• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clayton Moore said:
$205 a day travelling? Breakfast, a burger and a room?
Click to expand...

Pray tell us, how much money do you make in a day of doing nothing Clayton? Hmm? I'm willing to bet Dick Gage's $75k a year is more than you've seen in a years salary working your ass off.
 
Every response to the guy reminds me why I don't even bother with that kind of person... when the first thing you're called out as is an accusation of being either a shill or government plant and that you're an idiot for not believing in the conspiracy, then you know already that there will be no productive discussion. I'll bend over backwards to have a conversation with people who will at least avoid that crap, but not for that...
 
Dave Rogers said:
Bill smith's presentation of this quote in a forum dedicated to the discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories is a textbook example of one of the standard 9/11 truther strawman arguments. It rests on the assumption that there is no difference between rejecting the specific allegation that the 9/11 attacks were planned and executed by elements within the US Government, and rejecting the general assertion that some governments at some times are corrupt. The aim is to portray as naive and self-deluded those who question the truther account of events with the same level of skepticism that they question the vastly more widely understood account of events, and find that the former is contradicted by, where the latter is supported by, any and all the available evidence.

Dave
Click to expand...

Yet you pretend to act as if your opinion on this subject would be different if it weren't the commonly accepted theory.

Governments do bad things. Has history not taught you this? Would you ever doubt that the Russian government has committed such acts? Hitler used a similar strategy. Quote the Hitler part. Your friends will lubby dub it.

Just show me buildings that fall like that. Show me building collapses, even involving carbon fuels, that produce what one witness said was a steel beam dripping molten and what others said were explosions that literally shook them off their feet and killed some--far from the plane crashes. With all the anomalies and all of the people who stood to gain (Bush and Cheney connected defense contractors... and beyond) is it so unlikely that this wasn't an inside job?

No.

But you just don't want to believe it was an inside job. It's reality of the harsh type. And now you're in too deep. That sucks.
 
tempesta29 said:
Yet you pretend to act as if your opinion on this subject would be different if it weren't the commonly accepted theory.

Governments do bad things. Has history not taught you this? Would you ever doubt that the Russian government has committed such acts? Hitler used a similar strategy. Quote the Hitler part. Your friends will lubby dub it.

Just show me buildings that fall like that. Show me building collapses, even involving carbon fuels, that produce what one witness said was a steel beam dripping molten and what others said were explosions that literally shook them off their feet and killed some--far from the plane crashes. With all the anomalies and all of the people who stood to gain (Bush and Cheney connected defense contractors... and beyond) is it so unlikely that this wasn't an inside job?

No.

But you just don't want to believe it was an inside job. It's reality of the harsh type. And now you're in too deep. That sucks.
Click to expand...

Add to that the fact that neocons control many of US government policies. And no politician I know of mentions "neoconservative" in his or her yeas and nays.

Do government officials assert proudly and publicly that they are a neoconservative? NO!

How many neoconservatives can you name? How many backers, money people, of neoconservative lobbies/think tanks can you name?

Let alone that vast majority of Americans will give you a blank look if you mention neoconservative.

So there you have it. A group of unelected and under the radar people controlling American policies that impact their agenda.

9/11 was a snap for them.
 
tempesta29 said:
Just show me buildings that fall like that.
Click to expand...
Better idea; show us a building collapse that matches the criteria you think the WTC should have replicated and justify it. Find a building with a comparable structural system, plane impact damage & fire scenario, size, and materiality. If "freefall speed" is your only hunch that "something isn't right" you're far from "proving" anything.

The failure on not just your part, but that of groups like AE911 to show detailed building analyses to prove those "theories" is in my opinion nothing more than a mockery of competent professionals who are capable of far more competent research.
 
Last edited:
tempesta29 said:
Also show me a steel framed building that reaches free fall during its collapse. Yeah, that too.
Click to expand...
Not too far off...
femr2 said:
The Demolition of 1515 Flagler Dr...

44753876.jpg

898155405.png


A quick look at derived acceleration suggests very near to freefall, if indeed it is not actually reached...

657018636.jpg


May need to look at some other demolitions. Seems the assertion that near freefall doesn't occur could be wrong...
Click to expand...
 
tempesta29 said:
Also show me a steel framed building that reaches free fall during its collapse. Yeah, that too.
Click to expand...

Show us one that DOESN'T. Oh, right. Not too many instances out there of giant steel buildings collapsing due to non-CD causes.

femr2 said:
May need to look at some other demolitions. Seems the assertion that near freefall doesn't occur could be wrong...
Click to expand...
You can't use CD's to prove a non-CD.
 
tempesta29 said:
Also show me a steel framed building that reaches free fall during its collapse. Yeah, that too.
Click to expand...
Show me a building, any building, over 30 stories high, that has ever been bought down in a controlled demolition.

If you can provide that, I'll then ask for one within that set bought down without weakening walls and structural members first.

Get crackin'.
 
Last edited:
000063 said:
If you can provide that, I'll then ask for one bought down without weakening walls and structural members first.

Get crackin'.
Click to expand...

Then how did the two WTC towers collapse without
weakening walls and structural members of the first 80 floors?
 
NoahFence said:
Massive unfought fires started by the impact of one of the largest aircraft in the world going about as fast as it can, full of fuel.
Click to expand...

One of the paradign claims of the truth movement is that the "undamaged 80 floors of cold hard steel" should have stopped the collapse from happening regardless of any localized failure that might overwhelm the ability of the lower structure to absorb the impact of a large section falling form above
 
Well, Noah saved me a post.

Also, no building over 30s stories bought down by CD, I note.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
One of the paradign claims of the truth movement is that the "undamaged 80 floors of cold hard steel" should have stopped the collapse from happening regardless of any localized failure that might overwhelm the ability of the lower structure to absorb the impact of a large section falling form above
Click to expand...

Too bad that's not how it works!

(obviously ballparking for simplicity's sake):

One floor had to hold up 20 moving floors, then an instant later,
One floor had to hold up 21 moving slightly faster floors, then an instant later,
One floor had to hold up 22 moving even faster floors....

Rinse and repeat.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Then how did the two WTC towers collapse without
weakening walls and structural members of the first 80 floors?
Click to expand...

Classic troofer ignorance and misconception about building structures. The collapsing towers did weaken structural members.....specifically the floor plates which were not designed for such a large mass. The floor plates provided lateral support to the exterior and core columns, which would not support themselves without the lateral support.....and resulted in a total collapse.
 
Animal said:
Classic troofer ignorance and misconception about building structures. The collapsing towers did weaken structural members.....specifically the floor plates which were not designed for such a large mass. The floor plates provided lateral support to the exterior and core columns, which would not support themselves without the lateral support.....and resulted in a total collapse.
Click to expand...

Consider the classic four equal rectangles within a rectangle(floor) A, B, C, D X 120(floors). That gives us 480 points of possible failure.

Someone explain how A, B, C, D of one floor failed simultaneously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom