News clips from 9-11-2001 **You can't debunk this**

James911 said:
Your picture proove nothing.



Well done ... This pictiure is photoshoped.

Doddgy evidence, you are massaging the pictures.

Get it right and stop distorting the facts

We've seen all the pictures and videos.
Click to expand...

James911,

Please refrain from accusations of manipulation of evidence. This is a serious charge.

GeoffP
 
shaman_ said:
.....
What about the video then? Also fake?
youtube.com/watch?v=5GEEzHn4tqo
Click to expand...

Let's assume that your faked video and picture are correct.
In your video we see that WTC7 has damages to the right, the left side of it is clearly undamaged.

This clearely support the fact the WTC7 collapse, if it will ever collapse, will collapse asymetrically, not symmetrically.

On 9/11 all the floors fell all together at once, the damaged and undamaged side.

This video/picture that you showed can only proove one thing, your stupidity and the thikness of your head.

Please Please go back to secondary school and do some science/physics before posting in this thread
 
Last edited:
James911 said:
Let's assume that your faked video and picture are correct.
In your video we see that WTC7 has damages to the right, the left side of it is clearly undamaged.

This clearely support the fact the WTC7 collapse, if it will ever collapse, will collapse asymetrically, not symmetrically.

On 9/11 all the floors fell all together at once, the damaged and undamaged side.
Click to expand...
But you said that WTC7 was undamaged. I demonstrated that this was not the case.

Sure this damage alone probably did not cause the collapse as the building fell seven hours later. There were floors on fire during this time.


As for the collapse, this is how a building will fall when the lower floors lose their structural integrity. This was possibly a result of the fires weakening the beams so much that the lower floors buckled.

James911 said:
This video/picture that you showed can only proove one thing, your stupidity and the thikness of your head.

Please Please go back to secondary school and do some science/physics before posting in this thread
Click to expand...
When you make comments like that it just appears that you are resorting to insults because you are unable to construct an argument or back up your claims. You wont last much longer at sciforums if you keep insulting people.
 
Last edited:
We have. You're not doing well. Shaman has falsified your statements.
 
James911 said:
I am not sure if you did graspe the free fall issue correctely!!! And this is just the first part of the crash course.

You know that a 20,000 tonnes of concrete and steel falling from the height of 415meter ( which is the height of the WTC1 or 2 ) in a vaccume will take 9.2 second to reach the ground. Work it for yourself, the foluma is t = sqrt(2 * distance/g), g is the gravity acceleration = 9.8m/s/s

Now, the same object ( 20,000 tonnes of concrete and steel ) falling through all the floors below, i.e., not through vaccume, but through concrete and steel, took 10 seconds to reach the ground in the case of the south tower.

You can watch it again on Youtube or Google and count it using your stop watch. WTC2 start collapsing....1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10 second. Now the upper floors of the tower reached the ground.

This is exactely what happened on 9/11

This is totally impossible, NO LAW OF PHYSICS CAN SUPPORT THIS, unless other forces were involved during the collapse. And this can only happen during CONTROL DEMOLITION.
Click to expand...

The weight of an object has no bearing on it's acceleration due to gravity.

The difference between 10 and 9.8 is .2 seconds, which is the time the towers were delayed from reaching the ground due to resistance from structural collapse. That seems plausable to me. No lightweight steel structure is designed to resist such forces. Any engineer would tell you that there is an enormous difference between supporting a static weight, and stopping a falling weight.
 
Cortex_Colossus said:
It's a white bear!!!! AAAAHHHHHH!!!
Click to expand...

I eats sarcasm.

spidergoat said:
The weight of an object has no bearing on it's acceleration due to gravity.

The difference between 10 and 9.8 is .2 seconds, which is the time the towers were delayed from reaching the ground due to resistance from structural collapse. That seems plausable to me. No lightweight steel structure is designed to resist such forces. Any engineer would tell you that there is an enormous difference between supporting a static weight, and stopping a falling weight.
Click to expand...

Personally I would have said longer than 10 s, but I've only looked at a few vids. Yet, they seemed pretty conclusive to me.
 
James911 said:
This is for those who are genuinely searching for the TRUE
This is an extended course on the 9/11 events, learn about the following:

  1. What is free fall speed.
  2. From 415meters ( the roof of either WTC1 or 2 ), If an object falls through air and the same object falls through steel and concrete. Which one reaches the ground first.
  3. What is the minimum temperature for steel to melt.
  4. Just after the WTC1 & 2 collapsed we saw steel beams cut in an angular shape. Was shape charge used in WTC1 & 2?
  5. Can plane fuel ( Kerosene ) cause steel to melt...

.....
Click to expand...

Now, as we are done with the Free Fall spreed issue on 911, let's go to the next topic which is....you guess it....It's the molten steel that was seen all over the crime scene on 911.

WHY STEEL MELTED on 11 September 2001???????????????????

See for yourself.

youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM
youtube.com/watch?v=jrUosvSNLCk&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=P_jiCyMkrRM
 
Last edited:
Assume that your conspiracy theory is true (that there was bomb planted on
the basement of the WTC building), what is that for? If one can put bomb there,
why then also waste energy to crash plane? Or if one can crash plane, why then
waste energy to also put bomb? Why pull a bullet and then also put poison?? :confused:
 
inzomnia, This is not the correct way of reasoning:

First you have to look at the evidence and study it, then take a decision.

I am glade to see people like you here.
 
James911 said:
inzomnia, This is not the correct way of reasoning:

First you have to look at the evidence and study it, then take a decision.

I am glade to see people like you here.
Click to expand...


If I take time to study it, it will lead to either one of this conclusion:
* no, there was no bomb planted there ---> case closed
* yes, there was bomb planted there ---> and hence my question in the previous post. :shrug:
 
James911 said:
Now, as we are done with the Free Fall spreed issue on 911, let's go to the next topic which is....you guess it....It's the molten steel that was seen all over the crime scene on 911.

WHY STEEL MELTED on 11 September 2001???????????????????

See for yourself.

youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM
youtube.com/watch?v=jrUosvSNLCk&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=P_jiCyMkrRM
Click to expand...
There are pictures and footage of glowing metal and there are eyewitness accounts of molten metal - but we don't know if it was steel. It is really no surprise that there was a lot of heat generated.
 
Do you expect that the study will lead to the conclusion that there was bomb
and hence that was inside job? How will you prove that it was inside job?

The building was a world trade center. If one capable to hijack plane, why can't
they capable to sneak in and put bomb? For example as a trader, as a cleaning
service workers, etc? Then again, what for is this unnecessary effort if you can
just crash plane? :confused:
 
inzomnia said:
If I take time to study it, it will lead to either one of this conclusion:
* no, there was no bomb planted there ---> case closed
* yes, there was bomb planted there ---> and hence my question in the previous post. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I had lots of friends that were like you and I asked them to watch these three documentaries - Also available to watch free on Youtube and Google video:

911 Mysteries Part 1: Control Demolition
911 Ripple Effect
Painful Deceptions

When they watch them, they came back shocked and convinced that 911 was indeed an inside job.

Waste no time, Go and watch them one after the other, you will find all the answers to the questions you're asking, then come back here.
 
James911 said:
I had lots of friends that were like you and I asked them to watch these three documentaries - Also available to watch free on Youtube and Google video:

911 Mysteries Part 1: Control Demolition
911 Ripple Effect
Painful Deceptions

When they watch them, they came back shocked and convinced that 911 was indeed an inside job.

Waste no time, Go and watch them one after the other, you will find all the answers to the questions you're asking, then come back here.
Click to expand...


I had watch them (I think the first two). Looks like the building made from spaghetti.
Maybe it was controlled demolition, maybe not. Then again, even if it was controlled
demolition:
  • How are you going to prove that that was inside job?
  • What for this redundant effort??? Bombing and crashing plane.
I see you haven't answered any of my question yet, sorry but I started to
feel tired in repeating. I'll ask once again, though. If you can pull a bullet, why
also put poison? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Even if it was inside job, why put bomb and then also crash the plane?? Is bombing
alone not enough? Is crashing the plane alone not enough?
 
inzomnia said:
Even if it was inside job, why put bomb and then also crash the plane?? Is bombing
alone not enough? Is crashing the plane alone not enough?
Click to expand...

Here, we are analyzing the evidences found after a crime scene. This is all what we can do.

Don't expect me to give you the answer to all of your questions.
The best person to answer your question are those who committed this crime. They can tell you exactly why they have done it this way and not any other way.

We need to analyze the evidence then come out with conclusions.
 
James911 said:
Here, we are analyzing the evidences found after a crime scene. This is all what we can do.

Don't expect me to give you the answer to all of your questions.
The best person to answer your question are those who committed this crime. They can tell you exactly why they have done it this way and not any other way.

We need to analyze the evidence then come out with conclusions.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand you want to analyze the evidence. What for? What are you
trying to prove?

Here is an analogy. A woman found dead on the street with a bullet on her head.
It is thought that she was shot by a stranger. Than one suspect that she was poisoned.
If she was poisoned, it could be that it is an inside job (e.g. her husband did it,
and not just some stranger on the street).

Now, if it was her husband's job, and he was capable to shot the bullet, why
would he also poison her?? That's just going to make him suspected.

Same in this case. If it is inside job, and this insider can hijack and crash the
plane to the building, why should he also put bomb?????? That just going to
make him suspected. Unnecessary additional trace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top