You have any idea how many people died because those towers fell down?
9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)
- Thread starter Stryder
- Start date
- Status
You have any idea how many people died because those towers fell down?
You may want to read the following post:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2075127&postcount=1996
There have been several articles where the softened steel was discussed. I’m pretty sure there was photographic evidence as well. The articles are usually brought up by the conspiracy theorists because Abolhassan Astaneh describes them as ‘melted’ in one of them.
He is often mentioned by conspiracy theorists because he had complaints regarding the investigation. So by calling him an idiot and discarding his comments you are actually undermining the arguments of your troother mates.
Like explosives, missiles, thermite, nanothermite, superthemite, ray guns ect. Yeah ok.
There has been several steel structures which collapsed due to fire. It really isn't so surpising, unless you have a desire to believe in conspiracies.
Last edited:
So find the temperature data in the NCSTAR1 report. Why talk about articles when there is a 10,000 page government report? Just download it and search it with Adobe. NOT THE SUMMARIES with that isolated pockets of 1800 deg. ROFL
So explain why you don't have a table specifying the distribution of steel and concrete in the towers from an OFFICIAL SOURCE? It has been SEVEN YEARS! It didn't take that long to design the buildings.
Ever heard of the conservation of momentum? How is it that the top portion broke the support below and accelerated the mass below for it to come down in less than 18 seconds and yet you can't even specify the distribution of the mass below? Didn't the designers have to figure out how to make the building support itself? So why shouldn't that have been available within a few months.
The laws of physics don't change for the sake of what ANYBODY prefers to BELIEVE.
They don't care about sarcasm either.
Even the NIST admitted that information was necessary:
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5D.pdf page 74
Damage Analysis of
the World Trade Center Towers
pdf page 143
The NIST just hands us that collapse was inevitable crap and thus avoids have to say anything about how the vertical distribution of mass would have to affect the collapse time. So the people capable of believing it do. Physics is not about BELIEF. Analysis requires accurate data, so where is it?
Oh yeah, Dr. Sunder Dunderhead explained it. It was that 70% air by volume.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/cons-flash.html
That comes to 15 tons of air per level by the way though the building averaged 770 TONS OF STEEL per level.
psik
Last edited:
This is a dodge on your part. Astaneh was an engineer who presented his findings on the steel (with complaints) at the 9/11 commission. He mentions the extremely soft steel in more than one article. I can find them if you want? Are you going to accuse him of being wrong or lying? Will you consider the contents of the NIST report to be the only evidence worth looking at?
NIST did attempt to recreate conditions on 9/11 and in their tests they reached temperatures near 1000C.
Why would I? What are you rambling about?
You have supposedly been through the NIST report. ….
Again, what the hell are you talking about?
Do they care about upper case? lol If you have a point to make could you please make it without rambling.
Yes but you thought a missile hit the pentagon. ….
You aren’t listening. Over 100 people say they saw the plane hit the pentagon. They didn’t piece it together from the news the next day they saw a 767 hit the pentagon.
What you don’t understand is (1) that they have taken their own interpretation of witness accounts to fit their beliefs, those accounts were not even clear (2) they took accounts much later on. Witness testimony isn’t perfect and there were contradictory points within the accounts they presented as their proof. If they actually interviewed a hundred or so people and a couple said the angle was a little different then it doesn’t outweigh the 98. It also doesn’t outweigh the testimony of 100+ people who saw it hit. You will never get this because you don’t want to.
I will repeat, if we are to believe Ryan Mackey there was no peer review.
:thumbsup: Good work Scott!
Dr. Biederman and his team reported temperatures of a maximum of 850C.
You have shown that you will believe nearly anything in regards to 9/11.
No that person was in the list of ‘Architecture and Engineering Professionals’.
Yes I know you are mesmerized by credentials when they support the conspiracy but ignore them when in support of the official theory.
Only one? In a little known journal which allegedly had no actual peer review and required only a payment? All these supposedly qualified people behind the conspiracy and that’s all you have? That’s a little odd don’t you think? I submitted 20 something peer reviewed papers which supported the official story.
Once again, the fact that you keep bringing up his cold fusion work shows you are clueless to what is going on.
Wait...I thought we were talking about the collapse of the WTC 1 and 2, when did we switch back to the pentagon?
Guess we must have solved that one.
(yeah, right Mitch)
Guess we must have solved that one.
(yeah, right Mitch)I wish we could trust government reports to mention all the relevant data. But think for a moment; if that were true, we should conclude that WTC 7 didn't collapse, since it wasn't mentioned at all in the 9/11 Commission report
They did finally investigate what happened to WTC 7. I would argue they did so because people demanded that such an investigation be done. I believe people now need to demand an investigation into -why- there was no mention of the melted and evaporated steel.
As to the original FEMA investigation of WTC 7 they concluded, "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."
Yes, I know that aftewards, NIST continued to 'resolve' these issues. Here's an excerpt of their 5 year effort in action:
***********************************
Molten metal? What molten metal?
NIST, in its final report on WTC 7, ignored all of the evidence relating to molten metal, even though numerous reliable witnesses spoke of the presence of molten metal at Ground Zero. These witnesses included Richard Garlock, a structural engineer at Leslie E. Robertson Associates, an engineering firm involved in the design of the towers and the clean up of the site, who said "Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running."10
The witnesses to molten metal also included University of California, Berkeley engineering professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, who was the first scientist given access to the steel at ground zero. Dr. Astaneh-Asl referred to the WTC steel he found as "kind of melted."11 Years later, when asked again about his experience he clarified, "I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center."12
There are many other reports of molten metal at ground zero, including quite a few from those who support the Bush Administration's ever-changing fire-induced collapse theories. There are also photos supporting the reports of molten metal.13 But NIST continues to ignore all of this evidence in its new report.
***********************************
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20080911073516447
It goes on, making it clear that NIST ignored a lot of evidence, including paper thin steel and sulfidation, the possibility of nano-thermite being used (it would handily account for the 'mysterious' sulfidation and extreme thinning of steel) and having ignored all this evidence, concludes "The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery".
Ah, my apologies. In any case, many of the so called reports of witnesses to the downing of light poles have been discredited:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9680
I wish we could trust government reports to mention all the relevant data. But think for a moment; if that were true, we should conclude that WTC 7 didn't collapse, since it wasn't mentioned at all in the 9/11 Commission report
They did finally investigate what happened to WTC 7. I would argue they did so because people demanded that such an investigation be done. I believe people now need to demand an investigation into -why- there was no mention of the melted and evaporated steel.
As to the original FEMA investigation of WTC 7 they concluded, "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."
Yes, I know that aftewards, NIST continued to 'resolve' these issues. Here's an excerpt of their 5 year effort in action:
***********************************
Molten metal? What molten metal?
NIST, in its final report on WTC 7, ignored all of the evidence relating to molten metal, even though numerous reliable witnesses spoke of the presence of molten metal at Ground Zero. These witnesses included Richard Garlock, a structural engineer at Leslie E. Robertson Associates, an engineering firm involved in the design of the towers and the clean up of the site, who said "Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running."10
The witnesses to molten metal also included University of California, Berkeley engineering professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, who was the first scientist given access to the steel at ground zero. Dr. Astaneh-Asl referred to the WTC steel he found as "kind of melted."11 Years later, when asked again about his experience he clarified, "I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center."12
There are many other reports of molten metal at ground zero, including quite a few from those who support the Bush Administration's ever-changing fire-induced collapse theories. There are also photos supporting the reports of molten metal.13 But NIST continues to ignore all of this evidence in its new report.
***********************************
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20080911073516447
It goes on, making it clear that NIST ignored a lot of evidence, including paper thin steel and sulfidation, the possibility of nano-thermite being used (it would handily account for the 'mysterious' sulfidation and extreme thinning of steel) and having ignored all this evidence, concludes "The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery".
Once more scotch your a complete moron. It is jet fuel not diesel fuel. Two totally different chemicals. Who wrote that article a 7th grader?
<snip personal attack>
fedr, you may not have noticed that I'm talking about WTC 7, not the twin towers.
fedr, you may not have noticed that I'm talking about WTC 7, not the twin towers.
You mean "you are a complete moron" or alternatively"you're a complete moron".
I admit that I at times I have subscribed to an erroneous theory or 2 based on insufficient data. However, when data is shown to me which refutes the theory, I stop believing in it as well. This is what any good scientist would do.
The witness story is indeed quite a story. Aldo Marquis from CIT has made quite a list of the witnesses. He claims that there's only a total of 30 who could have seen or claim to have seen the impact.
He's categorized the witnesses into the following categories:
1- Only saw plane (possibly from far away location), could not see pentagon, light poles or impact, either deduced or are lying OR do not directly mention or CONFIRM seeing an impact.
2- Claims they "Saw" impact of "plane"/large airliner-were in a position to possibly confirm one.
3- "Saw" a plane & impact from far away, but DID NOT see a second plane/jet shadowing/chasing and veering away as the impact happened.
He lists several other categories, complete with many remarks about the individual witnesses, which can be seen here:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=10632
Buy a DVD from "the pilots" when you are there. Maybe scot3x gets a kick back for all the merchandising. $$$$
- Status