9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)

[scott3x]

9-11- Why the WTC towers collapsed

I'm going out on a limb here, not sure if I can do this, but I'll give it a go. Essentially, want to separate a few topics from the main 9/11 thread because it's gotten so big that it's hard to tell what topics have been responded to and which ones haven't. So here I'll talk about the NIST conclusion of the WTC buildings bowing inwards. I have now read in more depth the pinup concerning how to post on this forum; it says you should only try to quote one paragraph. But if I did this in the case below it wouldn't really say that much. So hopefully I can post the following paragraphs in this case atleast.

Some people believe that the bowing of the WTC towers means that the fire theory works. In the following article, it's shown to be highly questionable.

From Physics911, a Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven:

The computerized models of the Towers in the NIST study, which incorporate many features of the buildings and the fires on 9-11-01, are less than convincing. The Final report states:

The Investigation Team then defined three cases for each building by combining the middle, less severe, and more severe values of the influential variables. Upon a preliminary examination of the middle cases, it became clear that the towers would likely remain standing. The less severe cases were discarded after the aircraft impact results were compared to observed events. The middle cases (which became Case A for WTC 1 and Case C for WTC 2) were discarded after the structural response analysis of major subsystems were compared to observed events. (NIST, 2005, p. 142; emphasis added.)

The NIST report makes for interesting reading. The less severe cases based on empirical data were discarded because they did not result in building collapse. But ‘we must save the hypothesis,’ so more severe cases were tried and the simulations tweaked, as we read in the NIST report:

The more severe case (which became Case B for WTC 1 and Case D for WTC 2) was used for the global analysis of each tower. Complete sets of simulations were then performed for Cases B and D. To the extent that the simulations deviated from the photographic evidence or eyewitness reports [e.g., complete collapse occurred], the investigators adjusted the input, but only within the range of physical reality. Thus, for instance,…the pulling forces on the perimeter columns by the sagging floors were adjusted… (NIST, 2005, p. 142; emphasis added.)

The primary role of the floors in the collapse of the towers was to provide inward pull forces that induced inward bowing of perimeter columns. (NIST, 2005, p. 180; emphasis added.)

How fun to tweak the model like that, until the building collapses — until one gets the desired result. But the end result of such tweaked computer hypotheticals is not compelling, sorry gentlemen. Notice that the “the pulling forces on the perimeter columns by the sagging floors were adjusted” (NIST, 2005, p. 142; emphasis added) to get the perimeter columns to yield sufficiently — one suspects these were “adjusted” by hand quite a bit — even though the UK experts complained that “the core columns cannot pull the exterior [i.e., perimeter] columns in via the floor.” (Lane and Lamont, 2005; emphasis added.)

http://physics911.net/stevenjones

 

[scott3x]

Even if you could find the video again, it would only prove that some engineers (NIST engineers, perhaps?) claimed to have done so.

Well there is a picture of someone at ground zero cutting the standing beams in exactly the way the engineer described. I can't find the picture again, but I clearly remember seeing one.

Did they cut them in such a way that solidified molten metal could be seen on them? Even if they somehow did it this way, it doesn't mean that the beam pictured in zeitgeist was from them.

Steven Jones wrote a paper trying to prove that Jesus visited North America.

Sounds doubtful, but maybe. Is he a mormon? It seems like it if he's referring to it anyway:
http://web.archive.org/web/20051124...aculty/jones/rel491/handstext+and+figures.htm

In any case, even if he's wrong about that (since I believe Jesus, if he existed, was a man and not a God, it doesn't really matter to me), I don't believe it affects his judgement regarding 9/11.

The whole fire collapse thing has been thoroughly discredited.

Not until you explain the bowing. It's not discredited simply because you say so, it needs to be proven with honest interpretation of the facts. Something truthers can not do because the are dishonest with their interpretation of the facts all the fucking time.

Sigh. Listen, I will admit the possibility that some of my conclusions may be off. But I'm not lying to you. Anyway, I know I've already responded to this point, but the response was small. I decided to create a new thread titled "9-11- Why the WTC towers collapsed" in order to address issues of the WTC collapse itself. Maybe by dividing this thread up it will get a little less confusing as to what has already been responded to.

 

[scott3x]

I completely stopped reading when I came upon this early on: "... where explosive thermite was invented..."

Only an idiot with NO knowledge of chemistry thinks thermite is explosive!!!:bugeye:

So I saw no point in reading any more of what is probably also nonsense as well.

Alright, technically it's not an explosive. However, it could certainly have been used on 9/11. From Wikipedia:

Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time.

So it could definitely have cut the steel beams on the WTC towers.

 

[scott3x]

Coincidence theorist or conspiracy theorist...hmmm.
The gov has lied many times.
Over $2 million dollars of tax payer money goes "missing" and unaccounted for every 3 minutes.
Instances of false flag operations happening in the past.
The only 3 steel structured buildings to come down ever in a single day.
Huge insurance policy taken out just weeks before hand.
Inncredibly convienient for current actions (Iraq, patriot act) to have taken place.
No plane hit building 7.
Flight 93 was disintegrated.
Key witnesses heard explosions in the basement and throughout the buildings.


That's a lot of coincidences and I don't think I have named them all.
Would have to say I lean a little more towards the conspiracy theorists side as apposed to the coincidence theorists side.

Bottom line is I may never know.

I must admit I'm what you might call a 'true believer'. I'm definitely a Mulder type (X files). However, also like Mulder, I'm willing to look at all sides of an argument, even if I don't agree with one of the sides. The whole Larry Silverstein knew argument, for instance, I have found to be weak; maybe he knew, but so far all I've seen as possible evidence might actually simply have been a simple mistake in wording. It's why I'm trying to get out of that thread as I don't really want to be associated with that line of reasoning.

I agree with most of your other points though (the only one I haven't heard about is the $2 million missing every 3 minutes).

 

[scott3x]

Ummm... that's what happens when a plane lands face down in the ground at near the speed of sound. Moron.

Kenny, I'm not sure if this is your aim, but I can imagine that sometimes you might 'win' arguments because of your propensity to break the 'no cat fighting' rule. You have read the rules, haven't you? Just in case, here's the relevant part:

No Cat fighting (Hairpulling, scratching and biting is not permitted);
[Cat fighting can also be translated as "No Personal Attacks"]

(http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=36496)

Anyway, there's lots of evidence supporting the claim that Flight 93 exploded in the air, not on the ground. Take this link, for instance:
http://www.flight93crash.com/

Key witnesses heard explosions in the basement and throughout the buildings.

They also smelled kerosine in the basement, and thus 'explosions' could be described by ignited jet fuel traveling down the elevator shafts which is not controversial as it was described by many witnesses. Also we have to accept the probably of elevator cars falling to the basement/lobby, or other debris falling down the elevator shaft.

Jet fuel wouldn't reduce a 50 ton hydraulic press to rubble or a 300-lb. steel door wrinkled up like a strip of aluminum foil now, would it?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8374

Since the basement played no part in the collapse, it's irrelevant to the conspiracy theory.

From what I understand, the basement did eventually collapse, didn't it? Perhaps the initial blast was meant to soften it up. Or perhaps it was meant to overwhelm the rescue effort. But regardless, you can't deny something happened just because you're not sure why it was done.

 

[scott3x]

I realize that all this conspiracy junk isn't going to go away, but I sure will be glad when the morons get tired of talking about it so much.:bugeye:

I suppose since their minds are so small and their intelligence/knowledge so limited ("exploding" thermite - egad!!!) they have nothing else that they CAN talk about.

Sigh. Looks like a lot of people aren't reading the rules (hint: read my last post in this thread).

 

[scott3x]

So a minority of people interested to answer the poll believe it. Now it bears mentioning that this, also, is the problem. It only took a minority of interested Germans to bring about the Beer Putsch and, ultimately, Krystallnacht against the opposing, but passive will of the majority of Germans. This is where the emotion-based arguments of the Troofer movement is headed.

I'm not the one who's cat-fighting . Anyway, where did you get this 'minority of people interested to answer the poll' from? If the poll had less people believing that the government is lying to a certain extent regarding 9/11, I can easily imagine that you wouldn't be dismissive of its numbers, laugh .

I've lived in Canada, and I hate to say this...but Canadians are extraordinarily gullible and led about by neoleftism to a degree I don't think would be possible elsewhere.

You know I'm canadian don't you ? Us canadians aren't so interested in our right to bear arms (I personally believe that if things really got bad, people would get guns to defend themselves regardless of the law), a little more socialist (as in, we have free health care) and a little less warlike (on Iraq, we diplomatically said thanks, but no thanks ). If that's neoleftism, count me in ;-).

As a genuine communist, this frightens me to no end. They are - with exceptions - uncritical, disinterested, politically ignorant and browbeaten; there is almost a feeling of satisfaction in Canadian teenagers at being ignorant of the world around them excepting the mall. No one questions the questioners, because it's seen psychologically as "rocking the boat" - a colonial leftover that hangs over them still. I feel genuinely sorry for Canada, because it's going down a long, irrevocable road to hell on earth.

Can you post a link to back your claim ?

Not that everyone else isn't, of course.

Laugh .

Yeah, "might" tends to mean it's a supposition.

Then there we are.

Yep, there we are. You seen the movie "being there"? I loved that movie . Anyway, I'm going to try to respond to the following bit you wrote into the WTC Collapse thread I made; this thread has just gotten way too unwieldy .

 

[Read-Only]

Sigh. Looks like a lot of people aren't reading the rules (hint: read my last post in this thread).

That has nothing at all to do with a "cat fight." I simply expressed an opinion about the people who KEEP on hanging on to this stuff. 99% of them have NO expertise nor even basic knowledge of building structure and design, metallurgy, and many, many other things in order to discuss the topic with any degree of intelligence.

Seriously, take yourself as an example - just how long have you spent studying in any of those specific fields I just mentioned? Exactly what are your degrees and other qualifications?

Along another line, do you suppose you actually know more than the NSTB investigators who studied the site in Pennsylvania and ruled it was an "ordinary crash" at high speed rather than some on-board explosion?

It's PRECISELY those things that are in common with the VAST majority of the 9/11 conspiracy nuts. To put it quite bluntly, they do not know enough to even discuss what they keep talking (and raving!!) about. Personally, you don't seem as blinded as most of them but you clearly HAVE fallen for some of their inaccurate nonsense, haven't you?

So that's why I say that I'll be glad when they finally find something else to talk about.

 

[shaman_]

From Physics911, a Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven:

A scientific panel indeed.

Lets see who these scientists are.

PhD U California Davis
Intelligence Affairs

MSc & JD: Clarkson College
Chemistry & Law

PhD U of Wisconsin
Islamic Studies

BA, Princeton University
Central Intelligence Agency (ret.)

PhD University of Michigan
Physics

PhD: U of Connecticut
Kinesiology

PhD: U of Waterloo
Mathematics

PhD: Washington University
Physics

HBS U. of Edinburgh.
Aeronautical Engineer and Qualified Pilot

BS: Physics Bard College
MA: S. F. Inst. Archit

Architect and Builder
PhD University of Chicago

Arabic Language & Literature
MS Psychology & Graduate of Naval War College

Senior Military Affairs Journalist, Naval Postgraduate
PhD: U. of Edinburgh

Computer Science
PhD: Vanderbilt University

Physicist, Brigham Young U. (I believe Steven Jones lost that job)
MD: University of Witwatersrand

Forensic Pathology
PhD Catholic University

Lieut. Col. USAF (ret.)
MSC Systems Mgmt. USC

Liet. Col. USMC ret.
MSc: Brooklyn Polytechnic

Aerospace Engineer
Electr. &Tech. Inst. of New Orleans

Cellphone Engineer
FAA A&P Licence

US Airforce Colonel (ret.)
AAPP University of Alaska

Professional Airline Pilot
BSc Indiana University

Chemistry
ASQ Certified Quality Engineer

PhD: U of Sydney
Biology

Ed. D. Boise State University
Professor, Fielding Graduate U

MS Florida State
MS Louisiana State

Statistician
BBA U. of Miami FL

US Airforce Capt. (ret)
Captain for PAA & UAL

Not many structural engineers there.... islamic studies? kinesiology?

 

[KennyJC]

Kenny, I'm not sure if this is your aim, but I can imagine that sometimes you might 'win' arguments because of your propensity to break the 'no cat fighting' rule. You have read the rules, haven't you? Just in case, here's the relevant part:

(http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=36496)

I don't give a shit. He's a moron, you're a moron. End of story. Ban me for it, I don't care.

Anyway, there's lots of evidence supporting the claim that Flight 93 exploded in the air, not on the ground. Take this link, for instance:

There is NO evidence of such a claim. I'm very well aware of lots of the shoot down claims with Flight 93 and with certainty, all of them are easily debunked.

I'm not going to read through another truther website. Post it's best arguments and I shall debunk them.

Jet fuel wouldn't reduce a 50 ton hydraulic press to rubble or a 300-lb. steel door wrinkled up like a strip of aluminum foil now, would it?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8374

Well that's something I can't debunk at this moment. I'm going to try and find more about it. It's kind of hard to find a rational explanation for this when google searches pretty much turn up nothing but kookie websites. However, the fact that this guy smelled kerosine way down in the basement leads me to believe that explosions traveling down the elevator shaft was something to do with the damage he saw.

From what I understand, the basement did eventually collapse, didn't it? Perhaps the initial blast was meant to soften it up. Or perhaps it was meant to overwhelm the rescue effort. But regardless, you can't deny something happened just because you're not sure why it was done.

The WTC collapsed much like a sparkler fizzles from top to bottom, or much like a fuse burns from one end to another. What happens at the bottom is inconsequential to what is happening at the top. Easy to understand. No need for explosives in the basement.

 

[EndLightEnd]

You know Kenny, for someone who apparently is disgusted by this topic you seem very interested in it.

You seem like your only purpose here is to provide information to the contrary of what is brought up, no matter the subject. And even this you cannot do in a civilized manner.
I find it no coincidence the two people breaking the rules by insulting other people (continuously...) are the two of the most ignorant people Ive ever had the displeasure of reading posts from.

Stupid people get angry more often dont they? For me rationalism has always associated with being tempered and balanced, but I guess thats just me...

 

[KennyJC]

You know Kenny, for someone who apparently is disgusted by this topic you seem very interested in it.

If I'm disgusted by it (which I am), then that's reason enough for me to spent so much time on it.

You seem like your only purpose here is to provide information to the contrary of what is brought up, no matter the subject.

My purpose here is to attack lies and bullshit. And there is plenty of it here to keep me busy.

And even this you cannot do in a civilized manner.

If you want your fantasies respected, you should keep them to yourself, or go some place where you expect them to be respected. Your UFO bullshit doesn't offend me quite as much, but your 9/11 lies do.

I find it no coincidence the two people breaking the rules by insulting other people (continuously...) are the two of the most ignorant people Ive ever had the displeasure of reading posts from.

Ignorant... coming from a journey man of conspiracy theories including 9/11 truthiness.

Stupid people get angry more often dont they? For me rationalism has always associated with being tempered and balanced, but I guess thats just me...

The importance here is not just rationalism, even truthers display rationalism through the art of being professional liars.

 

[KennyJC]

Jet fuel wouldn't reduce a 50 ton hydraulic press to rubble or a 300-lb. steel door wrinkled up like a strip of aluminum foil now, would it?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8374

I can't believe I didn't think of it before... but the 50 ton part is not it's actual weight, but it's capacity. It would actually weigh only several hundred pounds. I wonder if truthers know this?

But of course you will say it's still too heavy to be reduced to rubble... But what about the walls around the hydraulic press? They would have required very little PSI to be destroyed and perhaps the hydraulic press was covered in rubble?

The fact he smelled the kerosine and saw white smoke just vindicates the explanation of the jet fuel traveling down the elevator shafts and then igniting, causing the damage those in the basement witnessed.

As for the door, was it an elevator door? Where was it in relation to the elevator shafts? Was it even steel? It's clear that both 9/11 witnesses and truthers get steel and other metals confused.

 

[Sock Puppy]

I'm not the one who's cat-fighting . Anyway, where did you get this 'minority of people interested to answer the poll' from? If the poll had less people believing that the government is lying to a certain extent regarding 9/11, I can easily imagine that you wouldn't be dismissive of its numbers, laugh .

Any poll is inherently dependent on those people who answer, and those who hang up the phone.

You know I'm canadian don't you

I'm Canadian too. Born Britain, spent most of my time in Canada. I'm sorry, but Canadians have become...sheep. Unquestioning, unthinking. Kids spouting revolutionary phrases without stopping to ask: is this true? Is it really right? Am I demeaning myself, and the historical dialectic, by believing this? As a communist who remembers the works of Marx, I'm offended by the gullibility of people claiming to share philosophies with me. You assume I don't know you, that I'm American - and you assume wrong. You fall into these things so easily, not hesitating in some misbegotten pride to take the time to "educate" me about Canada, not thinking for a second that I know all about the bloody country. The original peaceable kingdom. Well, things aren't really so peaceable all over. Ship of fools, from Harper to bloody Sid Ryan, that imported rattling clot in humanity's breath.

I posted this:

As a genuine communist, this frightens me to no end. They are - with exceptions - uncritical, disinterested, politically ignorant and browbeaten; there is almost a feeling of satisfaction in Canadian teenagers at being ignorant of the world around them excepting the mall. No one questions the questioners, because it's seen psychologically as "rocking the boat" - a colonial leftover that hangs over them still. I feel genuinely sorry for Canada, because it's going down a long, irrevocable road to hell on earth.

You posted this:

Can you post a link to back your claim ?

And it's funny, because you wouldn't see anything but the basest of Americans reveling in an ignorant attempt at an argument. Why? Why do this? I used to be proud, very proud, to say I was Canadian. No longer, if this is what is being churned out.

The peaceable kingdom, breeding foolishness and self-indulgence. My God; Canada is the retarded little brother of the US.

 

[scott3x]

Not many structural engineers there.... islamic studies? kinesiology?

Fine, but there are 2 physicists atleast. I never finished college myself, but I can still tell you that what they are saying makes sense. If NIST can twist the data however it wants, their study should be an object of ridicule not of praise.

 

[Sock Puppy]

NIST aren't twisting anything. They came to their conclusions honestly, which you have yet to disprove.

You're a great touter of numbers, Scott: why is it in your estimation that two physicists are worth more than, say, a hundred? A thousand?

 

[KennyJC]

Fine, but there are 2 physicists atleast. I never finished college myself, but I can still tell you that what they are saying makes sense. If NIST can twist the data however it wants, their study should be an object of ridicule not of praise.

Fucking bullshit. You haven't even read the NIST report and you are as happy as a pig in shit to sit there and say they twist data and then use Steven Jones as a credible alternative when it's clear to anyone HE is the one who twists his data at every possible opportunity.

 

[KennyJC]

Fine, but there are 2 physicists atleast. I never finished college myself, but I can still tell you that what they are saying makes sense. If NIST can twist the data however it wants, their study should be an object of ridicule not of praise.

Fucking bullshit. You haven't even read the NIST report and you are as happy as a pig in shit to sit there and say they twist data and then use Steven Jones (even authors named "Anon") as a credible alternative when it's clear to anyone HE is the one who twists his data at every possible opportunity.

 

[Sock Puppy]

If a gas fire can melt steel on a bridge, isn't that pretty much the end of the argument? Lord knows, I like a conspiracy theory too, but if it's wrong it's wrong.

Not like Roswell, of course.

 

[kmguru]

Need some structural and metalurgical engineers here to make any sense. Any one else, just BS.