Conspiracy theories..?

Carlid,

Why did the towers collapse as they did?

 

If you're looking to the NIST report for something definitive, forget it. Even though the purpose of the NIST Report was to explain what caused the collapse, the best it can do is tell you what happened right up until "collapse initiation." Kind of lame if you ask me. What do you think?

 

Do you believe that jet fuel caused the collapses? If you do, which I think is the case, I'll bet you have some preconceived assumptions about the core structures of those buildings as well.

 

Here, check out the photos on this site: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/construction.html

The steel just reeks of metalic testosterone, don't it? I mean, if there were such a thing. Hard to believe it all just gave way all at once. Even harder to believe is that this hard-to-believe event took place three times on the same day regardless of aircraft involvement. All the steel of the core columns and the outer walls just gave way all at once without offering any resistance to speak of; and this occurred three times on the same day? Is this what you're saying?

And you think I've invested in something that doesn't hold water???

 

You can call me a "truther" if you wish, but in my book, there are two kinds of people: those who believe that the steel I just showed you will just give way like soda crackers, and those who know that that just doesn't happen; and especially three times in one day.

 

I'm going to also guess that you are unaware of the fact that those in charge of the 9/11 Commission Report needed to omit all testimony from firefighters and first responders. Now, why do you suppose that in their effort to uncover the details of what happened, they would omit such telling things from the Report?

 

loose vhange baby!

 

9/11 is the event they needed to pass the patriot act and attack Iran. Duh

How's this for a conspiracy, maybe they could take control of your body and you'd have no recollection of those events

 

U forgot halliburton.....dick cheneys ex company bfore presidency....

 

Well attack Iran for oil... I do not know much about Halliburton.. Brief synopsis?

 

Carlid,
The Nist Report reported that it took ten seconds for a tower to collapse. Some say it was more like fifteen seconds. But the extra five seconds is really neither here nor there when you stop to consider that the law of the conservation of momentum and the conservation of energy was a definite consideration on that day when it came to the collapses.
Some people believe, or have faith in, something called the pancake-effect when it comes to explaining the unlikely manner in which the towers collapsed in on themselves.

However, this thing called conservation of energy assures us that when a floor falls and slams into the floor below it, a lot of the energy is absorbed by the lower floor. In order for the collapsing floors to not slow down as they slam into the one below it, the one below it would have to already be traveling at the same speed as the ones falling towards it. And besides that, there's the issue of the core-structure slowing things down even further--if not stopping it altogether.

Here, look at it like this: Let's say that the first few floors give way and crash down on the next floor. Those falling floors will necessarily be slowed down some before the lower floor begins to move. If that is true, then it would certainly have taken more time for the building to fall--at least twenty seconds; and remember that this estimate does not take into account the effect the core structure would have on the the speed of collapse. Scientifically speaking, the idea that the core structures of those buildings would offer no more resistance than industrial-strength couch cushions is . . . well, unscientific.

Check this out: http://911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml for a better understanding.

 

Carlid,

If you can find yourself a scientist that can prove that the "conservation of momentum" is a "sometimes thing," I'm all ears.

 

I can find about a dozen papers on not just how it fell but why no laws of physics were violated in any way by any of the explanations, the usual flaw is the conspiracy theorist take a point where the roof buckles as when it starts to fall, where as cameras that show a particular side of the building show that one side gives first and then less than a second later it falls, at least on WT7. As for the rest of it, thermite could not be used to bring down that sort of building without attracting the attention of everyone working in it. You can't just plant tons of a material and expect no one to notice, also the supposed sounds of explostions are actually consistent with structure fatigue, an analysis shows the windows on the building giving in in just such a way you would expect not had explosives of any kind been used but if external factors and external ones were in effect that were entirely conventional. Not to mention the fact it just wouldn't work. Fire can bring down buildings, this is something that has been extensively shown in both models and actual fire structural collapses. If there is any science from the conspiracists, I can't see it. All it is is wishful thinking dressed up with a tin foil hat and conformation bias. However to melt iron cores the fire has to be very intense and hot, the sort of intensity produced by burning tons of kerosene in a very confined space. temperature is intimately related to pressure which in turn is related to volume by



P is the absolute pressure V is the volume N is the number of gas molecules k is the Boltzmann constant (1.381×10−23 J·K−1 in SI units)T is the temperature (K)

The experiments show that not only could temperatures hot enough to melt concrete and iron have been produced, but are in all cases although in models for obvious reasons.

Not only that but once one floor fell the weight was easily enough to bring down the next, and so on. Done properly the time it took to fall is entirely consistent with collapse and is a little bit lower than free fall as expected, provided you use the right timing.

http://911review.com/errors/wtc/times.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8"]9/11 Debunked: WTC 7's Collapse Explained - YouTube

"on about a third of the face to the centre and to the bottom, approximately ten floors or 25% of the building was scooped out."

Shyam Sunder lead investigator of NIST.

Despite painstaking correction though these people continue to make claims that just aren't either factual or backed up by the evidence.
And:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874

Where are we now, claiming that the experts at NIST are either under the pay of the conspiracists or just don't know how to do their jobs.

I think people mock and laugh at conspiracists in the same way they mock creationists. They are completely biased and unscientific and when face with evidence will search as hard as they can to find circumstantial evidence that when analysed properly actually refutes there case.

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Science is an inconvenient truth to conspiracy theorists, unless of course it supports them. Problem is of course it doesn't and never has.

 

So what you want is them to do magic?

Or just speculate widely with no means of evidence?

Isn't magical thinking and selective bias the conspiracy theorist method of investigation?

Again this is a God of the gaps style argument, we can not know or do not know what happened at points x-y so hence God done it.

Anyway this is entirely off topic, there are far bigger whack jobs than 9/11 conspiracists, that need to be ridiculed like the Creationists of conspiracy theorists.

 

I think they should replace a democraticly elected government with a Shah who is pro West in a coup d'etait orchastrated by the CIA (operation AJAX) and under the behest of what is now British Petrolium (who had lost valuable oil consessions) is in order, after all it worked in the past. Then you can build nuclear reactors supplied by the US as they did in the past without worrying about them building nukes.

Then you can conveniently forget that the entire Republic that exists now is 100% your fault and pretend that people should take you seriously.

Conspiracy theories, sometimes they actually happened!

Also interesting to note that the sanctions on Iran are not imposed because they are building nukes (to this day CIA reports confirm that activity in this area ceased in early 2000), but because they refused to let IAEA inspectors in. If they did that the US et al would have absolutely no leg to stand on. But the Ahmadinejhad likes thumbing his nose at the US, it gives him significant political clout amongst those who elect leaders.

Oh and the centrifuge technology was built and supplied by European contractors, mostly German in order to support the existing somewhat dated 1950s American built power generators and future ones. This is of course entirely necessary as they currently use oil powered generators that burn costly oil resources that could otherwise be saved, bang for buck nuclear would be the most prudent economic option.

Iran could be building nukes but if they are they are doing so in direct scrutiny of the most sophisticate intelligence agencies in the world, MOSSAD, MI6 and the CIA. Which I have to admit is impressive if it were the case.

Of course this is all a plot by the Halliburtons to blah, blah the Joos done it!

I can say this though it's always somewhat about oil, they were just a damn site more obvious about it in the past.

 

Carlid,

You were just shown how the conservation of momentum dictates that a near free-fall of all three towers is impossible, especially in light of the core structure upholding itself. Did you know that the core structures of those buildings were designed to support several times the weight they were designed to support?

But let's start with your belief that the fire in the towers caused the collapse, and that the core structures crumbled or melted, or what ever it is that you're believing. Speaking of magic, how is it that the fire from the jet fuel, which burned off in twenty minutes, melted steel? That's not consistent with science, and everyone who hasn't invested everything in the first thing they were told on television knows it. If you continue believing that that's science, well, you might as well wear a tinfoil hat. Since you've exposed yourself as the type who believes that, on 9/11, an extinguished fire can melt steel, let's look at that a little further.

If the inside of the tower was a raging inferno, how do you explain this:
This is a transcript of firefighters' conversations on that day, just minutes before the collapse of WTC# 2:

Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."

Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"

Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."

Ladder 15: "Floor 78?"

Battalion Seven Chief: "Ten-four, numerous civilians, we gonna need two engines up here."

Battalion Seven Chief: "Tower one. Battalion Seven to Ladder 15.

Fifteen."

Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm going to need two of your firefighters Adam stairway to knock down two fires. We have a house line stretched we could use some water on it, knock it down, kay."

Ladder 15: "Alright ten-four, we're coming up the stairs. We're on 77 now in the B stair, I'll be right to you."

Battalion Seven Operations Tower One: "Battalion Seven Operations Tower One to Battalion Nine, need you on floor above 79. We have access stairs going up to 79, kay."

Battalion Nine: "Alright, I'm on my way up Orio."
________________________________________________

If the inside of the tower was a raging inferno, as you seem to believe it was, then you must also believe that injured people and firefighters alike can withstand an awful lot of heat. And that's just not consistent with science or reality.
________________________________________________

Now here's the story behind that taped exchange:

The Department of Justice has ordered secrecy measures to keep the contents of a “lost tape” of firefighters’ voices at the World Trade Center from being made public. The 78-minute audiotape evidently debunks the accepted explanation that intense jet fuel fires melted the towers’ steel beams and caused the collapses.

The New York Times recently revealed the existence of the tape of radio transmissions between firefighters of the New York Fire Department (NYFD), which proves that “at least two men” had reached the 78th floor Sky Lobby of the South Tower. The firefighters had reported about the fires and casualties they encountered and had begun evacuating the survivors.

The article said that firefighters “reached the crash zone on the 78th floor, where they went to the aid of grievously injured people trapped in a sprawl of destruction.”

While the article raises as many questions as it answers, it points to a reason for the secrecy: “Once they got there,” the article says, “they had a coherent plan for putting out the fires they could see and helping victims who survived.”

The report names two of the firefighters who were at the crash site: Battalion Chief Orio J. Palmer, who was organizing the evacuation of injured people, and Fire Marshal Ronald P. Bucca. Both were among the 343 firefighters who perished.

The voices of the firefighters “showed no panic, no sense that events were racing beyond their control,” the Times wrote. “At that point, the building would be standing for just a few more minutes, as the fire was weakening the structure on the floors above him. Even so, Chief Palmer could see only two pockets of fire, and called for a pair of engine companies to fight them.”

The fact that veteran firefighters had “a coherent plan for putting out” the “two pockets of fire” indicates they judged the blazes to be manageable. These reports from the scene of the crash provide crucial evidence debunking the government’s claim that a raging steel-melting inferno led to the tower’s collapse.

As the FEMA “Building Performance Assessment” report says, “Temperatures may have been as high as 900-1,100 degrees Celsius (1,700-2,000 Fahrenheit) in some areas.”

“If FEMA’s temperature estimates are correct, the interiors of the towers were furnaces capable of casting aluminum and glazing pottery,” Eric Hufschmid, author of the book Time for Painful Questions writes. Yet the voices on the tape prove that several firefighters were able to work “without fear” for an extended period at the point of the crash, and that the fires they encountered there were neither intense nor large.

The South Tower disintegrated in less than an hour after being hit by a plane, which impacted between its 78th and 84th floors. “Fire has never caused a steel building to collapse,” Hufschmid writes. “So how did a 56-minute fire bring down a steel building as strong as the South Tower?”
Hufschmid’s forthcoming book presents compelling evidence that explosives caused the towers to collapse.

I guess my question to you is: How can you hold on so tightly to your idea about the heat being so hot that it melted or otherwise caused steel to crumble so quickly?

Pointing to the Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia in 1991, Hufschmid writes, “The Meridian Plaza fire was extreme, but it did not cause the building to collapse. The fire in the South Tower seems insignificant by comparison to both the Meridian Plaza fire and the fire in the North Tower. How could the tiny fire in the South Tower cause the entire structure to shatter into dust after 56 minutes while much more extreme fires did not cause the Meridian Plaza building to even crack into two pieces?”

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PA), the bi-state authority and owner of the World Trade Center, retrieved the “lost tape.” A spokesman for the authority, Greg Trevor, told AFP that the tape was found in PA police offices at 5 WTC, “two or three weeks” after 9-11. The PA police monitored radio transmissions from the WTC.

Because of an unexplained delay in producing the tape, it was believed “for months” that firefighters had gone no higher than about the 50th floor in each tower. The delay, Trevor said, was due to the time required to transfer the voice data to “encrypted CDs.”

In January or February, the PA offered a copy of the tape to NYFD officials, who reportedly declined the offer because they did not want to sign the confidentiality agreement as demanded by the PA. The Independent of Britain added that the PA “held back from sharing it with police and only relinquished it on condition that a confidentiality agreement was signed.”

“That’s not correct,” Trevor told AFP regarding the allegation that the PA had withheld the tape from the police. The PA had only handled the tape “under the instruction of the U.S. attorney’s office,” he said.
Spokesman Bernard Gifford said NYPD had not pursued a criminal investigation of 9-11, having “turned it over” to the FBI.

Gifford wouldn’t say when this occurred, although Joe Valiquette of the New York office of the FBI told AFP that the federal bureau had run the investigation “from the moment it happened.”

On Aug. 2 the relatives of the 16 firefighters whose voices were identified on the tape were allowed to hear their last words in a New York City hotel. The families were first required to sign a statement prepared by lawyers that they would not disclose what was said on the tape.

Despite the fact that the contents of the tape are being kept secret, the Times article says, “Only now, nearly a year after the attacks, are the efforts of Chief Palmer, Mr. Bucca and others becoming public. City fire officials simply delayed listening to a 78-minute tape that is the only known recording of firefighters inside the towers.”

While Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta said he had not known the tape existed until “very recently,” both the Times and CNN err in claiming that the NYFD is the agency behind the extreme secrecy.
“The Fire Department has forbidden anyone to discuss the contents publicly on the ground that the tape might be evidence in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the man accused of plotting with the hijackers,” the Times said.

When AFP asked the NYFD why the only conversations between firefighters engaged at the scene of the crash had to be kept secret because of Moussaoui, who was in prison in Minnesota at the time, the spokesman replied, “Take it up with the Department of Justice.”

Asked about the numerous reports by eyewitnesses, including firefighters, of explosions inside the towers before they collapsed, Mike Logrin, spokesman for the NYFD, said, “We’re pretty sure there weren’t bombs in the building.”

On Sept. 11 the British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) interviewed one of its New York-based reporters, Steve Evans, who was in the second tower when it was hit.

“I was at the base of the second tower, the second tower that was hit,” Evans said. “There was an explosion—I didn’t think it was an explosion—but the base of the building shook. I felt it shake . . . then when we were outside, the second explosion happened and then there was a series of explosions. . . . We can only wonder at the kind of damage—the kind of human damage—which was caused by those explosions—those series of explosions,” he said.

Evans is a professional journalist and although his observations of explosions in the second tower should be taken into account, they are not. Numerous eyewitnesses reported also seeing or hearing explosions.

Valiquette of the FBI told AFP that he had not “heard anything” about reports of explosions in the building and that he had “never heard any discussion of it” in the FBI’s New York office.
____________________________________________________________________________

"The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes"
Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).
_____________________________________________________________________________
In fact, let's listen to what a few eyewitnesses have to say:

Here are statements from three eye-witnesses that provide evidence that the heating due to the jet fuel was indeed minimal.
Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby (one of the impact floors of the South Tower) when the aircraft hit. He has been quoted as saying: "We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped."

Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the South Tower: "The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway."

Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: "Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned."
Neither Stanley Praimnath nor Donovan Cowan nor Ling Young were cooked by the jet fuel fire. All three survived.
_________________________________________________________________________

Did you know that a couple of firefighters who were a distance from thebuilding said that they saw heard and saw flaring explosions that went around the building like a belt?

But back to the point, if there were a raging inferno in the tower, that means that no one could have survived in an environment that was melting steel--or even half that temperature. So, now that you understand that steel core structures don't crumble, allowing for a near free-fall to occur, and that they weren't even near melting, how will this change your opinion?

 

And as far as your belief concerning the IAEA inspections in Iran, I believe that this: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2011...rview-Iranian-Ambassador-Ali-Asghar-Soltanieh should clear things up.
__________________________
EXCERPT:

ACT: On the critical issue of enrichment, Iran has often said that it would not give up enrichment. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has said publicly that Iran would have the right to enrichment under IAEA inspections at some future date, but only after it had addressed international concerns about its nuclear program. Now if Iran’s primary concern is about what it calls its nuclear rights, why hasn’t Iran been willing to negotiate with the P5+1 with the understanding outlined by Secretary Clinton?
Soltanieh: You see there is a dilemma here. First of all, the inalienable right of the countries for the peaceful use of nuclear energy including fuel cycle and enrichment, that is already in the statute of the IAEA and NPT Article IV.[2] Therefore, the recognition is already there. The only thing that we always said and expect is not to create obstacles for us or any other country to benefit from these inalienable rights enshrined in the statute and the NPT. Calling for suspension is in fact a violation of that right and a violation of the spirit and letter of the statute.
I just want you and your distinguished readers to go to the NPT text and IAEA statute. You can never find in any of these documents the notion of suspension. Suspension was invented for Iran, and the verification of suspension was invented for Iran. Therefore, according to these legal documents, nobody could say to any country that you should suspend your nuclear activities. The only thing is that the IAEA should verify the declaration by member states and monitor and control those activities to make sure that there is no diversion toward military or prohibited purposes. That is exactly what we want. Therefore if the United States or other countries understand that they should not contradict themselves with these principles and international legal documents, then we are in the same boat and the same place. We should have the same understanding of what we are talking about. should clear that up.

_________________________________

I suggest you read the whole thing before a more informed discussion between us can take place.

 

@ carlid do u think that 911 is a inside job?

 

I knew you were one of "THEM".

 

Carlid,

You are right. Technically, this is off-topic. So, we can continue our discussion here: http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=445506&page=2