A W Smith
Philosopher
The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job
- Thread starter Regnad Kcin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- inside job
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
Jammy?
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
You should try it once. It's wild, man.
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
As a corollary:
If a truther comes close to grasping the Inflationary Model of Conspiracy Theories, his brain will inflate until it explodes.
Fortunately, no truther has come close to grasping it.
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
Where is the evidence of explosive residue from the World Trade Center? If it was a controlled demolition there has to be residue from the explosives. You're up against the Law of Conservation of Matter here.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Right back at you. The only difference I can name the perps. Alex Jones, Steven Jones, David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage (need I go on?). I can also state the motive, money and notoriety. Can you do the same (and back it with facts, like I can)?
So, Who is behind your belief and why?
Fonebone
persona non grata
and You're up against the TRUTH here
If you are a sincere truth seeker Craig these links will help you understand
WHY no explosive residues were found by the NIST. Bic?
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
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.
http://www.metroactive.com/metro/09.09.09/cover-0936.html
• NIST never tested for explosive residues despite evidence, including many eyewitness accounts from first responders and people who escaped the buildings, that explosives and incendiaries were present.
• The collapse of the three buildings resembles two different types of controlled demolitions, and not the bending or toppling of a heated building section that might result from a fire.
If you are a sincere truth seeker Craig these links will help you understand
WHY no explosive residues were found by the NIST. Bic?
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
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.
http://www.metroactive.com/metro/09.09.09/cover-0936.html
• NIST never tested for explosive residues despite evidence, including many eyewitness accounts from first responders and people who escaped the buildings, that explosives and incendiaries were present.
• The collapse of the three buildings resembles two different types of controlled demolitions, and not the bending or toppling of a heated building section that might result from a fire.
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
Great now come up with the residue. The Law of Conservation of Matter doesn't even bend. If there were explosives there would have be residue. Go find some. Manhattan should have been covered with it.
Edit: More to the point. Your "work" is not good enough. This is a serious topic that resulted in the deaths of about 3000 people on that day an you've turned it into a meaningless hobby.
Last edited:
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2009
- Messages
- 1,461
No one said they saw explosives or incendiaries. People heard explosions which can be easily be accounted for by regular measn due to fire. NIST didn't test for residues because none of the effects of explosives were present (explosions on the order of over 110 dbs, visible effects on steel, etc).
9/11 Chewy Defense
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 3,593
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2009
- Messages
- 1,461
I would love to see truthers at a murder scene.
"HE WAS SHOT! THERE IS BLOOD AND SOMEONE HEARD A BANG!"
"No...there is no sign of a gun shot wound, but a knife wound instead."
"WHY DON'T YOU TEST FOR GUN POWDER! SOMEONE HEARD A BANG!"
"Why do that? There is no sign of a gun. The bang could have been a door slamming, it could be anything. Only the guy in the other room heard a bang. If it was a gun it would have been loud enough for the neighbors to hear."
"PEOPLE HEARD A BANG!!!"
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Fonebone
persona non grata
Listen UP
Message
Manhattan was covered with the residues Slick. The problem was that the
professionals the taxpayers employ were derelict in their duties.
Three thousand people were murdered on 9-11 and countless more 1st responders,
rescue workers and innocent citizens have or will die from the effects of those residues
in the air that one of those professionals in the EPA declared as safe.
Americans were severely traumatized in the days and weeks after the attacks and
were fed loads of propaganda to keep them traumatized.
Slowly the intelligent citizens began to wake up and began to ask questions.
Some asked why the American military failed to interdict even one terrorist hijacked jetliner.
Some began to ask questions about how our intelligence professionals failed to uncover even
minor clues until after the attacks. Ten thinking Americans woke up a hundred -
hundreds woke up thousands- now millions are awaking to the facts of 9-11.
OK I'll acknowledge that we will never awaken the cowardly or the stupid citizens in America,
nor will the TRUTHERS ever prod the willfully ignorant and mindless partisans to think-
but the intelligent citizens the world over are beginning to awaken and
think and research 9-11 as well.
Ubet this a serious topic and my meaningless hobby as you call it has evolved
into an avocation for millions of intelligent citizens worldwide that will not cease
until the entire truth of 9-11 is revealed.
Thank you for the ridicule Slick. I'll redouble my efforts in your honor. Bic ?
BTW - How about a sample of YOUR work.
Message
Manhattan was covered with the residues Slick. The problem was that the
professionals the taxpayers employ were derelict in their duties.
Three thousand people were murdered on 9-11 and countless more 1st responders,
rescue workers and innocent citizens have or will die from the effects of those residues
in the air that one of those professionals in the EPA declared as safe.
Americans were severely traumatized in the days and weeks after the attacks and
were fed loads of propaganda to keep them traumatized.
Slowly the intelligent citizens began to wake up and began to ask questions.
Some asked why the American military failed to interdict even one terrorist hijacked jetliner.
Some began to ask questions about how our intelligence professionals failed to uncover even
minor clues until after the attacks. Ten thinking Americans woke up a hundred -
hundreds woke up thousands- now millions are awaking to the facts of 9-11.
OK I'll acknowledge that we will never awaken the cowardly or the stupid citizens in America,
nor will the TRUTHERS ever prod the willfully ignorant and mindless partisans to think-
but the intelligent citizens the world over are beginning to awaken and
think and research 9-11 as well.
Ubet this a serious topic and my meaningless hobby as you call it has evolved
into an avocation for millions of intelligent citizens worldwide that will not cease
until the entire truth of 9-11 is revealed.
Thank you for the ridicule Slick. I'll redouble my efforts in your honor. Bic ?
BTW - How about a sample of YOUR work.
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 11,278
So the residue is what is killing the 1st responders? What in the residue is killing them?
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
Evidence?
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 12,374
I found this quote buried in the middle of your ignorant diatribe. Delightful.
So now anybody who doesn't follow your cult is cowardly or stupid, and all the cowardly and stupid Americans are ignoring you, huh? This is how you rationalize your irrelevance, huh? Very nice.
Dude. I think you are just a little full of yourself, aren't you?
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
And those residues were analysed, and found to contain no trace of explosives. In fact, they were so devoid of anything suspicious that a bunch of truthers had to make up a bunch of lies about them to cover up for the fact that they showed nothing suspicious.
It seems fairly clear that that is not the case. The 9/11 truth movement is showing no signs of growth.
Changed tack there a little, didn't we?
And there, in a nutshell, you've shown why this sub-forum, insignificant though it is, is such a problem for truthers. Here, intelligent citizens from all over the world have awoken, thought and researched 9/11, and found that all the evidence points to al-Qaeda having been its perpetrators, and that the hypotheses put forward in which the US Government is complicit are without exception not just unproven but absurd. In your distorted world view, we cannot possibly exist. So you have to keep coming back here and trying to rationalise us away. And we won't disappear, so you get frustrated and angry, and post ever more ridiculous rants in which you accuse anyone and everyone of whatever crosses your mind at the moment you write them.
Every time you post another rant like this, you hammer home how irrelevant the truth movement is, and always was.
Dave
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
Well at least he's recognizing his limitations. Or to put it another way, he knows he'll always be irrelevant. What's disturbing to me though is that these people choose such a serious topic to waste their time on. It's at the very least distasteful.
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
Why does it matter that NIST didn't test for some supposed "residue"? The NYPD CSU did, and if truthers want to make hay from that, they're more than welcome to FOIA the NYPD for their findings.
Furthermore: Who says that it's NIST that has to test anything? Recall, there were two experiments conducted by non-NIST parties on 1. Dust, and 2. What appeared to be melted/eroded areas on the steel. In the first case, the dust examination by the truther researchers has been discussed elsewhere in this forum and has been found lacking, but using those researchers own data, it can be shown that what they were studying was not some deliberately planted incendiary at all. In the second, the WPI researchers discovered an interesting chemical reaction occured in the piles, but it too was something contradicting the use of explosives. The point here is that outside parties have conducted tests on materials recovered from Ground Zero and the immediately surrounding area. Why the red herring of what NIST did? When people cite NIST's findings, it's in regards to what they determined about the fires, the jets impact damage, and the performance of the structural steel in that situation. Nobody mentions explosives testing in conjunction with the NIST reports for the same reason nobody mentions Donald Duck in reference to Solzhenitsyn's work: Because that was not the topic of the work.
If someone's going to talk about the NIST report, then they'd blasted well understand that the topics had better cover the fires, or the performance of the structures while aflame. If they're complaining about something that supposedly wasn't in the report, then they're commiting the same sort of lunacy that I would be if I complained about certain esperanto words not appearing in an english dictionary. It's been time for many years now for the truthers to realize what exactly the NIST report was, and to stop trying to make it out to be something it's not.
Furthermore: Who says that it's NIST that has to test anything? Recall, there were two experiments conducted by non-NIST parties on 1. Dust, and 2. What appeared to be melted/eroded areas on the steel. In the first case, the dust examination by the truther researchers has been discussed elsewhere in this forum and has been found lacking, but using those researchers own data, it can be shown that what they were studying was not some deliberately planted incendiary at all. In the second, the WPI researchers discovered an interesting chemical reaction occured in the piles, but it too was something contradicting the use of explosives. The point here is that outside parties have conducted tests on materials recovered from Ground Zero and the immediately surrounding area. Why the red herring of what NIST did? When people cite NIST's findings, it's in regards to what they determined about the fires, the jets impact damage, and the performance of the structural steel in that situation. Nobody mentions explosives testing in conjunction with the NIST reports for the same reason nobody mentions Donald Duck in reference to Solzhenitsyn's work: Because that was not the topic of the work.
If someone's going to talk about the NIST report, then they'd blasted well understand that the topics had better cover the fires, or the performance of the structures while aflame. If they're complaining about something that supposedly wasn't in the report, then they're commiting the same sort of lunacy that I would be if I complained about certain esperanto words not appearing in an english dictionary. It's been time for many years now for the truthers to realize what exactly the NIST report was, and to stop trying to make it out to be something it's not.
ProBonoShill
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,329
Ummmm I think you left something out, silly little truthers always forgetting things, let's read the whole answer :
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
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.
Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.
Only a complete idiot would believe thermite was used to bring down the towers.