in the seismic record from 9/11.

Ergo, there is no need to have tested for explosives since it is physically impossible for explosives to have been involved in the Twin Towers collapses.

This is all very simple and you should be able to understand it.

 

[MikeW]

Im not sure how you think these people got so badly blasted apart (for you to have personally removed 'hundreds of body parts' yourself confirms what the facts reveal, that people (and the towers themselves) were blown to bits. How could it all get so badly damaged from getting crushed by a gravity driven collapse of an intact structure. Wouldn't that just squash things down and not have blown them so violently (and forcefully) apart?

Robert C Shaler was the former director of the Forensic Biology Department at the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, and the man who directed the DNA identification efforts. Was he surprised by this? Here's what he says on page 66 of his book, "Who They Were":

"Intellectually, we agreed that anyone inside these buildings likely had been pulverized into small fragments. The falling buildings had acted like two huge mortar and pestles, grinding the tissue and bone into smaller and smaller pieces, some of it to dust. The stark truth was that even normal office objects, such as computers and desks and chairs, were rarely found intact. Sadly people, too, had become tiny fragments that blended into the omnipresent dust that had become the hallmark of the World Trade Center rubble".

So: the expert in charge wasn't in the least bit surprised that victims had been "pulverized into small fragments". He expected it from the beginning.

 

[atavisms]

I guess you're implying that this was the sort of dangerous situation a pilot should be able to handle, being threatened with something as pathetic as a 'box cutter'. ...stop this stupidity about how 'box cutters' aren't scary as Hell.

Not at all. It is not that a boxcutter cannot be a scary weapon, (did not say that -Im sure it can kill someone easily if it slices an artery and they bleed out)..what I said was that I read somewhere that emergency training dictates that pilots immediately convey any trouble in a cockpit (radio or squawk 7500) and found it difficult to believe that not one person in four cockpits manged to get this off before the planes were taken over by "men armed with box cutters."

This kind of speculation is not something I generally do and did not mean to suggest that this is so indicative of anything in and of itself.. Just thatit seems rather unlikely is all.

 

[atavisms]

Autopilot.
GPS.
You are one ignorant twoofer.

don't avionics GPS require a navigation beacon? regardless, u'r right I should not comment on such things, as do I not know much at all about the subject. I was asking out of speculation.

-I guess you need to attack me personally, the reality is, it says more about you than anyone else. It's a shame you could not as effectively debunk the central issues raised in the initial post.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

-I guess you need to attack me personally, the reality is, it says more about you than anyone else.

Kind of like lying about having been there and having freinds who died in the attack. dtugg isn't the one trying to steal sympathy from those who really did lose loved ones that day.

 

[funk de fino]

the point remains as valid, they did not test for explosives.

Did you ignore the Brent Blanchard paper and continue to spew rubbish?

page 8, assertion 6.

http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf

Please try and contact the mentioned people and explain why you say they are lying. You do not know what tests or inspections were carried out at this point

That would be Yanuzzi demolition, Public officials and forensic investigators. John Yannuzzi and Dennis Dannenfelser.

I bet you do not.

 

[funk de fino]

don't avionics GPS require a navigation beacon? regardless, u'r right I should not comment on such things, as do I not know much at all about the subject. I was asking out of speculation.

-I guess you need to attack me personally, the reality is, it says more about you than anyone else. It's a shame you could not as effectively debunk the central issues raised in the initial post.

Its a shame you did not deign to try and research it from an expert before starting to believe lies on a 911 truth site.

 

[Reactor drone]

don't avionics GPS require a navigation beacon? regardless, u'r right I should not comment on such things, as do I not know much at all about the subject. I was asking out of speculation.

-I guess you need to attack me personally, the reality is, it says more about you than anyone else. It's a shame you could not as effectively debunk the central issues raised in the initial post.

GPS uses a system of satelites to triangulate positions.In aviation they're usually embedded with the inertial navigation system.Both of those are independant of ground navigation beacons.

There is also ADF which uses the ground beacons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_direction_finder

Another ground based nav system is VOR

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHF_omnidirectional_range