Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/22/00
Posts: 532
WTC 7 Help Me Understand
    #6158449 - 10/11/06 01:58 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ok, I have been on here periodically for years. I am a "leftie". However I dont buy into the 9/11 conspiracy theories. In fact I let someone have it in anger in a thread awhile back. But one thing does make me uncomfortable and that is WTC 7. I have seen the conspiracy theorists observations on its collapse. What does the other side say? I just dont fucking understand why this building would collapse! WTF? What is the official explanation? Please leave this thread to pure discussion of WTC 7. Thanks, I really want to hear all sides of this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Buddha5254]
    #6158491 - 10/11/06 02:11 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Okay, let's begin with the most common claim: No steel-frame building has ever collapsed before due to fire.

This is false, the report on the Sight and Sound Theatre fire in Pennsylvania is publicly available, you can read it here: http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf

The conclusions are clear: the theatre was a solid steel-frame building constructed to code, and it collapsed due to fire.

Then we get to the next point the conspiracy theorists usually make: other steel frame buildings of comparable construction have failed to collapse due to fire.

This would be true, except that it ignores the initial (and on going) structural damage done to WTC 7 by debris impact. WTC 7 didn't just recieve damage from the fire, it had very large holes torn into it by flying debris. This is best described by Fire Captain Boyle, whose eye-witness account is available here:
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

To quote him:
"So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."

So, WTC 7 already had a 20-story tall hole torn in it before it began taking damage from the fire. Thus, pointing out other steel framed buildings that burned doesn't compare unless they first sustained comparable structural damage before even catching fire.

The next point is also in Fire Captain Boyle's quote, debris was continuing to fall onto WTC 7 the entire time, causing additional impacts and damage. Again, this is why simply pointing out other steel-buildings that caught fire doesn't compare, none of them were subjected to ongoing impacts from debris cascading off other buildings.

It's also publicly known that there was an electricity-generating facility housed in WTC 7, which required large diesel reserves in order to run. These diesel reserves caught fire, creating hotter and longer burning flames than would have occured in other buildings ajacent to the Towers.

Finally, looking at other buildings a comparable distance from the Towers you can see that they also took similar levels of structural damage. The Bankers Trust building also had a 20-story hole torn in its base. The difference between the Bankers Trust and WTC 7 is the lack of diesel reserves, thus the Bankers Trust building never caught fire. WTC 7 meanwhile not only had a large hole torn in its base, but its diesel reserves caught fire and burned for over 6 hours, eventually causing the building to collapse.

Edit: Oops, forgot one of the important bits.

WTC 7 also didn't collapse "straight down". If you look at the photo series available at the bottom of this page: http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
It's fairly clear that WTC 7 collapsed towards the south. Furthermore, photos of the debris left after WTC 7 collapse show that it is strewn to the south, not in a perfect radius around the base, which would have happened if it actually fell straight down.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6158712 - 10/11/06 02:57 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

That is a very weak argument IMO.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6158727 - 10/11/06 03:00 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Not anywhere close to being as weak as your "rebuttal".

Would you like to give us some specifics regarding which facts Economist presented are "weak"?



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6160560 - 10/11/06 11:57 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

They only "weak" part is that he left out the bit where the new owner told them to "pull the building down" so he could cash in on the insurance. Of course, I suspect Economist would used the actual quote and put into the proper context rather than adding a few extra words and using it to mislead, as I did.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDisco Cat
iS A PoiNdexteR

Registered: 09/15/00
Posts: 2,601
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6160734 - 10/12/06 01:19 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yeah, I saw it said in a documentary that the building had been lined with explosives since its construction in case it ever had to be pulled, and the same documentary showed the owner explain that they decided to take it down.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Disco Cat]
    #6160989 - 10/12/06 04:33 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> Yeah, I saw it said in a documentary that the building had been lined with explosives since its construction in case it ever had to be pulled

It is pretty common practice these days to use explosives as insulation in buildings. This allows the US government to blow up any building that needs to go quickly. The explosive they use is made from an exotic type of spun glass. It kind of looks like pink cotton candy. Tear open almost any building wall and you will find some inside. Spooky stuff, I say!


(tongue in cheek for the humor impaired)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblequiver
freedrug
Male

Registered: 10/25/05
Posts: 8,047
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6160998 - 10/12/06 04:37 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

:lol:
damn and all along i thought that stuff was fairyfloss to keep the ants happy


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6161493 - 10/12/06 09:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

FEMA on Building 7

Despite the inescapable logic of the above, the official theory for the collapse, as published in Chapter 5 of the FEMA report goes as follows:

* At 9:59 AM (after the South Tower collapse), electrical power to the substations in WTC 7 was shut off.
* Due to a design flaw, generators in WTC 7 started up by themselves.
* Debris from the collapsing North Tower breached a fuel oil pipe in a room in the north side of the building. (This means the debris had to travel across WTC 6 and Vesey Street -- a distance of at least 355 feet -- penetrate the outer wall of WTC 6, and smash through about 50 feet of the building, including a concrete masonry wall.)
* This, and other debris (that also made the journey across Building 6 and Vesey Street), managed to start numerous fires in the building. (Unfortunately, this event did not prompt anyone to turn off the generators.)
* The backup mechanism (that should have shut off the fuel oil pumps when a breach occurred) failed to work, and the fuel oil (diesel) was pumped from the tanks on the ground floor to the fifth floor where it ignited. The pumps emptied the tanks of all 12,000 gallons of fuel.
* The extant fires raised the temperature of the spilled fuel oil to the 140 degrees F required for it to ignite.
* The sprinkler system malfunctioned and failed to extinguish the fire.
* The burning diesel fuel heated trusses to the point where they lost most of their strength, precipitating a total collapse of Building 7.

The last point is the greatest stretch, since it asks us to believe that an event that would be expected only to cause the sagging of a floor instead led not only to total collapse, but to such a tidy collapse that directly adjacent buildings were scarcely even damaged. This is surprising behavior for a steel frame skyscraper designed to survive fires, hurricanes, and earthquakes.

After laying out this highly improbable scenario, the FEMA report authors conclude:
The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.

Unfortunately for investigators hoping to resolve this issue, nearly all of the evidence had already been destroyed by the time the FEMA report was published.
Documents Destroyed

At the time of its destruction, Building 7 housed documents relating to numerous SEC investigations. The files for approximately three to four thousand cases were destroyed, according to the Los Angeles Times. Among the destroyed documents were ones that may have demonstrated the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy. 2


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161503 - 10/12/06 10:00 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

The FEMA report doesnt explain how the fuel spread so evenly to all four corners of the building AND how the fire degraded every falling part of the building soo evenly as to make it fall soo straight.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161559 - 10/12/06 10:15 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> a distance of at least 355 feet

How tall were the twin towers again? Basically 1400 feet? I see no problem with parts of the WTC going 355 feet horizontal with that much verticle drop. Oh wait, the controlled demolotion of the WTC towers meant that everything went straight down and had no effect on surrounding buildings. Never mind.

> This is surprising behavior for a steel frame skyscraper designed to survive fires, hurricanes, and earthquakes.

Too bad it wasn't a lone fire, hurricane or earthquake that hit the building. Was the building designed to survive another building falling onto it? Probably not.

> The FEMA report doesnt explain how the fuel spread so evenly to all four corners of the building

Those pesky liquids are so difficult to work with. I hate it when spill a bucket of water on the floor and it just sits there in a big pile instead of spreading out.

Having been in a building that had a massive water leak, I know that it takes very little time for three to four inches of liquid to spread through out an entire floor.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6161576 - 10/12/06 10:23 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Say what you want.. Youll never convinve me that it was anything other than a controlled demolition.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 6 months, 28 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161599 - 10/12/06 10:30 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Nothing like an open mind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161693 - 10/12/06 11:03 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

GabbaDJ, you left out the most important aspect of the FEMA report:

A request for further investigation which took the form of the NIST report.

I noted that you didn't even mention the NIST report, could this be because they conclude that it was not a controlled demolition?

I also note that you claim WTC 7 collapsed "neatly without causing any debris or damage to fall on adjacent buildings. Yet this is 100% untrue, as you can clearly see in this photo:



Please note the significant amount of debris that collapsed onto the black-and-white striped building, along with the damage it took. This was the building located directly behind WTC 7 and it clearly did not remain "untouched" after a "neat collapse".

But then, you've already explained that you don't value debate on this subject, so this is probably just a waste of time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Redstorm]
    #6161700 - 10/12/06 11:05 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)



--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6161712 - 10/12/06 11:09 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Never said that it fell neatly, just that it fell evenly.. Both far right and far left and center fell all at the same time.

I just dont see that happening unless the supports were all knocked out evenly and at the same time.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinecupevampe
The Lunatic isin My Head
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/31/05
Posts: 163
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161757 - 10/12/06 11:28 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

there is a good video here

jeff king of MIT exposing his collapse theory

it seems he knows what he's saying


--------------------
My Blog: The Invisible Landscape

Subscribe this great podcast! www.matrixmasters.com/podcasts

No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.

PS: sorry 4 my english - i'm italian *-*-* i do my best!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6161766 - 10/12/06 11:29 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> Both far right and far left and center fell all at the same time.

Just because different parts of a building are falling at the same rate does not mean that the building is falling straight down.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6162281 - 10/12/06 01:41 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

There's something that needs clarification here, Economist.

First look at the usual WTC7 collapse videos, and tell me if the collapse, according to you, looks clean or messy (feel free to compare it to the Twin Towers'). IMHO, as far as we can see, that is until the roof falls to the level where the 20th floor used to be, it looks pretty clean (even, straight, symmetrical, call it however you wish). Feel free to contradict me, but do give arguments.
There was indeed a *very slight* movement to the south, but in terms of angular deviation, I would estimate it to be about 5 degrees, hardly significant. You couldn't say it *tilted*, it fell much straighter than most controlled demos I've seen. Saying it fell straight down is hardly a stretch. If it had fallen because damage to the south face, the tilt would be significant, if not complete. WTC7 would have fallen onto WTC6 (in between 7 and 1) and on the North Tower rubble.

Secondly, you're the one who pointed out the building fell to the south. How come the debris you're pointing out in your picture is north of the building's footprint?

Finally, the pic you show is unclear because it's taken from an angle, and the debris of the North tower and WTC7 seem to mix. Things are much clearer viewed from a zenith perspective:


[Admittedly, the pic is low-quality, but you can see the complete hi-res picture here.

Now tell me the building fell out of its footprint.  :rolleyes:

Edit: I tried to post a few pics from http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/groundzero.html, but it didn't work. For nice views of the WTC7 rubble, scroll down to the pics taken on 9/15 (the fourth one) and on 9/16 (the last two). Obviously, 7 did fall very neatly on its footprint, and the rubble is slightly more to the north than to the south.

Edited by Aldous (10/12/06 02:38 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6162414 - 10/12/06 02:29 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Not anywhere close to being as weak as your "rebuttal".

Would you like to give us some specifics regarding which facts Economist presented are "weak"?

No, I am through with the 9/11 bullshit. I was just stating that I was of the opinion that his arguments were weak. No more, no less.



Phred




--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6162426 - 10/12/06 02:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

When you take into consideration what was in WTC 7 it becomes even more suspect. The perfect base of opperations for such a conspiracy.

NORAD standing down.

The owner of the WTC making lots of money, no matter what anyone says. There is no way he lost money with the world's greatest insurance policy ever made, and paying 2 months dues. lol

The "terrorists" passport being "found" amongst the wreckage.

It boggles my mind how anyone could explain all this shit, what a sloppy job bush and co. did.  :grin:


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6162442 - 10/12/06 02:38 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

No, I am through with the 9/11 bullshit.




... he proclaims while composing yet another post on it.






Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6162471 - 10/12/06 02:45 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

LOL I saw that coming.

I couldn't resist.....I am done......nooooooo bush did it oooooowwwww.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6162502 - 10/12/06 02:59 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Aldous said:
First look at the usual WTC7 collapse videos, and tell me if the collapse, according to you, looks clean or messy (feel free to compare it to the Twin Towers').



The collapse looks exactly the same as the Twin Towers: WTC 7 began to collapse from the point where a hole had been torn in its structure.

Take a look at this sequence from the tower collapse:

Note how the part of the tower above the impact seems to fall straight down?

The difference is that the major impact point on WTC 7 was a 20-story hole torn at the building's base. Just as the floors about the impact in the towers appear to fall straight down, to the naked eye, so to do the floors above the impact point (which was in the base) of WTC 7.

Quote:

Aldous said:
There was indeed a *very slight* movement to the south, but in terms of angular deviation, I would estimate it to be about 5 degrees, hardly significant. You couldn't say it *tilted*, it fell much straighter than most controlled demos I've seen.



So...you admit that it fell in a certain direction, but not enough to impress your "expert opinion"?

As I already stated, if you look at the behavior of the collapse above the impact point I've linked here, you see the same exact behavior. It lists slighty, but not very much. Thus, the evidence that non-controlled collapses can look like that exists in the form of the North tower's collapse.

Quote:

Aldous said:
Secondly, you're the one who pointed out the building fell to the south. How come the debris you're pointing out in your picture is north of the building's footprint?



Are you seriously trying to suggest that there's no debris south of the WTC 7's footprine? Please look again, there's way more debris to the South than to the North.

I posted that picture because GabbaDJ was trying to suggest that WTC 7's collapse didn't cause damage to adjacent buildings, that is clearly wrong, as shown in the picture.

Quote:

Aldous said:
Now tell me the building fell out of its footprint.



Are you really suggesting that you can tell from that pic how much rubble belongs to WTC 7 and how much belongs to the Towers? That's a skill that even experts don't claim to have.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6162511 - 10/12/06 03:03 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

alpharedecho said:
The owner of the WTC making lots of money, no matter what anyone says. There is no way he lost money with the world's greatest insurance policy ever made, and paying 2 months dues. lol



We've had this debate before.

The NYC Comptroller's report clearly shows that he lost money, because he only recieved ~$5 billion in payout, but the towers cost over $6 billion to rebuild, and he stills owes lease money to the Port Authority.

I'm going to assume from your statement that you still haven't been able to come up with evidence that disproves the comptroller's report. If you have I'd love to hear it.

On the other hand, if you're still going with a "hunch" there's a reason the US Supreme Court has ruled time and again that hunches don't count as evidence...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6162583 - 10/12/06 03:20 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

alpharedecho said:
When you take into consideration what was in WTC 7 it becomes even more suspect. The perfect base of opperations for such a conspiracy.

NORAD standing down.

The owner of the WTC making lots of money, no matter what anyone says. There is no way he lost money with the world's greatest insurance policy ever made, and paying 2 months dues. lol

The "terrorists" passport being "found" amongst the wreckage.

It boggles my mind how anyone could explain all this shit, what a sloppy job bush and co. did.  :grin:




the wtc is probably owned by a lot of people, and they may have had a  crazy insurance plan, but consider the monthly income lost.  All the rents  due and other things. 

Also, who cares if someone is making lots off money.  Wooo, someone is making money, are you suggesting that nine eleven was a huge insurance scam?


--------------------
Asshole

Edited by nakors_junk_bag (10/12/06 06:51 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: nakors_junk_bag]
    #6162644 - 10/12/06 03:33 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Silverstein and whatever partners he has own 7. The rest are leases. The reason why we point out that Silverstein lost money is because there is a whole gang of idiots who think he had it demolished to make a profit. No profit, ergo no motive. No motive.........then what? Stupid people blathering about things they have absolutely no understanding of. With a possible jew hating issue as well.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6162666 - 10/12/06 03:37 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Cory Lidle's passport was found in the street.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6163377 - 10/12/06 06:50 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

thanks for clarifying.

I hardly pay enough attention to justify my arrogance.

Edited by nakors_junk_bag (10/12/06 07:27 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: nakors_junk_bag]
    #6164033 - 10/12/06 09:51 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Only one way to find out the truth..

Kidnap and interrogate Silverstein and Bushes Cousin who was in charge of security for the WTC Complex (nobody mentioned that), video tape it all and make them tell the truth..

Ill bet that they squeel like pigs and tell all.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6164048 - 10/12/06 09:55 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

It bears no stance to reason that the fucking thing was a huge insurance scam.

Those guys were making enough money off the place to never have to settle for insurance fraud, tat was all residual income for them they will see no more of.


--------------------
Asshole

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: nakors_junk_bag]
    #6164552 - 10/13/06 12:43 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Of course it wasn't just some big plan to make money of the insurance, read up on PNAC.


--------------------
"Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6164626 - 10/13/06 01:15 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Economist said:
Are you seriously trying to suggest that there's no debris south of the WTC 7's footprine? Please look again, there's way more debris to the South than to the North.
[...]
Are you really suggesting that you can tell from that pic how much rubble belongs to WTC 7 and how much belongs to the Towers? That's a skill that even experts don't claim to have.


I edited my post and added more pics, maybe you missed out on that. If your questions still stand, your state of denial is doubleplus high.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: RosettaStoned]
    #6164868 - 10/13/06 07:17 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

It was all a big bail out..

Bail out for the several trillion dollars in lawsuit papers against major american companies whose files all got destroyed in the attack.

Bail out for the US Dollar which was set to take a HUGE HIT with all of our "axis of evil" countries switching from buying and selling oil in US Dollars, to Euros.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6165150 - 10/13/06 09:50 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Silverstein and whatever partners he has own 7.  The rest are leases.  The reason why we point out that Silverstein lost money is because there is a whole gang of idiots who think he had it demolished to make a profit.  No profit, ergo no motive.  No motive.........then what?  Stupid people blathering about things they have absolutely no understanding of.  With a possible jew hating issue as well.




I don't give a shit what race or religion he is, it is my opinion that him and others made a profit on that terrible day. Everything seems just a little too perfect for my liking. I bet Silverstein is flat broke now eh.  :rolleyes:


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6165336 - 10/13/06 10:41 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Aldous said:
I edited my post and added more pics, maybe you missed out on that. If your questions still stand, your state of denial is doubleplus high.



You directed everyone's attention to the 4th pic from 9/15 on the page you linked. That pic:


While it definitely is a picture of where WTC 7 was, there's smoke obscuring where most of the debris is located (to the South, as the building listed that way as it collapsed). Are you still trying to claim that you can tell *through the smoke mind you* how much of that debris belongs to WTC 7 and how much belonged to the towers?

And you're saying I'm the one in a state of denial...

@GabbaDJ

Please take an economics class before you sound silly again. Law suits do nothing to dimish the value of the dollar, only changes to the money supply, or changes in demand of dollars do that. Since a law suit simply involves money changing hands, it neither results in a reduction in the money supply, nor in a change in demand for dollars.

A better plan (and one that would actually work) would be for the Federal Reserve to maintain elevated interest rates (remember the big cuts wouldn't come until after 9/11), rather than blow up some buildings...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6165505 - 10/13/06 11:28 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> And you're saying I'm the one in a state of denial...

It has been very refreshing to read your posts, Economist. Unforunately, I have gotten extremly cynical and a bit sarcastic in my responses after pounding common sense against a brick wall time and time again. I wish I had the self control that Phred shows and be able to refrain from these debates. I hope you are able to avoid the path I took... venting frustration at thick skulled ignorance by making fun of the people that will accept arm waving rain makers over engineering, science, reason, and logic.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6165531 - 10/13/06 11:34 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Science says: If a paper document held inside the pocket/luggage of a person who flies a 747 jet into a building, it will float down the street to safety.  :rolleyes:


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinebarfightlard
tales of theinexpressible
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6165556 - 10/13/06 11:43 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Physical Laws were on vaccation that day, duh.


--------------------

"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6165613 - 10/13/06 11:57 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

GabbaDj said:
It was all a big bail out..

Bail out for the several trillion dollars in lawsuit papers against major american companies whose files all got destroyed in the attack.

Bail out for the US Dollar which was set to take a HUGE HIT with all of our "axis of evil" countries switching from buying and selling oil in US Dollars, to Euros.




I'm well aware of what saddam had plans to do with his oil and I'm well aware of that taliban denying the plans for a pipeline across their country. So yeah, these things were the triggering factor. By these people attacking our economy in such ways there was no way the top people in the US would sit back and allow this to happen. But it's more than just money, it's power...they were attacking our very ability to be the "top dog".

I don't believe the US govt thought that saddam or the taliban had the ability to cripple the US dollar, but they did have the ability to start a chain reaction. So our govt made a bold statement on 9/11 by showing all the world govts that they had better think twice before challenging our spot at the top.


--------------------
"Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6165722 - 10/13/06 12:25 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

alpharedecho said:
Science says: If a paper document held inside the pocket/luggage of a person who flies a 747 jet into a building, it will float down the street to safety.  :rolleyes:




this is a ridiculous statement.

there have been countless occasions were total destruction was waged all around the lone figure of a single untouched article.  Fires have burned down houses leaving toys completely unscathed whilst the whole has has been destroyed. 

There have been plain crashes where every single person on the plain is killed but one traveler who is completely free of injury.

there have been instances where a people have been expelled from plains and fallen twenty seven thousands feet to the most assured death only to live.

don't pretend to know so much a bout physics when you can't account the for the dynamics any given situation is likely to be affected by.


--------------------
Asshole

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: nakors_junk_bag]
    #6165911 - 10/13/06 01:15 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Care to show me some examples of these things?

We are not talking about a house burning down.

Show me an example where a 747 jet full of fuel flew into a building and a single document floated to the ground. Oh yeah, the "terrorist" passport no less.

I don't buy it.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6165980 - 10/13/06 01:39 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

alpharedecho said:
Science says: If a paper document held inside the pocket/luggage of a person who flies a 747 jet into a building, it will float down the street to safety.  :rolleyes:




Yes, science says that there is a chance that a paper document inside an airplane that flies into a building can escape and float safely down to the street.  And guess what: alpha decay happens as well... for some of the same reasons.  Science is not always intuitive and often does not make sense on the surface... and it isn't even a conspiracy.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6165993 - 10/13/06 01:43 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

alpharedecho said:
Show me an example where a 747 jet full of fuel flew into a building and a single document floated to the ground. Oh yeah, the "terrorist" passport no less.



I can't find any examples of a 747 (outside of 9/11), but then, how often do 747s fly into buildings?

However, in the recent air crash in New York, which was described as generating a "ball of fire", though obviously on a smaller scale, the pilot's passport survived. You can check that out here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6042306.stm?ls

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6166005 - 10/13/06 01:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> Show me an example where a 747 jet full of fuel flew into a building

Uh... since there are only two examples of 747s full of fuel flying into buildings, I can only offer you two examples.  :nono:

> Oh yeah, the "terrorist" passport no less.

Where was the terrorist with the passport?  What was the first part of the plane to hit the building?  Where are the fuel tanks?  Does the plane immediately burn to cinders, or is there an explosion?  What happens to stuff during an explosion, does it all come together or does it all spread apart?  Where was the terrorist that had the passport again?  And what part of the plane would have broken apart first as it contacted the building?  Where do people usually keep their passport while traveling?  If you expected anything to survive, where would you expect it to come from: the very front of the plane, the very tail of the plane, or somewhere right around the gas tanks/center of the plane?


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6166111 - 10/13/06 02:37 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Economist said:
You directed everyone's attention to the 4th pic from 9/15 on the page you linked. [...] While it definitely is a picture of where WTC 7 was, there's smoke obscuring where most of the debris is located (to the South, as the building listed that way as it collapsed).


You conveniently chose to ignore the other pics I directed your attention to. Take, for instance, the one but last pic from the next day. On the far left, you can see where the southern end of WTC7's debris ends. As you can see, Vesey Street, which was the southern boundary of WTC7, is almost clear. It's not obstructed by a major pile of debris, as it would have been if the southward tilt of the building had been significant.

Quote:

Are you still trying to claim that you can tell *through the smoke mind you* how much of that debris belongs to WTC 7 and how much belonged to the towers?


I didn't think I would have to point this out to you, but obviously I do. The last of the Twin towers to collapse did so some 7 hours prior to WTC7. I think by that time, all its debris had found time to fall to the ground. So, logically, the WTC7 rubble should be lying on top of the North tower debris. Besides, the North tower debris didn't make it much further than 7, it's the outer boundary of WTC1's debris field, so that would not make for a very high stack. So obviously, the big heap of debris you see in the footprint of 7 (9/16, last pic) obviously belongs to that one. All North tower debris this far from its origin is simply lying at ground level.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 8 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6166148 - 10/13/06 02:56 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Aldous said:
You conveniently chose to ignore the other pics I directed your attention to. Take, for instance, the one but last pic from the next day. On the far left, you can see where the southern end of WTC7's debris ends. As you can see, Vesey Street, which was the southern boundary of WTC7, is almost clear. It's not obstructed by a major pile of debris, as it would have been if the southward tilt of the building had been significant.



I'm sorry you feel that I'm purposefully ignoring anything. I really am just looking at the photos that you direct me to. Looking at the two photos from the next day:


Again, I see a lot of smoke and a lot of intermixed debris. You are right, in that the outline of the streets is clear, but the debris is just that: debris. There are bits of steel poking up, down, left, right, etc. It's impossible to tell what fell down and penetrated lower debris, what's poking up from underneith, etc.

Quote:

Aldous said:
The last of the Twin towers to collapse did so some 7 hours prior to WTC7. I think by that time, all its debris had found time to fall to the ground. So, logically, the WTC7 rubble should be lying on top of the North tower debris.



I don't disagree, but look at those pictures. Debris isn't lying in neat uniform sheets, it's jutting in every imaginable direction. How much of it is poking up from underneath vs. resting on top?

Personally, I don't think it's possible to tell from thsoe pictures, but I'll let anyone who wants to try judge for themselves.

Quote:

Aldous said:Besides, the North tower debris didn't make it much further than 7, it's the outer boundary of WTC1's debris field, so that would not make for a very high stack. So obviously, the big heap of debris you see in the footprint of 7 (9/16, last pic) obviously belongs to that one. All North tower debris this far from its origin is simply lying at ground level.



Ah, but when you examine the last pic from 9/16 (the second pic I linked above), even if we are to assume that the large pile of debris is all WTC 7, you can see that it clearly fell to the south of the footprint. You can see the very edge of the black-and-white striped building, which as was pointed out before, lies to the north, and you can see that the pile seems to grow thicker as you travel south.

Combine this with what was already stated in this thread: that WTC 7 collapsed to the south as it went down, and it no longer seems to even resemble the results of controlled demolition.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6166280 - 10/13/06 03:41 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Economist said:
you can see that it clearly fell to the south of the footprint.


If it had actually fallen to the south, the highest pile of debris would completely obstruct Vesey street, or there would at least be some significant debris there. You just admitted there was hardly any debris on Vesey street, which marks the southern edge of WTC7. What more can I say? How can you maintain the tower fell significantly southward while at the same time admitting there's hardly any debris past the southern boundary of the footprint?  :confused:
Quote:

You can see the very edge of the black-and-white striped building, which as was pointed out before, lies to the north, and you can see that the pile seems to grow thicker as you travel south.


...to the middle of the footprint. The pile then completely stops at Vesey street. Conclusion: the pile is pretty much exactly in WTC7's footprint. Stop nitpicking.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6166726 - 10/13/06 05:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

You just admitted there was hardly any debris on Vesey street, which marks the southern edge of WTC7. What more can I say? How can you maintain the tower fell significantly southward while at the same time admitting there's hardly any debris past the southern boundary of the footprint?




Gee... you think in the week or so that passed from the collapse to the time the picture was taken, they might have tried to clear any rubble off Vesey Street first? So they could, you know, actually get vehicles other than helicopters through?

Use some common sense for once.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6166864 - 10/13/06 06:49 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Quote:

You just admitted there was hardly any debris on Vesey street, which marks the southern edge of WTC7. What more can I say? How can you maintain the tower fell significantly southward while at the same time admitting there's hardly any debris past the southern boundary of the footprint?




Gee... you think in the week or so that passed from the collapse to the time the picture was taken, they might have tried to clear any rubble off Vesey Street first? So they could, you know, actually get vehicles other than helicopters through?

Use some common sense for once.




Phred




You are such a quaint dreamer I almost want to hug you and protect you from these mean people.

Hmmm, a tiny plane laden with fuel crashes into a building in Manhattan and 100% of the passports on board are found on the street. It is obviously a government plant to discredit the argument of the stupid brigade. With his wife's cooperation, of course, the neocon enabler that she is.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Economist]
    #6166903 - 10/13/06 07:07 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

@GabbaDJ

Please take an economics class before you sound silly again. Law suits do nothing to diminish the value of the dollar, only changes to the money supply, or changes in demand of dollars do that. Since a law suit simply involves money changing hands, it neither results in a reduction in the money supply, nor in a change in demand for dollars.

A better plan (and one that would actually work) would be for the Federal Reserve to maintain elevated interest rates (remember the big cuts wouldn't come until after 9/11), rather than blow up some buildings...




@Economist

Please take a class on reading comprehension before you make an ass of yourself..  I said nothing about lawsuits diminishing the value of the dollar. 

Please re-read what I said correctly and see that your statement actually agrees with me when you say that weak demand for dollars diminishes its value. 

Ill bet you didnt know that just before 9/11 and our invasion of Iraq, several Mideast countries, and also North Korea switched from buying and selling oil in US Dollars and began to buy oil in Euros.  Venezuela, Syria, Iran have also or are close too doing so.  If more countries follow then we will be in some serious trouble.

Good thing that we had the largest terrorist attack on US soil to clear the way for us to go in and put a stop to this. :rolleyes:


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6166951 - 10/13/06 07:23 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

NOTHING and NOBODY can explain with ANY evidence shown, the fuel, the fire, the big hole ect. Why all four corners right and left as well as the center fell straight down, all at the same time..

I will admit that a combination of any and all of those factors would cause a partial collapse, even eventually a total collapse but not in the way we all saw it fall.

And I never said that it all fell nice and neat, just that all of it fell straight down, all at the same time. sure it fell on top of other buildings and made a big mess but its painfully easy to see that something knocked out all of the lower supports, all within one second of each other and nothing anyone has said cones even close to being able to cause that.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6167253 - 10/13/06 09:30 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

NOTHING and NOBODY can explain with ANY evidence shown, the fuel, the fire, the big hole ect. Why all four corners right and left as well as the center fell straight down, all at the same time..




Jesus Christ on a crutch, man... can you not read?

The big hole is explained by the fact that debris from the towers hit WTC7. How hard is that to grasp, fa cryin' out loud?

And as has been made abundantly clear from videos of the collapse -- links to which videos have been posted here several times -- all four corners left and right did NOT fall at the same time. The stills from the videos show that, as do the videos themselves watched in slow motion.

If it all collapsed simultaneously, you might have a leg to stand on. Maybe. But it didn't, and your continued insistence it did shows a stubborn refusal to admit reality. Your prerogative, of course. This is America, after all, and every American has the right to be wrong. Just don't expect the rest of us to follow suit.

The fuel and the fire have been amply explained. Why do you have such a hard time believing the building caught fire? Buildings catch fire all the time... even buildings which haven't been showered by flaming debris.

Quote:

...its painfully easy to see that something knocked out all of the lower supports, all within one second of each other ...




Please give me the name and address of your weed dealer, because I would dearly love to buy whatever you took that lets you see that. It sure as hell doesn't look like that in any of the videos I have seen posted here.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6167515 - 10/13/06 11:16 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

f it all collapsed simultaneously, you might have a leg to stand on. Maybe. But it didn't, and your continued insistence it did shows a stubborn refusal to admit reality. Your prerogative, of course. This is America, after all, and every American has the right to be wrong. Just don't expect the rest of us to follow suit.




Ok, what exactly is your definition of "simultaneously"?

One second? Two seconds apart? Im going to have to say that my definition of "simultaneously" would have to include the time it took for every far corner of that building to begin their collapse which is less than two seconds.

Which you can see in any of the videos in this thread.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Edited by GabbaDj (10/13/06 11:17 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6167629 - 10/14/06 12:00 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Ok, what exactly is your definition of "simultaneously"?




I'll accept your first definition as being close enough -- "within one second" of each other. I don't see them going within one second of each other. Not on any of the videos I have seen so far.

You seem to have convinced yourself that the building didn't collapse on its own -- that it was deliberately brought down with demolition charges. It has been established from the reports of the men on the scene -- the firefighters -- that no one went into the building and planted charges while they were there. So if the building collapsed due to demolition charges, those charges must have been planted before the planes hit the towers.

Is that your position? That the charges were in place in WTC7 before the planes hit the towers? Because if it is your position, I want you to think the rest of it through before making your next post.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6168340 - 10/14/06 09:23 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Is that your position? That the charges were in place in WTC7 before the planes hit the towers? Because if it is your position, I want you to think the rest of it through before making your next post.




Yes, yes it is. Why is it soo hard to believe?


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6168473 - 10/14/06 10:11 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Gee... you think in the week or so that passed from the collapse to the time the picture was taken, they might have tried to clear any rubble off Vesey Street first? So they could, you know, actually get vehicles other than helicopters through?


Sure they might have done that, they probably did, even though I see no bulldozers on those pics. But this supports my point exactly. If they were able to clear Vesey street in just a few days, the rubble there must have been marginal, nothing like the stories high mound of debris one can see within the footprint of the building. Hence, WTC7 fell pretty neatly in its footprint. Anyone with eyes in their heads can see that. Or do you think that mountain of debris was on Vesey street until they pushed it north a little to restore traffic?

Edited by Aldous (10/14/06 10:19 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6168594 - 10/14/06 10:54 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

it isn't the size of the pile, its the size of the force of men sent to remove it.


--------------------
Asshole

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: nakors_junk_bag]
    #6168881 - 10/14/06 12:12 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Right, but if the building had fallen southwards, and all the debris was on Vesey street and even further south, and they immediately sent a huge crowd of men to remove it, where does that stories-high and nicely shaped pile of debris right in 7's footprint come from?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Aldous]
    #6169062 - 10/14/06 01:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Right, but if the building had fallen southwards, and all the debris was on Vesey street and even further south, and they immediately sent a huge crowd of men to remove it, where does that stories-high and nicely shaped pile of debris right in 7's footprint come from?




No one is saying there was no debris inside the building's footprint, just that the collapse started in the most likely place as described by the fire crew on the scene -- the bulge partway up the southwest corner. Of course the great majority of debris from the collapse will still be within the building's footprint, duh. That will always be the case. No one is claiming "all" the debris was on Vesey Street. Try to read what is written for a change.

Only a fool would fail to grasp the reason there is no longer any debris on Vesey Street in a picture taken almost a week later is that whatever portion of debris fell on that street would be cleared away FIRST. Pretty hard to work effectively on a site you can't reach. Any foreman who didn't make clearing the streets his first priority would be fired immediately.


Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6169087 - 10/14/06 01:49 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Yes, yes it is. Why is it soo hard to believe?




Because it would be pretty near impossible to plant concealed demolition charges in an occupied building, for one. Which night do you think the ninjas who ripped open the walls, planted and wired the charges, then repaired, plastered, and repainted the walls so no one would notice, accomplished this task?

And of course, the big question -- what would the government-sponsored ninjas have done had there not been obvious structural damage to the building by debris falling from the tower next to it? How could they have known there would be such visibly obvious damage -- a twenty story hole ripped in the southwest edge and a growing bulge visible for all to see? If that debris had fallen another ten meters off to the side there would have been little to no damage at all, and "they" couldn't have gotten away with demolishing an unscathed building.

Can you really fool yourself into thinking the plotters just crossed their fingers and hoped the debris trajectories would go their way?

You ask what I find so hard to believe, yet you uncritically swallow an outrageous and convoluted Robert Ludlum plot no Hollywood director would try to pawn off on a studio as plausible.

I leave it to the rational readers of this thread to decide for themselves which scenario is the more likely.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6169095 - 10/14/06 01:54 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Further, what possible benefit to the plotters would there be to adding WTC7 to the mix? You think destroying the twin towers wasn't enough for them to convince Americans to go along with their nefarious agenda?

"Gee, Maude, I don't really think we should go after those Al Qaeda fellows. After all, it was just the two towers and the Pentagon and those poor folks on Flight 93 who had some hard luck. Now, if WTC7 had been destroyed as well, I might go along with Bush and Rummie and his crew. But since it is still standing, I just can't bring myself to support those Washington fellers."




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6169703 - 10/14/06 06:24 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> Jesus Christ on a crutch, man... can you not read?

I see that I am not the only one to loose patience after pounding my head against a brick wall. I think the tinfoil obscures eyesight making reading difficult.

I do want to apologize to all of those that I have offended with my lame comments. They come from frustration rather than lack of respect. This is my own failing.

> Hmmm, a tiny plane laden with fuel crashes into a building in Manhattan and 100% of the passports on board are found on the street

You mean both? (I guess 100% sounds like more when we are only talking about two!) Here is a good question: where was most of the plane's wreckage located? The wreckage wouldn't have been on the ground, along with the passports, would it? Now before somebody asks why the 737 didn't bounce off the WTC, think about weight and velocity (kenetic energy and momentum) of the two different events.

"Laden with fuel" ... thats funny... with a full tank, the Cirrus SR20 (the tiny plane we are talking about) holds a whopping 56 gallons. A 737 holds a bit more than 4700 gallons.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170400 - 10/14/06 11:10 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Common Phred...    I know your just dying to admit that you believe in a tiny way that everything seems  just a little suspicious.

Quote:

Because it would be pretty near impossible to plant concealed demolition charges in an occupied building, for one. Which night do you think the ninjas who ripped open the walls, planted and wired the charges, then repaired, plastered, and repainted the walls so no one would notice, accomplished this task?




Ninjas?  No, just a bunch of special special ops persons with engineering backgrounds who have been used for years to do bad things to both people in the US and around the world. 

Security for the entire complex was contracted to a company that G W Bushes brother was a principal of. :confused:  Yeah, I dont even buy the whole security/ Bush brother thing :grin:  +1 to you..   

Still its a bonus for conspiracy theorists.  I DO believe that security could be manipulated easily because the security company has deep ties with the pentagon and other government infrastructures.

Quote:

And of course, the big question -- what would the government-sponsored ninjas have done had there not been obvious structural damage to the building by debris falling from the tower next to it? How could they have known there would be such visibly obvious damage -- a twenty story hole ripped in the southwest edge and a growing bulge visible for all to see? If that debris had fallen another ten meters off to the side there would have been little to no damage at all, and "they" couldn't have gotten away with demolishing an unscathed building.




Even elementary school kids could tell you that debris would fall that building given the height of the towers.  Even if it only broke a few windows then it would explain why a fire broke out right?    The same fire which they say brought down the buildings..

Ask why it started???  Hell.. Maybe it was vandals..  Perhaps it was officials shredding documents that sparked a fire? Or how about just a plain old power surge in the midst of a huge catastrophe which happened to set off 12.000 gallons of diesel fuel whould pumped out into the building due to a "design flaw"...

Please dont make me come up with ways that fires could have started in that building..  Since fires account for the majority of the reason why the entire building collapsed. 

Dont even try to say that the 20 story "hole" had anything to do with it because if you remember the  federal building in Oklahoma.

You can see that a building can manage its structural integrity easily with most of its structure has been blown away.

OOoh and since their was a HUGE hole in most of the building then how did the diesel that fueled the fire not simply run out into the street?  How did it flood the floor and sit burning long enough  to weaken the structural integrity of all four corners of that building as to make them collapse within two seconds of each other?  Or simultaniously as I like to say :grin:


Huh?


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Edited by GabbaDj (10/14/06 11:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170465 - 10/14/06 11:28 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Further, what possible benefit to the plotters would there be to adding WTC7 to the mix? You think destroying the twin towers wasn't enough for them to convince Americans to go along with their nefarious agenda?

"Gee, Maude, I don't really think we should go after those Al Qaeda fellows. After all, it was just the two towers and the Pentagon and those poor folks on Flight 93 who had some hard luck. Now, if WTC7 had been destroyed as well, I might go along with Bush and Rummie and his crew. But since it is still standing, I just can't bring myself to support those Washington fellers."




While I dont buy that Silverstein was a player in this and that he played a part in order to cash in on a huge insurance settlement....  I do believe that that building held deep dark secrets..

After all the building had;
Quote:

The government agencies housed at 7 World Trade Center were the United States Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (IRS), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). [2]




As well as several offices which were used to investigate government/corporate fraud, the building was a warehouse for TRILLIONS of dollars worth of lawsuit papers which were all lost.

Anyone remember Rumsfield coming foreword about the trillions of dollars missing from the coffers?  Ever wonder what happened to that money? or the documentation behind it?  Its all gone due to the collapse of WTC7.

Hmmm  How convenient that vandals broke in, destroyed all of this and saved America from the embarrassment of havint its most major companies exposed for the frauds they have committed. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Edited by GabbaDj (10/14/06 11:33 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6170532 - 10/14/06 11:52 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

No, just a bunch of special special ops persons with engineering backgrounds who have been used for years to do bad things to both people in the US and around the world.




Dream on. You have obviously never done any construction or renovation work. Such work cannot be done unnoticed, no matter how skilled the team or how large. Even disregarding the time factor, fresh paint is fresh paint.

Then of course there is the impossibility of finding a large enough team of brainwashed zombies who will not only agree to unquestioningly do this bizarre task in the first place, but who will all remain silent about it even once they realize they were duped. This in a country where the government can't keep ANYTHING from leaking? Yeah, right.

Quote:

Even elementary school kids could tell you that debris would fall that building given the height of the towers.




Sure. Fall WHERE, though.

Quote:

The same fire which they say brought down the buildings.




You demonstrate your unseriousness of really wanting to find out what happened. You ignore what has been posted over and over again -- the fact that there was not just a fire, but structural damage so severe the entire fire team could see with their own eyes the ever-developing bulge in the edge of the building. The same bulge which led the leader of the team to pull his guys out before it caved in on him. Unlike some tinfoil hat wearing armchair analysts, this guy knew what he was talking about, as did most of the other fire guys on the scene. They were completely unsurprised when the building collapsed. Or are they all also being paid off by the government to say they were unsurprised? Do they all work for Bush's brother?

No one here has ever said it collapsed due to fire alone. It has been noted over and over it was a combination of structural and fire damage.

I can't help but note you have completely ignored my point about it being completely unnecessary to even bring down WTC7 at all -- that the destruction of the twin towers and the attack on the Pentagon was plenty.

You don't work from facts and draw conclusions from them, you start with your conclusion -- that the entire Bush admiistration is so corrupt -- no, corrupt is the wrong word -- so evil -- that they would happily kill thousands of innocent Americans in order to.. what? Increase the value of Cheney's stock options? And not only is the Bush administration that evil, but so are quite literally hundreds and more probably thousands of others who would necessarily have to be in on the plot in order to pull it off.

That kind of thinking is so blatantly deranged that anyone who truly believes it (rather than just pretending they do in order to troll) is beyond the reach of all rational discussion. When the NIST report on WTC7 is finalized with explanations for the mechanics of the collapse, you will ignore that, too. You will claim the NIST report writers were paid to write it that way. Or maybe that the families of the report writers were kidnapped and held as hostages to force them to write the report the way the Bushies want them to.

In other words, no evidence is good enough for you.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170581 - 10/15/06 12:08 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Dream on. You have obviously never done any construction or renovation work. Such work cannot be done unnoticed, no matter how skilled the team or how large. Even disregarding the time factor, fresh paint is fresh paint.





Sure I have.. In fact me and 5 other crews spent 6 months changing the ballasts and lights in the twin towers in Sacramento. We also did the capital building and several other california government buildings.

One thing I know is that the structural supports in a major office building arent accessible to the general public and crews of people could work 24 hours unnoticed if given the proper excuse. At night we had keys that took us all over these government buildings, we even stole computer parts from several closets we stumbled across.

I used to work for the government as recently as just a few months ago and believe me that their isnt any shortage of brainwashed zombies who could be capable of doing such things.

What will it take for you to just admit even the slightest possibility?

A command from your Superior?


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6170875 - 10/15/06 02:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

In fact me and 5 other crews spent 6 months changing the ballasts and lights in the twin towers in Sacramento.




I didn't ask if you had changed light bulbs, I asked if you had done any renovations. To place demo charges around support beams involves tearing open walls to get at the beams. Once you have placed the charges, you have to repair -- undetectably -- the areas you tore open. This involves repairing drywall, plastering, and painting.

Even IF you were a good enough artist to make the opened area LOOK as if it were untouched -- i.e. matching the paint color perfetly and artificially "aging" it so the patch doesn't show, the SMELL of the work remains. New drywall, new plaster, and especially new paint, all have their characteristic odors, and those odors don't vanish for days afterwards, and often longer than that.

Besides, you make the same mistake all the tinfoil beanie theorists who churn out such pieces of dreck as "Loose Change" make -- you focus on what you believe to be oddities or anomalies (in this case your belief that the collapse of WTC7 strikes YOU as fishy) while ignoring completely the overall picture.

A hell of a lot more went on that day than just the collapse of a single building. Four airliners were hijacked. The financial center, military center, and government center of the USA were all targets. If Flight 93 had made it, it would have crashed into the Capitol. Any theory which doesn't address these facts is automatically a bogus theory. So let's look at your theory -- that WTC7 was prepared with demolition charges by US government agents beforehand.

It necessarily follows that if this is true, then the entire plot was engineered by the US government.

If the entire plot was engineered by the US government, it necessarily follows that the US government was willing to cripple itself to the point of no longer being able to function. Kind of tough to get Congress to authorize any miltary action when a huge chunk of the people who make up Congress have been killed by Flight 93 crashing into the Capitol. And it would be kind of tough to carry out whatever military action the surviving congresspeople claim to be able to "authorize" if many of your senior commanders have been killed when the Pentagon was hit.

And of course, it is even tougher to find people willing to kill themselves by flying hijacked airplanes into buildings.

But the biggest stumbling block of all is that this theory requires not just Bush and his cronies to be evil people, but literally hundreds (more probably thousands) of others who would necessarily have to be in on the plot. Not only do ALL the members of this vast multitude have to be utterly depraved, they have to be utterly loyal to "the cause" and possess superhuman discipline regarding continued secrecy. No leaks. No midnight attacks of conscience followed by tearful confessions. No drunken boasts or slips of the tongue. No heartfelt discussions with the wife (or husband). Ever.

You obviously haven't thought this through. Because it's not just a case of meeting some of these conditions. ALL of the above (and a lot more besides -- I am trying to be brief here) conditions must be met or your theory falls apart.

And that is just if everything goes well. The plot you envision is so complex that any of literally hundreds of the random events which make up the fabric of everyday life could scotch the entire plan -- something as simple as a couple of office workers carrying on an adulterous affair and fucking like bunnies in a closet after hours stumbling out of that closet with their clothes in disarray and coming across the team placing demo charges in one of the buildings.

Now let's look at what really happened.

A small group -- less than two dozen -- of religious fanatics hijacked some airliners. Four of those fanatics had learned just enough about flying an airliner to navigate their way back to some pretty distinctive and almost impossible to miss buildngs and fly those planes into the buildings.

No need to worry about someone spilling the beans down the road. No difficulty finding people willing to commit suicide. No need to devise some insanely complicated plot with potentially dozens of loose ends -- people have been hijacking airliners since the Sixties. Anyone can do it. As spectacular terrorist operations go, it's pretty tough to come up with a plan much simpler to carry out than hijacking a plane. It's a time-tested classic.

Anyone who attempts to convince rational people to choose your theory over the terrorist reality is going to have to come up with something a hell of a lot more compelling than yammering on and on about how it seems to YOU that the eventual collapse of a building not even on the target list looked fishy.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6171029 - 10/15/06 06:42 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> To place demo charges around support beams involves tearing open walls to get at the beams.

It is actually more than that. You also have to CUT the beam, at least twice, to weaken it before you can use explosives to finish the job. To cut an I-beam with explosives, you first have to cut the two flanges on the I-beam leaving only the center intact. You then place shaped charges exactly opposite one another on the intact center support. When the explosives detonate, they cut the remaining center part of the beam.

It might be possible to use explosives to cut the flanges on the I-beam, but I wouldn't want to risk it. Actually, the more I think about it, the more difficult I realize the problem becomes. I guess this is why they cut the beams. *laugh*

There are three major problems that occur when the I-beams are not first cut:

1) Eight charges (minimum) must be detonated at the exact same time to cut the beam, rather than only two charges.

2) The blast wave from the flange charges will (most likely) interfere with the blast wave from the center charges resulting in loss of symmetry. Instead of cutting, the charges will blow each other apart.

3) There is a good chance that the small area of the I-beam where the sides attach to the center will not be cut. I don't have time to explain the theory of the Monroe effect, but it boils down to the lack of symmetry in the shaped charges at the intersections between the sides and center of the I-beam.

The above is required to get the nice clean cut look. You could always just fill the space up with a bunch of explosive and blow the shit out of everything in the area. Of course, then your beams are going to be all twisted and gnarly with a nice shattered/torn look, not cut nice and neat. This is also a huge waste of explosives, which is a huge waste of money, which is why this isn't done in professional demolitions. I suppose if I were trying to hide the use of explosives, this is the route I would choose. However, metal fatigued by explosives has a well known look to it, especially at the microscopic level. (I know from personal, hand on, experience.)

> What will it take for you to just admit even the slightest possibility?

I have never denied the possibility. In fact, it took a while to convince me on tower seven. However, in the case of the WTC, I think Oliver Stone summed up my feelings better than I could have done:

Quote:

I think that conspiracy-mongering on 9/11 is a waste of time. The far greater conspiracy occurred after 9/11 when basically a neo-cabal inside our government hijacked policy and went to war. That was as broad a conspiracy as we can get and it was about 20, 30 people.




--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6171260 - 10/15/06 09:46 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Hey, I never said that it was easy. :grin:


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6171806 - 10/15/06 01:23 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I haven't seen many I-beams in the WTC rubble. It looked mostly like hollow square beams to me. I'm not saying those are easier or more difficult to cut, just that they weren't I-beams.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKamek
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/08/05
Posts: 2,923
Last seen: 1 year, 2 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6171832 - 10/15/06 01:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ok please look at this video, it's about a leading explosives expert commenting on the WTC 7 collapse. He is shown both videos of the WTC north and south towers and the WTC 7 building. His comment is that both WTC towers are NOT controlled demolition because it is virtually impossible to do. But when he is shown the WTC 7 collapse he has a very different response;

part1
part2
part3

edit: the subtitles aren't very good, some of the tranlations are too literal etc...
edit2: this is the raw version and it's uncut so sometimes it's a bit chaotic...

Edited by Kamek (10/15/06 01:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6172100 - 10/15/06 02:51 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Jesus Christ on a crutch, man... can you not read?

I see that I am not the only one to loose patience after pounding my head against a brick wall. I think the tinfoil obscures eyesight making reading difficult.

I do want to apologize to all of those that I have offended with my lame comments. They come from frustration rather than lack of respect. This is my own failing.

> Hmmm, a tiny plane laden with fuel crashes into a building in Manhattan and 100% of the passports on board are found on the street

You mean both? (I guess 100% sounds like more when we are only talking about two!) Here is a good question: where was most of the plane's wreckage located? The wreckage wouldn't have been on the ground, along with the passports, would it? Now before somebody asks why the 737 didn't bounce off the WTC, think about weight and velocity (kenetic energy and momentum) of the two different events.




There was no reason to believe the instructor had his passport with him. Hell, I have no idea why Lidle had his. Do you carry yours with you regularly? Regardless, the accident was a flaming mess and yet the passport survived, which is one of the favorite nitwit points used by the 9/11 dipshits to point out the fakery at the WTC. Capisce? Or are you one of those who thinks that the passport find at the WTC was indicative of fakery? I never got that notion from your posts before.
Quote:



"Laden with fuel" ... thats funny... with a full tank, the Cirrus SR20 (the tiny plane we are talking about) holds a whopping 56 gallons. A 737 holds a bit more than 4700 gallons.




There was quite a glorious conflagration there. Certainly long enough to incinerate a passport and a couple of pilots. His passport was found in the street, it said, not his pocket. I can read quite well.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Kamek]
    #6172111 - 10/15/06 02:53 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yeah, I posted a thread about this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6172608 - 10/15/06 05:13 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> I never got that notion from your posts before.

I think one of us is misreading the other... I'm not sure which. Probably me debating against myself.

My intended point was that one should not compare the Cirrus SR20 to the Boeing 737 when it comes to damage they will cause, or the debris they leave behind.

Personally, I find the passport evidence of WTC to be nothing special. If I remember correctly, it was Atta's passport that was found, one of the pilots. It would make sense that he was in possession of his passport. I always carry mine with me when I travel rather than leaving in my luggage for the airline to loose.

Being the pilot, Atta would have been the first to impact the building. One of two things are going to happen: 1) the plane starts to crumple up with him inside as it breaks into the building, or 2) the first bit of the plane is going to break off and fall to the ground as the rest of the plane crashes through the building. Either way, the area that the pilot was in would be far away from the fuel tanks of the plane. When the fuel tanks blow, stuff near them burn while stuff far away will get blown clear, for the most part.

Why didn't the passport, if it got blown clear, burn up in the buiding? Short reason: heat rises. Even if the passport is in a pool of burning jet fuel, it will burn no more than a wick in a latern will burn. Obviously, there are many more paths for the passport to be destroyed, than not... but I don't find the passport being found to be out of the ordinary. Were other passports found, or just the one? What about other papers, wallets, IDs, etc?


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6173599 - 10/15/06 10:13 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I can believe that a passport could survive. I dont know how it was salvaged soo quickly out of the millions of tons of crap that fell to the ground that day but Im sure that things like that happen..

I however dont believe that on a single day several physical anomoniallys can happen within a small area to several buildings all within a small amount of time.

I believe that people want to believe in me but they are too scared.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* WTC 911 Fires - Not So Hot, Eh?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )
usefulidiot 10,763 189 01/27/05 11:11 AM
by CJay
* New Seismic Data Refutes Official Explanation Of WTC Collapses usefulidiot 6,466 15 05/08/06 09:28 AM
by Turn
* WTC Rescue Workers Silenced After Black Box Discovery
( 1 2 all )
usefulidiot 3,234 24 12/19/04 11:11 PM
by Rose
* Millionaire Offers $100,000 For Scientific Proof WTC Towers Collapsed As Bush Administration Claims
( 1 2 all )
ekomstop 4,975 37 12/16/04 08:29 PM
by ekomstop
* No Justification for the WTC Bombings?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Ravus 4,977 83 11/12/04 02:23 PM
by Phluck
* Understanding UFO Secrecy
( 1 2 3 all )
exclusive58 3,271 43 10/26/05 12:52 AM
by _Aegis_
* WTC 7: How did it fall?
( 1 2 all )
SquattingMarmot 2,454 26 01/04/04 02:16 PM
by iamhimheisme
* 9/11 update on Silverstein's insurance claim
( 1 2 all )
Hank, FTW 2,629 24 11/06/06 03:54 PM
by zappaisgod

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
6,497 topic views. 2 members, 4 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.048 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 14 queries.